Topic: Anti-Atheist Bigotry: Atheists Are As Distrusted As Rapists - page 3. (Read 4706 times)
You can have morality and ethics without religion. This is something that many religious people fail to understand!
It's kinda the other way. Everybody has morals and ethics in one form or another, because everybody has religion, even though it may not be one of the formal religions.
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/religion?s=t
EDIT: To see that this is true, consider all the people of a particular formal religion. No two people believe their religion in exactly the same way. Usually they formally claim that they accept some doctrine that the leaders proclaim, or that is in some religious books. But because they all understand it differently, there are simply a bunch of people with their own individual religion that happen to go under the name and banner of a particular formal religion.
It's like this with all the people in the world... except that some don't have a religion that is formally stated to be a religion.
Did you even read your link?
Quote
religion
[ri-lij-uh n]
Spell Syllables
Examples Word Origin
See more synonyms on Thesaurus.com
noun
1.
a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
2.
a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects:
the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.
3.
the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices:
a world council of religions.
4.
the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.:
to enter religion.
5.
the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.
6.
something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience:
to make a religion of fighting prejudice.
7.
religions, Archaic. religious rites:
painted priests performing religions deep into the night.
Idioms
9.
get religion, Informal.
to acquire a deep conviction of the validity of religious beliefs and practices.
to resolve to mend one's errant ways:
The company got religion and stopped making dangerous products.
noun
1.
belief in, worship of, or obedience to a supernatural power or powers considered to be divine or to have control of human destiny
2.
any formal or institutionalized expression of such belief: the Christian religion
3.
the attitude and feeling of one who believes in a transcendent controlling power or powers
4.
(mainly RC Church) the way of life determined by the vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience entered upon by monks, friars, and nuns: to enter religion
5.
something of overwhelming importance to a person: football is his religion
6.
(archaic)
the practice of sacred ritual observances
sacred rites and ceremonies
Word Origin
C12: via Old French from Latin religiō fear of the supernatural, piety, probably from religāre to tie up, from re- + ligāre to bind
[ri-lij-uh n]
Spell Syllables
Examples Word Origin
See more synonyms on Thesaurus.com
noun
1.
a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
2.
a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects:
the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.
3.
the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices:
a world council of religions.
4.
the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.:
to enter religion.
5.
the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.
6.
something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience:
to make a religion of fighting prejudice.
7.
religions, Archaic. religious rites:
painted priests performing religions deep into the night.
Idioms
9.
get religion, Informal.
to acquire a deep conviction of the validity of religious beliefs and practices.
to resolve to mend one's errant ways:
The company got religion and stopped making dangerous products.
noun
1.
belief in, worship of, or obedience to a supernatural power or powers considered to be divine or to have control of human destiny
2.
any formal or institutionalized expression of such belief: the Christian religion
3.
the attitude and feeling of one who believes in a transcendent controlling power or powers
4.
(mainly RC Church) the way of life determined by the vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience entered upon by monks, friars, and nuns: to enter religion
5.
something of overwhelming importance to a person: football is his religion
6.
(archaic)
the practice of sacred ritual observances
sacred rites and ceremonies
Word Origin
C12: via Old French from Latin religiō fear of the supernatural, piety, probably from religāre to tie up, from re- + ligāre to bind
Only some of these definitions agree with your definition of "religion" whereas all of them agree with my (atheism excluding) definition of religion.
You can have morality and ethics without religion. This is something that many religious people fail to understand!
It's kinda the other way. Everybody has morals and ethics in one form or another, because everybody has religion, even though it may not be one of the formal religions.
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/religion?s=t
EDIT: To see that this is true, consider all the people of a particular formal religion. No two people believe their religion in exactly the same way. Usually they formally claim that they accept some doctrine that the leaders proclaim, or that is in some religious books. But because they all understand it differently, there are simply a bunch of people with their own individual religion that happen to go under the name and banner of a particular formal religion.
It's like this with all the people in the world... except that some don't have a religion that is formally stated to be a religion.
You can have morality and ethics without religion. This is something that many religious people fail to understand!
If by "science" you mean science theories, why would anyone trust them, since they have not been proven to be factual? Of course, there is a way that you can trust science theories. You can trust that they are theories until they have been proven to be factual.
It's a shame gravity is just a theory... I suppose that means there is a chance gravity doesn't exist?
Gravity law is law. Gravity theory is theory.
I suppose if you think gravity is "just a theory", that it doesn't affect you?
Naw, you're wrong... Both gravity and evolution are proven to be a true, factual and predictive representation of reality... which is basically what a theory means in science... learn your words
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory
Quote
A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method and repeatedly tested and confirmed through observation and experimentation. Scientific theories are the most reliable, rigorous, and comprehensive form of scientific knowledge.
It is important to note that the definition of a "scientific theory" (often ambiguously contracted to "theory" for the sake of brevity, including in this page) as used in the disciplines of science is significantly different from, and in contrast to, the common vernacular usage of the word "theory". As used in everyday non-scientific speech, "theory" implies that something is an unsubstantiated and speculative guess, conjecture, or hypothesis; such a usage is the opposite of a scientific theory.
It is important to note that the definition of a "scientific theory" (often ambiguously contracted to "theory" for the sake of brevity, including in this page) as used in the disciplines of science is significantly different from, and in contrast to, the common vernacular usage of the word "theory". As used in everyday non-scientific speech, "theory" implies that something is an unsubstantiated and speculative guess, conjecture, or hypothesis; such a usage is the opposite of a scientific theory.
Regarding evolution, something exists. It has been termed evolution. Since the thing that exists, does indeed exist, if you call it evolution, then evolution exists.
Evolution theory talks about some things that are not known to exist. It also talks about the reasons why the existence termed "evolution" exists, and why some of the things in evolution theory might exist.
They are two different things... evolution and evolution theory.
People can write all kinds of things in Wikipedia. A lot of Wikipedia is not truth. It is a good starting point, to see what a subject is about in general. But it needs to be backed up by other info before it can be known to be factual.
This is something like Quantum Physics. QP is complex probability. It always needs to be backed up by something else before it can be known to be factual.
Just because a scientific theory is often made up of some science facts, does not make the theory itself to be factual. The theory takes the facts and combines and twists them into something new that is not known to be factual until it has been proven factual.
For example. Big Bang Theory probably will never be known to be true. Why not? As good as it might sound, there is no way to go back 13 or 14 billion years to see if it is true. There is always the chance that something unforeseen might have been there to make all the best BB theory to be non-factual.
It's the same with all science theory. Until it is proven to be factual, it is just theory, even if it has the word "science" in front of it.
Blah blah, meaningless drivel
Name something in evolution "that is not known to exist"... anything at all... don't make a claim you can't back up with facts and evidence
Even evolution theory exists as theory. But theory means that nobody knows if it exists outside of theory. If it was known to exist outside of theory, it wouldn't be theory.
To quote, well you... "It always needs to be backed up by something else before it can be known to be factual"
The elusive "It." What's the matter? Afraid you won't be able to deceive people into thinking what you want them, to if you repeat the whole thing?Big Bang Theory is something completely different from Evolution, and was actually invented by a Christian (do some research)
So what? Even evolution theory is completely different from evolution. The fact that theory is not known to be factual is the point, not who put the theory together.You make things up, like saying there is a difference between "evolution" and "evolution theory"... there is not... these are talking about the same thing... quit intentionally lying to people
Wrong. There is a space and 6 letters more in "evolution theory" than there is in "evolution." Scientifically speaking, evolution theory exists as theory, while evolution without the word "theory" after it would exist as fact if it existed at all.
You can't have it both ways. Either you have found something that exists and have called it evolution, or you have not. Scientifically speaking, if evolution is not known to exist for a fact, call it what it is, evolution theory.
Perhaps you should read through that which you call meaningless drivel before you call it such.
If by "science" you mean science theories, why would anyone trust them, since they have not been proven to be factual? Of course, there is a way that you can trust science theories. You can trust that they are theories until they have been proven to be factual.
It's a shame gravity is just a theory... I suppose that means there is a chance gravity doesn't exist?
Gravity law is law. Gravity theory is theory.
I suppose if you think gravity is "just a theory", that it doesn't affect you?
Naw, you're wrong... Both gravity and evolution are proven to be a true, factual and predictive representation of reality... which is basically what a theory means in science... learn your words
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory
Quote
A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method and repeatedly tested and confirmed through observation and experimentation. Scientific theories are the most reliable, rigorous, and comprehensive form of scientific knowledge.
It is important to note that the definition of a "scientific theory" (often ambiguously contracted to "theory" for the sake of brevity, including in this page) as used in the disciplines of science is significantly different from, and in contrast to, the common vernacular usage of the word "theory". As used in everyday non-scientific speech, "theory" implies that something is an unsubstantiated and speculative guess, conjecture, or hypothesis; such a usage is the opposite of a scientific theory.
It is important to note that the definition of a "scientific theory" (often ambiguously contracted to "theory" for the sake of brevity, including in this page) as used in the disciplines of science is significantly different from, and in contrast to, the common vernacular usage of the word "theory". As used in everyday non-scientific speech, "theory" implies that something is an unsubstantiated and speculative guess, conjecture, or hypothesis; such a usage is the opposite of a scientific theory.
Regarding evolution, something exists. It has been termed evolution. Since the thing that exists, does indeed exist, if you call it evolution, then evolution exists.
Evolution theory talks about some things that are not known to exist. It also talks about the reasons why the existence termed "evolution" exists, and why some of the things in evolution theory might exist.
They are two different things... evolution and evolution theory.
People can write all kinds of things in Wikipedia. A lot of Wikipedia is not truth. It is a good starting point, to see what a subject is about in general. But it needs to be backed up by other info before it can be known to be factual.
This is something like Quantum Physics. QP is complex probability. It always needs to be backed up by something else before it can be known to be factual.
Just because a scientific theory is often made up of some science facts, does not make the theory itself to be factual. The theory takes the facts and combines and twists them into something new that is not known to be factual until it has been proven factual.
For example. Big Bang Theory probably will never be known to be true. Why not? As good as it might sound, there is no way to go back 13 or 14 billion years to see if it is true. There is always the chance that something unforeseen might have been there to make all the best BB theory to be non-factual.
It's the same with all science theory. Until it is proven to be factual, it is just theory, even if it has the word "science" in front of it.
Blah blah, meaningless drivel
Name something in evolution "that is not known to exist"... anything at all... don't make a claim you can't back up with facts and evidence
To quote, well you... "It always needs to be backed up by something else before it can be known to be factual"
Big Bang Theory is something completely different from Evolution, and was actually invented by a Christian (do some research)
You make things up, like saying there is a difference between "evolution" and "evolution theory"... there is not... these are talking about the same thing... quit intentionally lying to people
If by "science" you mean science theories, why would anyone trust them, since they have not been proven to be factual? Of course, there is a way that you can trust science theories. You can trust that they are theories until they have been proven to be factual.
It's a shame gravity is just a theory... I suppose that means there is a chance gravity doesn't exist?
Gravity law is law. Gravity theory is theory.
I suppose if you think gravity is "just a theory", that it doesn't affect you?
Naw, you're wrong... Both gravity and evolution are proven to be a true, factual and predictive representation of reality... which is basically what a theory means in science... learn your words
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory
Quote
A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method and repeatedly tested and confirmed through observation and experimentation. Scientific theories are the most reliable, rigorous, and comprehensive form of scientific knowledge.
It is important to note that the definition of a "scientific theory" (often ambiguously contracted to "theory" for the sake of brevity, including in this page) as used in the disciplines of science is significantly different from, and in contrast to, the common vernacular usage of the word "theory". As used in everyday non-scientific speech, "theory" implies that something is an unsubstantiated and speculative guess, conjecture, or hypothesis; such a usage is the opposite of a scientific theory.
It is important to note that the definition of a "scientific theory" (often ambiguously contracted to "theory" for the sake of brevity, including in this page) as used in the disciplines of science is significantly different from, and in contrast to, the common vernacular usage of the word "theory". As used in everyday non-scientific speech, "theory" implies that something is an unsubstantiated and speculative guess, conjecture, or hypothesis; such a usage is the opposite of a scientific theory.
Regarding evolution, something exists. It has been termed evolution. Since the thing that exists, does indeed exist, if you call it evolution, then evolution exists.
Evolution theory talks about some things that are not known to exist. It also talks about the reasons why the existence termed "evolution" exists, and why some of the things in evolution theory might exist.
They are two different things... evolution and evolution theory.
People can write all kinds of things in Wikipedia. A lot of Wikipedia is not truth. It is a good starting point, to see what a subject is about in general. But it needs to be backed up by other info before it can be known to be factual.
This is something like Quantum Physics. QP is complex probability. It always needs to be backed up by something else before it can be known to be factual.
Just because a scientific theory is often made up of some science facts, does not make the theory itself to be factual. The theory takes the facts and combines and twists them into something new that is not known to be factual until it has been proven factual.
For example. Big Bang Theory probably will never be known to be true. Why not? As good as it might sound, there is no way to go back 13 or 14 billion years to see if it is true. There is always the chance that something unforeseen might have been there to make all the best BB theory to be non-factual.
It's the same with all science theory. Until it is proven to be factual, it is just theory, even if it has the word "science" in front of it.
If by "science" you mean science theories, why would anyone trust them, since they have not been proven to be factual? Of course, there is a way that you can trust science theories. You can trust that they are theories until they have been proven to be factual.
It's a shame gravity is just a theory... I suppose that means there is a chance gravity doesn't exist?
I suppose if you think gravity is "just a theory", that it doesn't affect you?
Naw, you're wrong... Both gravity and evolution are proven to be a true, factual and predictive representation of reality... which is basically what a theory means in science... learn your words
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory
Quote
A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method and repeatedly tested and confirmed through observation and experimentation. Scientific theories are the most reliable, rigorous, and comprehensive form of scientific knowledge.
It is important to note that the definition of a "scientific theory" (often ambiguously contracted to "theory" for the sake of brevity, including in this page) as used in the disciplines of science is significantly different from, and in contrast to, the common vernacular usage of the word "theory". As used in everyday non-scientific speech, "theory" implies that something is an unsubstantiated and speculative guess, conjecture, or hypothesis; such a usage is the opposite of a scientific theory.
It is important to note that the definition of a "scientific theory" (often ambiguously contracted to "theory" for the sake of brevity, including in this page) as used in the disciplines of science is significantly different from, and in contrast to, the common vernacular usage of the word "theory". As used in everyday non-scientific speech, "theory" implies that something is an unsubstantiated and speculative guess, conjecture, or hypothesis; such a usage is the opposite of a scientific theory.
Atheists are not as bad as rapist. They do not violate your free will.
Their problem is that they don't realize how using their freedom to rape (for example) actually takes their freedom from them. They start to realize it when they are thrown into prison, where they lose a lot of their freedoms.
God damn it you are such a stupid fucking asshole
Atheists are the most moral of all people (evidenced by statistics)... 20% of Americans are Atheist, yet only 0.2% of prisoners are Atheists... do you need any more statistics than that?
According to prison statistics, Christians are 10,000% (100x) more likely to commit a felony than an Atheist...
People like to think Blacks commit more crimes than White people... but it's only like 3-to-1... Christian vs Atheist is 100-to-1... Basically, Christians are the ones committing the vast majority of crimes in America... statistically proven to be true
Tsk, tsk. How you talk! Just be glad God doesn't take your freedom away for how you misuse it.
How's the statistics for how many before-prison atheists find religion when inside?
As far as Christians doing worse than atheists (if your statistics are even accurate), the devil already has the atheists. He doesn't need to work so hard on them. He is trying to get the Christians, so he focuses on tempting them. Since Christians are only people, they often fall for this greater tempting to do wrong. Doesn't mean they are less saved as Christians... or that atheists will be saved at all as long as they remain atheists.
Turn while you can, and be saved for eternal life. As it is, you are throwing your freedom away.
You use science and statistics when it suits your purpose and then ignore them or denigrate them when it doesn't, so it would be best if you do not weigh in on anything to do with science or with statistics.
Here you go again, not providing links to the things that you say, nor explaining what you are talking about.
As most of the people can see, you are simply full of deceit. But, you are a person, and until your end comes, I respect that. Why do I respect that? Because there is always the chance, no matter how slim, that you will turn to God and be saved.
So you're just going to go with not trusting statistics or science, then? That your final answer?
I don't really know what you mean.
If by "science" you mean science theories, why would anyone trust them, since they have not been proven to be factual? Of course, there is a way that you can trust science theories. You can trust that they are theories until they have been proven to be factual.
Why do you often suggest all kinds of generalities, as well as suggesting that someone thinks a certain way about those generalities? And then you won't even answer the question about why you do this?
Either you trust and use science and/or statistics, or you don't. There is no in between.
Atheists are not as bad as rapist. They do not violate your free will.
Their problem is that they don't realize how using their freedom to rape (for example) actually takes their freedom from them. They start to realize it when they are thrown into prison, where they lose a lot of their freedoms.
God damn it you are such a stupid fucking asshole
Atheists are the most moral of all people (evidenced by statistics)... 20% of Americans are Atheist, yet only 0.2% of prisoners are Atheists... do you need any more statistics than that?
According to prison statistics, Christians are 10,000% (100x) more likely to commit a felony than an Atheist...
People like to think Blacks commit more crimes than White people... but it's only like 3-to-1... Christian vs Atheist is 100-to-1... Basically, Christians are the ones committing the vast majority of crimes in America... statistically proven to be true
Tsk, tsk. How you talk! Just be glad God doesn't take your freedom away for how you misuse it.
How's the statistics for how many before-prison atheists find religion when inside?
As far as Christians doing worse than atheists (if your statistics are even accurate), the devil already has the atheists. He doesn't need to work so hard on them. He is trying to get the Christians, so he focuses on tempting them. Since Christians are only people, they often fall for this greater tempting to do wrong. Doesn't mean they are less saved as Christians... or that atheists will be saved at all as long as they remain atheists.
Turn while you can, and be saved for eternal life. As it is, you are throwing your freedom away.
You use science and statistics when it suits your purpose and then ignore them or denigrate them when it doesn't, so it would be best if you do not weigh in on anything to do with science or with statistics.
Here you go again, not providing links to the things that you say, nor explaining what you are talking about.
As most of the people can see, you are simply full of deceit. But, you are a person, and until your end comes, I respect that. Why do I respect that? Because there is always the chance, no matter how slim, that you will turn to God and be saved.
So you're just going to go with not trusting statistics or science, then? That your final answer?
I don't really know what you mean.
If by "science" you mean science theories, why would anyone trust them, since they have not been proven to be factual? Of course, there is a way that you can trust science theories. You can trust that they are theories until they have been proven to be factual.
Why do you often suggest all kinds of generalities, as well as suggesting that someone thinks a certain way about those generalities? And then you won't even answer the question about why you do this?
Atheists are not as bad as rapist. They do not violate your free will.
Their problem is that they don't realize how using their freedom to rape (for example) actually takes their freedom from them. They start to realize it when they are thrown into prison, where they lose a lot of their freedoms.
God damn it you are such a stupid fucking asshole
Atheists are the most moral of all people (evidenced by statistics)... 20% of Americans are Atheist, yet only 0.2% of prisoners are Atheists... do you need any more statistics than that?
According to prison statistics, Christians are 10,000% (100x) more likely to commit a felony than an Atheist...
People like to think Blacks commit more crimes than White people... but it's only like 3-to-1... Christian vs Atheist is 100-to-1... Basically, Christians are the ones committing the vast majority of crimes in America... statistically proven to be true
Tsk, tsk. How you talk! Just be glad God doesn't take your freedom away for how you misuse it.
How's the statistics for how many before-prison atheists find religion when inside?
As far as Christians doing worse than atheists (if your statistics are even accurate), the devil already has the atheists. He doesn't need to work so hard on them. He is trying to get the Christians, so he focuses on tempting them. Since Christians are only people, they often fall for this greater tempting to do wrong. Doesn't mean they are less saved as Christians... or that atheists will be saved at all as long as they remain atheists.
Turn while you can, and be saved for eternal life. As it is, you are throwing your freedom away.
You use science and statistics when it suits your purpose and then ignore them or denigrate them when it doesn't, so it would be best if you do not weigh in on anything to do with science or with statistics.
Here you go again, not providing links to the things that you say, nor explaining what you are talking about.
As most of the people can see, you are simply full of deceit. But, you are a person, and until your end comes, I respect that. Why do I respect that? Because there is always the chance, no matter how slim, that you will turn to God and be saved.
So you're just going to go with not trusting statistics or science, then? That your final answer?
Atheists are not as bad as rapist. They do not violate your free will.
Their problem is that they don't realize how using their freedom to rape (for example) actually takes their freedom from them. They start to realize it when they are thrown into prison, where they lose a lot of their freedoms.
God damn it you are such a stupid fucking asshole
Atheists are the most moral of all people (evidenced by statistics)... 20% of Americans are Atheist, yet only 0.2% of prisoners are Atheists... do you need any more statistics than that?
According to prison statistics, Christians are 10,000% (100x) more likely to commit a felony than an Atheist...
People like to think Blacks commit more crimes than White people... but it's only like 3-to-1... Christian vs Atheist is 100-to-1... Basically, Christians are the ones committing the vast majority of crimes in America... statistically proven to be true
Tsk, tsk. How you talk! Just be glad God doesn't take your freedom away for how you misuse it.
How's the statistics for how many before-prison atheists find religion when inside?
As far as Christians doing worse than atheists (if your statistics are even accurate), the devil already has the atheists. He doesn't need to work so hard on them. He is trying to get the Christians, so he focuses on tempting them. Since Christians are only people, they often fall for this greater tempting to do wrong. Doesn't mean they are less saved as Christians... or that atheists will be saved at all as long as they remain atheists.
Turn while you can, and be saved for eternal life. As it is, you are throwing your freedom away.
You use science and statistics when it suits your purpose and then ignore them or denigrate them when it doesn't, so it would be best if you do not weigh in on anything to do with science or with statistics.
Here you go again, not providing links to the things that you say, nor explaining what you are talking about.
As most of the people can see, you are simply full of deceit. But, you are a person, and until your end comes, I respect that. Why do I respect that? Because there is always the chance, no matter how slim, that you will turn to God and be saved.
Atheists are not as bad as rapist. They do not violate your free will.
Their problem is that they don't realize how using their freedom to rape (for example) actually takes their freedom from them. They start to realize it when they are thrown into prison, where they lose a lot of their freedoms.
God damn it you are such a stupid fucking asshole
Atheists are the most moral of all people (evidenced by statistics)... 20% of Americans are Atheist, yet only 0.2% of prisoners are Atheists... do you need any more statistics than that?
According to prison statistics, Christians are 10,000% (100x) more likely to commit a felony than an Atheist...
People like to think Blacks commit more crimes than White people... but it's only like 3-to-1... Christian vs Atheist is 100-to-1... Basically, Christians are the ones committing the vast majority of crimes in America... statistically proven to be true
Tsk, tsk. How you talk! Just be glad God doesn't take your freedom away for how you misuse it.
How's the statistics for how many before-prison atheists find religion when inside?
As far as Christians doing worse than atheists (if your statistics are even accurate), the devil already has the atheists. He doesn't need to work so hard on them. He is trying to get the Christians, so he focuses on tempting them. Since Christians are only people, they often fall for this greater tempting to do wrong. Doesn't mean they are less saved as Christians... or that atheists will be saved at all as long as they remain atheists.
Turn while you can, and be saved for eternal life. As it is, you are throwing your freedom away.
You use science and statistics when it suits your purpose and then ignore them or denigrate them when it doesn't, so it would be best if you do not weigh in on anything to do with science or with statistics.
Atheists are not as bad as rapist. They do not violate your free will.
Because, just like theists, they are not smart enough to know how to live freely except that they go to God for the instructions God has placed in the Bible.Wait, did you just say religious people are too stupid to know how to live without reading instructions from bible?
In a lot of ways, yes. And so are the rest of the people.
Atheists are not as bad as rapist. They do not violate your free will.
Their problem is that they don't realize how using their freedom to rape (for example) actually takes their freedom from them. They start to realize it when they are thrown into prison, where they lose a lot of their freedoms.
God damn it you are such a stupid fucking asshole
Atheists are the most moral of all people (evidenced by statistics)... 20% of Americans are Atheist, yet only 0.2% of prisoners are Atheists... do you need any more statistics than that?
According to prison statistics, Christians are 10,000% (100x) more likely to commit a felony than an Atheist...
People like to think Blacks commit more crimes than White people... but it's only like 3-to-1... Christian vs Atheist is 100-to-1... Basically, Christians are the ones committing the vast majority of crimes in America... statistically proven to be true
Tsk, tsk. How you talk! Just be glad God doesn't take your freedom away for how you misuse it.
How's the statistics for how many before-prison atheists find religion when inside?
As far as Christians doing worse than atheists (if your statistics are even accurate), the devil already has the atheists. He doesn't need to work so hard on them. He is trying to get the Christians, so he focuses on tempting them. Since Christians are only people, they often fall for this greater tempting to do wrong. Doesn't mean they are less saved as Christians... or that atheists will be saved at all as long as they remain atheists.
Turn while you can, and be saved for eternal life. As it is, you are throwing your freedom away.
Atheists are not as bad as rapist. They do not violate your free will.
Their problem is that they don't realize how using their freedom to rape (for example) actually takes their freedom from them. They start to realize it when they are thrown into prison, where they lose a lot of their freedoms.
God damn it you are such a stupid fucking asshole
Atheists are the most moral of all people (evidenced by statistics)... 20% of Americans are Atheist, yet only 0.2% of prisoners are Atheists... do you need any more statistics than that?
According to prison statistics, Christians are 10,000% (100x) more likely to commit a felony than an Atheist...
People like to think Blacks commit more crimes than White people... but it's only like 3-to-1... Christian vs Atheist is 100-to-1... Basically, Christians are the ones committing the vast majority of crimes in America... statistically proven to be true
Atheists are not as bad as rapist. They do not violate your free will.
Because, just like theists, they are not smart enough to know how to live freely except that they go to God for the instructions God has placed in the Bible.Wait, did you just say religious people are too stupid to know how to live without reading instructions from bible?
Atheists are not as bad as rapist. They do not violate your free will.
Yes, but. An atheist believes in freedom. If he didn't, he wouldn't freely do the things that religions say you shouldn't... like raping.
The trouble with atheists is not in that they love freedom. Loving freedom is great. Their problem is that they don't realize how using their freedom to rape (for example) actually takes their freedom from them. They start to realize it when they are thrown into prison, where they lose a lot of their freedoms.
Now, I am not saying that all atheists are rapists by any means. I am not even saying that the majority of atheists lack understanding of how to be free in a general way. I am simply saying that their idea of freedom from God isn't really freedom. Why not? Because, just like theists, they are not smart enough to know how to live freely except that they go to God for the instructions God has placed in the Bible.
Atheists are not as bad as rapist. They do not violate your free will.
...a religion under #6 which says, "blah blah blah"
You do not get to pick and choose which definition you like best
When speaking about a religion as you are, you use definition #1
#6 is used rarely in cases such as, "turning debating into a religion"... which is not the same usage of the word religion... it is a colloquial expression
You are either fucking stupid, or intentional conflating definitions to confuse people... please stop with this nonsense
Jump to: