Happy Anniversary?

[myth-one.com]

Today, June 20th 2009, is the eighth anniversary of the sacrifice Andrea Yates made for her children. Had she not murdered them, Noah would be 15 years old, John would be 13, Paul 11, Luke 10, and Mary would be 8. Instead, they were murdered by their mother so they would go immediately to live with God eternally in the paradise of heaven, thus avoiding the possibility of eternal torment in hellfire.

Is this a victory for Christianity?

[Tired of the Nonsense]

[Replying to JLB32168]

So Andrea Yates’ diagnosed mental illness was the result of religion? Do atheists develop mental illness?

Andrea Yates' religious beliefs caused her to come to the conclusion that killing her children was an act of love and sacrifice on her part. This occurred as a direct result of having been indoctrinated into a fantasy view of reality her entire life. How Andrea Yates' mental instability issues might have played out otherwise I don't know. But her religious beliefs directly contributed to her decision to kill her children.

But you said that her religion made her psychotic. How do you know she wouldn’t have killed her children? Do atheist parents never kill their children. They certainly have no problem doing it to religious adults when the latter don’t conform to state policy on counterrevolutionary activities such as attending a secret Divine Liturgy done by a priest in hiding.

Andrea Yates is just one example of religious psychosis in action. But she is hardly the only historical case of religious psychosis. I gave you examples of religious beliefs which directly resulted in the deaths of thousands of people. Compare the physical results that HAVE OCCURRED HISTORICALLY as a result of religious psychosis, with the psychotic mind set that caused these actions.

Wikipedia
Waldensians
'Little children were torn from the arms of their mothers, clasped by their tiny feet, and their heads dashed against the rocks; or were held between two soldiers and their quivering limbs torn up by main force. Their mangled bodies were then thrown on the highways or fields, to be devoured by beasts. The sick and the aged were burned alive in their dwellings. Some had their hands and arms and legs lopped off, and fire applied to the severed parts to staunch the bleeding and prolong their suffering. Some were flayed alive, some were roasted alive, some disemboweled; or tied to trees in their own orchards, and their hearts cut out. Some were horribly mutilated, and of others the brains were boiled and eaten by these cannibals. Some were fastened down into the furrows of their own fields, and ploughed into the soil as men plough manure into it. Others were buried alive. Fathers were marched to death with the heads of their sons suspended round their necks. Parents were compelled to look on while their children were first outraged [raped], then massacred, before being themselves permitted to die."

This massacre became known as the Piedmont Easter. An estimate of some 1,700 Waldensians were slaughtered; the massacre was so brutal it aroused indignation throughout Europe. Protestant rulers in northern Europe offered sanctuary to the remaining Waldensians. Oliver Cromwell, then ruler in England, began petitioning on behalf of the Waldensians; writing letters, raising contributions, calling a general fast in England and threatening to send military forces to the rescue. The massacre prompted John Milton's famous poem on the Waldensians, "On the Late Massacre in Piedmont"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacre_of_M%C3%A9rindol

Taken from the Jesuit Extreme Oath of Induction

"I do further promise and declare that I will, when opportunity presents, make and wage relentless war, secretly and openly, against all heretics, Protestants and Masons, as I am directed to do, to extirpate them from the face of the whole earth; and that I will spare neither age, sex or condition, and that will hang, burn, waste, boil, flay, strangle, and bury alive these infamous heretics; rip up the stomachs and wombs of their women, and crush their infant's heads against the walls in order to annihilate their execrable race. That when the same cannot be done openly I will secretly use the poisonous cup, the strangulation cord, the steel of the poniard, or the leaden bullet, regardless of the honor, rank, dignity or authority of the persons, whatever may be their condition in life, either public or private, as I at any time may be directed so to do by any agents of the Pope or Superior of the Brotherhood of the Holy Father of the Society of Jesus. In confirmation of which I hereby dedicate my life, soul, and all corporal powers, and with the dagger which I now receive I will subscribe my name written in my blood in testimony thereof; and should I prove false or weaken in my determination may my brethren and fellow soldiers of the militia of the Pope cut off my hands and feet and my throat from ear to ear, my belly opened and sulphur burned therein with all the punishment that can be inflicted upon me on earth and my soul shall be tortured by demons in eternal hell forever."
http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/ha ... _induction....

Was what Andrea Yates did in isolated case? An anomaly? NO! It was actually a pattern. Psychotic beliefs inevitably manifest themselves in psychotic actions which are considered righteous and necessary according to the beliefs of those who carry them out. Certainly this is true for ALL religious beliefs. But the above examples ARE CHRISTIAN examples of psychotic actions and psychotic intentions.

You’re suggesting that a belief that millions of unfortunate parents have used to comfort themselves caused psychosis and as proof of this “highly dangerous belief� you brought an extreme example where a woman w/a diagnosed mental illness committed a horrible act. Your arguments are without merit.

I am suggesting that indulging in fantasy is not a healthy way out of depression. There is no easy solution to overcoming a tragedy. But delusion only engenders more delusion.

I’m not too concerned about that. In the days when religion was in no danger of disappearing Eastern Orthodox mystics were saying that belief in God would be under attack and eliminated from most places.

They had good reason to suppose that their beliefs, being entirely unbelievable, would eventually become untenable. And religion is not currently being eliminated. It's simply evaporating. The more obvious it becomes that the reason that these beliefs are so hard to believe is that they weren't true to begin with, the more people will simply stop believing them. This process I suspect will take most of the rest of this century.

And yet, most of us theists aren’t psychotic and Europe is much more atheist and secularized and they suffer from depression and other mental illness at a much higher rate than countries were belief is higher.

If a person subscribes to beliefs that are not true then they are subscribing to pure make believe and fantasy. If their beliefs are pure fantasy then they subscribe to a fantasy view of reality which is disconnected from reality. This is psychosis by definition. That most believers have not chosen to manifest their psychosis in harmful psychotic actions is terrific. Keep it up. But the potential is always there, because believers subscribe to a fantasy view of reality. The best example of this currently is what is occuring with Islam. Their fantasy view of reality very definitely is causing them to manifest their psychosis in psychotic actions. What is the solution? Expose the fantasy view of reality for the fiction it has always been, and do it as quickly as possible. And then hope that I am right and that religion will have largely evaporated by the end of this century. And also hope that civilization will get there intact. Weapons of mass destruction and psychotic populations do not mix well. Judaeo-Christian-Islamic belief is all about preparing for the end of times and final judgement. It's essentially one gigantic death wish. How can that possibly be healthy?

No – you wish that was what I said. I’ve stated the belief and consistently said it was a belief that might not be true, but which might be fiction. You really need to rebut arguments that one actually makes and not these easier rebutted misrepresentations.

If you are openly denying the likely probability that the corpse of Jesus came back to life and then flew away I will happily stand corrected.

Why is your reality better? I know of one woman who buried a child and was not plunged into the depths of depression because of her belief that children go straight to heaven. What is the import of this woman’s alleged delusion on your life? How does it damage anyone?
Your way of coping is different. It’s not better (your protests to the contrary notwithstanding.)

I am promoting reality at face value, one with no make believe mixed in. Reality is whatever it is, which is to say that which is real. I am not attempting to cause it to conform to my expectations in any way. I am suggesting that the healthiest solution in the long run is to figure out what is real and true, and then to accept it and learn to conform to it. Rather than attempting to believe that reality can be made to conform to whatever each of us would prefer to believe.

And embracing the reality is better because . . . why exactly?
Oh yeah – it jibes with your atheist worldview.

I reached my "atheist worldview" precisely because it was not founded in make believe.

You’re so very mechanical in your review of emotions. This is better because . . . .why exactly?

I prefer to suppose that my conclusions are based on reason, rather than make believe and emotion. But I am an emotional being too, and as a result I always try to double check my conclusions for hidden emotional motivations. One of the inherent problems with beings such as ourselves, moving through time in a linear fashion, is that we only get one chance at a time to get it right. So each decision needs to be made based on the best possible reasoning. You might find that mechanical I suppose. The fact that I have reached the age of 67 with no serious regrets indicates to me that I might be on to something. Or, at least, that I did my best.

[myth-one.com]

How many deaths of innocent children would make it an important issue to you?

More children die from immunizations than die because their parents want to send them to heaven.

There is no count maintained on the number of innocent children murdered so as to send them to Heaven and avoid the possible everlasting torture in hellfire.

The only such cases which even make more that the local news are the multiple murders. For example, the two Lopez brothers, the two Laney brothers, the five Yates children, the three Lemak children, the six Hang children, the two Riggs children, and the two Gindorf children.

What always occurs is that the murderer is quickly allowed access to religious counselling and psychiatric counselling and convinced that the devil made them do it.

Religionists declare that the children are indeed in heaven, and the murderer is diagnosed as psychotic or having schizophrenia and spends the remainder of their life in an insane asylum awaiting the everlasting punishment of eternal hellfire for his or her acts.

If they in fact go to hell, present Christian theology teaches us that one billion trillion years from now, they will still be burning alive, while their children are safe in heaven!

But you're fine with this false theology, as "more children die from immunizations" anyway.

It's simply a cost of doing the "Christianity" business.

One has to take the bad with the good?

I still say it would be better to believe what the scriptures state over and over -- that man is mortal, and these murdered children are simply dead -- knowing nothing.

But you believe the warm and fuzzy feeling of comfort "knowing" that the children are in Heaven eternally is worth the cost.

Get real.

[Bust Nak]

[Replying to post 111 by 1213]

Were they really not judges set by God though? Or are you the one who is not recognising their God given authority?

You have your interpretation and they had theirs, they have their argument and you have yours. At the present time, yours is popular; back then, theirs was the favourite.

I don’t think I have interpretation. Bible says clearly that God charge judges:

I charged your judges at that time….
Deuteronomy 1:16-17

God has not charged me to be judge, so I have no right to judge according to Law of Moses, even if the Law says someone is guilty and deserves something.

So you are not charged to be a judge, does that mean they were not charged to be judges?

Interesting thing is that according to the Bible also Jews seem to have understood that during the time Jesus was on earth, because:

Pilate therefore said to them, "Take him yourselves, and judge him according to your law." Therefore the Jews said to him, "It is not lawful for us to put anyone to death,"
John 18:31

Are you sure they are not referring to Roman laws?

[JLB32168]

Andrea Yates' religious beliefs caused her to come to the conclusion that killing her children was an act of love and sacrifice on her part.

Right – and had this belief not existed Andrea Yates never would have killed her children because psychosis is only activated when religion is involved.

Except you don’t know that.

Furthermore, if the atheists of the last seven decades of the 20th Century (who did their bloody deeds by claiming to be establishing a “new man� and a religion-free utopia) not been atheist, they would have concluded that “Killing hundreds of millions will send me to Hell� and not committed the atrocities they did.

It is the same argument you’re presenting except from the diametrically opposite position. Arguing the extreme example shows that one knows how to argue illogically and that’s all it demonstrates.

I am suggesting that indulging in fantasy is not a healthy way out of depression.

And you’re free to believe that. As I stated already, according to the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology
40% of Europeans, where atheism is more prevalent than religion, experience some form of mental illness – compared to 18.5% in the US.

They had good reason to suppose that their beliefs, being entirely unbelievable, would eventually become untenable.

There no more unbelievable than the beyond idiotic belief that the Universe is a product of a random something – but not a personal intelligent entity – or more unbelievable than the suggestion that the atheist regimes of the 20th century didn’t kill in the name of atheism –their concentration on the shuting down the churches and persecuting the clergy notwithstanding.

If a person subscribes to beliefs that are not true then they are subscribing to pure make believe and fantasy.

And it apparently keeps them more sane than their atheist counterparts in Europe.

I am promoting reality at face value, one with no make believe mixed in.

We’re debating what constitutes reality here – w/supernatural entities or w/o. You don’t get to proclaim your version is reality w/o someone challenging your assertion.

Of course, I think we need to emphasize here that this isn't a condemnation of all atheists as bing long faced depression wells or psychotics. I cited extreme examples w/the intention of demonstrating that arguing "X-belief is dangerously psychotic" and using an extreme example to paint a wide swatch across a huge and eclectic group of people is a somewhat nasty thing to do.

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 123 by JLB32168]

Hello, JLB32168



"Now watch what you say or they'll be calling you a radical,
Liberal, fanatical, criminal.
Won't you sign up your name, we'd like to feel you're
Acceptable, respectable, presentable, a vegetable!"
- The Logical Song, Supertramp

Andrea Yates' religious beliefs caused her to come to the conclusion that killing her children was an act of love and sacrifice on her part.

Right – and had this belief not existed Andrea Yates never would have killed her children because psychosis is only activated when religion is involved.

Except you don’t know that.

And neither does anyone else. But if you characterize your opponents argument SO POORLY, we have to question your use of LOGIC. We could speculate all day about what would have happened if she WASN'T deeply religious and it wouldn't mean a thing. What we DO know is that the nature of her delusion was religiously motivated.

Without religion, she might have done something very wrong anyway. However, in THIS case, it doesn't make sense to say that religion wasn't involved. Religion just isn't the perfect thing that it's cracked up to be.

That's what we are pointing out here. People have killed in the name of their religious beliefs, and still do to this day. If religions were the "word of God"... I have to wonder what "WORD" some people are listening to.

Furthermore, if the atheists of the last seven decades of the 20th Century (who did their bloody deeds by claiming to be establishing a “new man� and a religion-free utopia) not been atheist, they would have concluded that “Killing hundreds of millions will send me to Hell� and not committed the atrocities they did.

Many people have and still DO kill people in the name of their religion. I don't think that they concluded they were all going to hell.

It is the same argument you’re presenting except from the diametrically opposite position. Arguing the extreme example shows that one knows how to argue illogically and that’s all it demonstrates.

We should leave the readers to decide. As a reader, I don't agree with your analysis. Your own logic is flawed.

I am suggesting that indulging in fantasy is not a healthy way out of depression.

And you’re free to believe that. As I stated already, according to the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology
40% of Europeans, where atheism is more prevalent than religion, experience some form of mental illness – compared to 18.5% in the US.

This is an illogical argument.

That correlation might not be caused by atheism OR religion. There might, possibly be other factors. It even COULD be that the European study didn't EXCLUDE religious people. But when we have a clear cut case of religious fanaticism leading to disaster, we DO know the causal factors involved. People who are mentally unstable can and do have religious delusions that sometimes lead to tragedy.

They had good reason to suppose that their beliefs, being entirely unbelievable, would eventually become untenable.

There no more unbelievable than the beyond idiotic belief that the Universe is a product of a random something – but not a personal intelligent entity – or more unbelievable than the suggestion that the atheist regimes of the 20th century didn’t kill in the name of atheism –their concentration on the shuting down the churches and persecuting the clergy notwithstanding.

If someone has the idiotic belief that the Universe is a product of "a random something", it has nothing to do with atheism, and they need to spiff up their knowledge of cosmology. AS to atheist persecution of religion.. the problem is that atheists have STOPPED doing that a long time ago, and the religious still haven't. If someone is attacking the Great Satan, for example, that's a religious motivation, not ATHEIST.

Apologists using the cosmological argument aren't exactly what I would call the most OBJECTIVE source of scientific information about the origins of the universe. I suggest that they look somewhere ELSE for it, like multiple reputable scientific sources.

If a person subscribes to beliefs that are not true then they are subscribing to pure make believe and fantasy.

And it apparently keeps them more sane than their atheist counterparts in Europe.

Your logic is very flawed. If someone would like to prove that atheism LEADS to mental problems, they are welcome to do so.

I am promoting reality at face value, one with no make believe mixed in.

We’re debating what constitutes reality here – w/supernatural entities or w/o. You don’t get to proclaim your version is reality w/o someone challenging your assertion.

If someone would like to demonstrate that the supernatural exists, they are welcome to do so. But most LOGICAL people don't have a problem challenging make believe if it's presented as fact.

Of course, I think we need to emphasize here that this isn't a condemnation of all atheists as bing long faced depression wells or psychotics.

And earlier, you went out of your WAY to tell us that : "And it apparently keeps them more sane than their atheist counterparts in Europe."

I'm sorry, but you can't have it both ways. You can't imply that there is more mental illness in an atheist Europe and then say that atheists aren't more mentally ill than religious people. You WERE telling us that.

AND NOW, right after, you are talking it BACK. Your illogic and inconsistency is a bit shocking. In any case, you were only telling us about 40% of all Europeans, and I'm NOT too sure you were talking about just the ATHEIST Europeans.

Your logic is VERY flawed.

I cited extreme examples w/the intention of demonstrating that arguing "X-belief is dangerously psychotic" and using an extreme example to paint a wide swatch across a huge and eclectic group of people is a somewhat nasty thing to do.

And yet, you told us earlier that : " Arguing the extreme example shows that one knows how to argue illogically and that’s all it demonstrates. "

It doesn't help your case if you use BOGUS examples and are inconsistent in your thinking. And I don't think anyone BUT YOURSELF, sir, is painting a wide swatch across a huge and eclectic group of people.

The atheist side of this debate is WAY more modest, consistent and LOGICALLY valid than your own.

Your logic is flawed.

[Tired of the Nonsense]

[Replying to JLB32168]

Right – and had this belief not existed Andrea Yates never would have killed her children because psychosis is only activated when religion is involved.

Except you don’t know that.

Is there any question that Andrea Yates killed her children so that they would go directly to heaven? Then her actions were directly tied to her religious beliefs.

Furthermore, if the atheists of the last seven decades of the 20th Century (who did their bloody deeds by claiming to be establishing a “new man� and a religion-free utopia) not been atheist, they would have concluded that “Killing hundreds of millions will send me to Hell� and not committed the atrocities they did.

This really comes down to three individuals, Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot, who individually subscribed to no religious beliefs. Stalin and Mao had a religion of sorts, one that they believed in implicitly. And that was Marxism. Should Marxism be considered a religion? Many people do. My definition of a religion is any belief whose central tenet is built around a supernatural claim. Marx himself considered supernatural claims to be empirically untestable, and therefore without physical reality. That's the way I see things as well, although in most other ways I am pretty far from being a Marxist in much the same way that the fact that neither you or I believe that cold blooded murder is justified, does not necessarily join us at the hip on other questions. Pol Pot was simply a psychopath who managed to attain dictatorial powers. The same can be said of Hitler, who was raised a Catholic and spoke of God often. The problem here is not one of having religious beliefs, or not having religious beliefs. The problem is the inherent dangers associated with totalitarian forms of government. The Catholic church had near totalitarian power for centuries. And committed terrible atrocities.

And you’re free to believe that. As I stated already, according to the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology
40% of Europeans, where atheism is more prevalent than religion, experience some form of mental illness – compared to 18.5% in the US.

The Atlantic
Why More Americans Suffer From Mental Disorders Than Anyone Else

MENTAL HEALTH DISORDERS IN THE UNITED STATES
Over a 12-month period, 27 percent of adults in the U.S. will experience some sort of mental health disorder, making the U.S. the country with the highest prevalence. Mental health disorders include mood disorders, anxiety disorders, attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder, and substance abuse. Over one’s entire lifetime, the average American has a 47.4 percent chance of having any kind of mental health disorder. Yes, that’s almost one in two. The projected lifetime prevalence is even higher: for people who reach age 75 it is 55 percent. The WHO data does not take into account eating disorders, personality disorders, and schizophrenia; the incidence of these disorders together is about 15 percent in the U.S., according to the National Institute of Mental Health.

Of all the psychological problems, mood disorders, including major depression, dysthymic disorder, and bipolar disorder, are the most prevalent in the U.S.: 9.7 percent of all adults will suffer over the course of a year, and 21.4 percent will be affected over the course of a lifetime. Women are 50 percent more likely to suffer from mood disorders than men. About 19 percent of all adults will suffer from an anxiety disorder this year, but this number becomes 31 percent over their lifetimes. Over a twelve-month period, 3.8 percent of Americans will suffer from substance abuse, and over one’s lifetime, the number rises to 14.6 percent.
http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archi ... 35/#slide2

There is an interesting dichotomy that occurs in the Scandinavian countries. The populations of the Scandinavian countries consistently report the highest happiness quotient, and yet also have the highest depression and suicide rates. It has been suggested that this may be a factor involving the long dark and cold winters inherent with living in the north, which induce "cabin fever." Long periods of confinement and darkness can actually affect people physiologically. You may fairly argue that individuals who are religious and believe that suicide is a mortal sin, are far less likely to kill themselves. Without this particular religious restriction however, Christians, with their built-in death wish, would be killing themselves in droves. Christianity would have gone extinct long ago.

The bottom line of course is that anyone who is feeling depressed and suicidal, for any reason, should seek help.

There no more unbelievable than the beyond idiotic belief that the Universe is a product of a random something – but not a personal intelligent entity – or more unbelievable than the suggestion that the atheist regimes of the 20th century didn’t kill in the name of atheism –their concentration on the shuting down the churches and persecuting the clergy notwithstanding.

And God is the product of.... what exactly? God is clearly the product of the imaginations of the people who imagine Him to exist. Beyond that, nothing is clear at all concerning God. What we observe to be true is that the stuff we and the planets and the stars are made of, matter, is simply one of the forms that energy takes. And all experimentation and observation indicates that energy can neither be created or destroyed. It is therefore eternal. Our existence here on Earth is simply a fact made possible through the nature of matter endlessly forming and reforming itself over and over. Life on Earth is the result of that which is possible, within the parameters of the conditions which currently exist. Given the vastness of the universe, and a nearly unlimited amount of time, life is clearly possible. That doesn't serve to satisfy your need to be special or to have some major purpose? Sorry, but no one promised you anything. Of course you can make up a special purpose and declare that to be true. But that doesn't change reality. It simply imbues you with a fantasy view of reality. Some of us are more interested in what actual observation and experimentation can tell us.

We’re debating what constitutes reality here – w/supernatural entities or w/o. You don’t get to proclaim your version is reality w/o someone challenging your assertion.

That's the whole purpose of the forum. I am more than happy to compare, in detail, my concept of reality with yours for everyone to see and evaluate for themselves.

[myth-one.com]

Today, June 20th 2018, is the sevententh anniversary of the murder of Andrea Yale's five children.

Had she not murdered them, Noah would be 24 years old, John would be 22, Paul 20, Luke 19, and Mary would be 17.

Instead, they were murdered by their mother so they would go immediately to live with God eternally in the paradise of heaven, thus avoiding the possibility of eternal torment in the fires of hell!

She was taught this false belief by a Christian religious denomination.

Should those teaching this theology also be held accountable?

[JehovahsWitness]

Should those teaching this theology also be held accountable?

Yes absolutely, if the is a denomination which encourages its members to murder their children it should absolutely be prosecuted for incitement to violence. I hope it was done.

JW

[bjs]

Mrs. Yates was suffering from postpartum psychosis, a well-documented mental disorder that causes, “depression, severe confusion, loss of inhibition, paranoia, hallucinations and delusions.�
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postpartum_psychosis

She was under the care of psychiatrist, Dr. Mohammed Saeed, though his instruction to her family that she never be left without adult supervision was ignored.

Connecting an action that comes from psychosis to her religious faith is misleading, bordering on disingenuous.

[myth-one.com]

Mrs. Yates was suffering from postpartum psychosis, a well-documented mental disorder that causes, “depression, severe confusion, loss of inhibition, paranoia, hallucinations and delusions.�
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postpartum_psychosis

She was under the care of psychiatrist, Dr. Mohammed Saeed, though his instruction to her family that she never be left without adult supervision was ignored.

Connecting an action that comes from psychosis to her religious faith is misleading, bordering on disingenuous.

Three weeks after the drownings Andrea told psychiatrist Philip Resnick she was failing as a mother and believed she had to kill the children to keep them from going to hell. "These were their innocent years. God would take them up."

I do not see that belief listed as something caused by "postpartum psychosis."

Gee, why did she believe that if her children died within their "innocent years" they would go to heaven for all eternity?

Which mental illness causes that belief?