Topic: The road to the End of Religion: How sex will kill God - page 20. (Read 37219 times)

No I haven't. Sorry but you don't get to dictate to me how best to use my time. Additionally lets say the book does have valid studies... which are in support of your argument? All of them? None of them? You cant just throw a stack of books at some one and claim the entirety to be in support of your argument, that is not how it works.

If the evidence is there, PRESENT IT. I am not going to sift thru 3 tons of horse shit so I can convince myself of your opinion, sorry.

The burden of proof is upon you. Source scientific studies that you believe support your argument, I don't care what book or publication they came from as long as they are scientifically valid. We both know this is impossible though because you are aware your ideology has no scientific backing and your ideology is nothing more than dogma no different than any religion.

It was a statement, not an argument. I would hope you know the difference.


Still graphs from 2008....? I'm still waiting on the new statistics 7 years later. I'm not even arguing against the belief in God going down, I wouldn't be shocked if it was. But you should at least have recent scientific data to prove your theory.


What do I care if there are more ethnicities alive than whites? My adopted-uncle was hispanic. Most of my bosses have been African American. Diversity is great. So who cares?

I get the distinct impression you still haven't read a single page of Sex at Dawn, even after it has been presented to you for free.

In my quest for knowledge I have read Sex at Dawn, the Holy Bible, the Noble Qur'an, most of the Torah, Ketuvim, and Nevi'im, the Tao Te Ching, and every volume of the Norton Anthology of World Literature. I ask you to read only the first of the six books I listed in the OP, and that's too much?

Where does the intellectual burden truly fall here?

Ok, so supposedly they exist... and do any of them support your arguments about gender identity? Pick one you believe supports YOUR argument and present it. The fact that you are incapable of this is a very clear indication to me you aren't even familiar with the content that you spout as science based fact.

You are the one making the claim, therefore the burden of proof is upon you. Atheists love saying this to theists. Now lets see if you can actually observe this standard for yourself.

"Thou speakath as though the written word will remain for all time!"

Compelling argument there, Socrates.

When I say "die" I don't mean "no believers at all", I mean a very tiny minority will be theists, like the Amish today.

You want a more realistic graph? Here you go, a highly probable case:



And the best-case scenario for comparison:



To reiterate:

You're going to have to come to terms with the fact that within 25 years there will be more athiest Americans than there will be Christians.
Oh, also there will be more hispanics than whites, so deal with that too. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, WASPS.

You act like the Internet will be here forever.

When sex freedom becomes full freedom, and people realize the possibilities, the Internet will die because people will be too busy engaging in the real thing to maintain the Internet. Those people who don't perish from overindulgence in sex, will finally realize that they have to go back to work to produce food so that they won't starve. Long before this happens, there will be all kinds of wild anarchy. The Net having been long gone, people in their pain will return to religion, partially because the dark ages will have returned.

I've always loved that song, lol.

You're wrong that it will die.

Where is your more accurate recent graph without the silly lines going in opposite directions as the charted ones?

Your mistake is in thinking Homo Sapiens are civilized beings first, and animals second. In reality it's the other way around. You are a Primate; a Mammal; an Animal first and foremost. If you are ever faced with mortal danger you will know this to be true.

"I am my body", say it with me kids. Embodied experience, or "living in the present moment", which dominated human existence for our first five hundred thousand years as a species, is finally reasserting itself over abstract disembodied experience. With a fucking vengeance.

Orgasmic Nirvana is pure paradise on Earth. This can and will be the death of religion. What need have we for some fairy tale paradise after death, when Paradise on Earth is right there for the taking? As sex becomes more and more important to our culture, religion will continue to fade.

How many years of dying religion will pass before you theists give up this silly "my White Knight will come save us!" bullshit?

Sex is just an animal instinct like eating  It can't never kill religion 

I assume nothing, I've read the books and many of the works cited as well. You can find a plethora of scientific studies at the end of Sex At Dawn, which can be obtained free in EBOOK format via torrent here.

(Or navigate to the link through TBP if you don't trust me: https://thepiratebay.la/torrent/8389863/Sex_At_Dawn_How_We_Mate__Why_We_Stray_and_What_It_Means_for_Mode)

Ah yes, breeding. A strategy that has been proven to work well throughout the ages, right up until the dawn of the information age. You see, now that theists are no longer able to insulate the minds of their children from outside information throughout the formative years, indoctrination (religious or otherwise) has a much higher chance of failure.

This is one of those trends that will only accelerate as children connect to the internet at younger ages. Walk around any city in America and you'll see kids - even toddlers - with smartphones. Modern children who grow up in industrialized nations are all connected to our global web of thought during their formative years! Hell, with the power of multimedia, these kids are being conveyed basic ideas before they have even learned to read! Nothing like this has ever happened before.

That's today, 2015. And look what's already happening (in America) as a result:



Sooner or later we're going to bridge the technological gap between wetware (brains) and hardware (computers), and when that day comes you can kiss your religion goodbye forever.


P.S.
It won't be long before all the poor kids in like China, India, and sub-saharan Africa come online, as those areas have the benefit of leapfrogging the entire landline telecommunications tech evolution. They go from no telecom straight to internet-connected smartphone networks.

That's one of the reasons government is so important. It keeps the crooked politicians in one place so we always know where they are in case we need to incarcerate them. And often they don't breed because they are too busy screwing the people rather than keeping it at home.

I wonder what 1.6 billion (projected to be 3 billion by 2050) of muslims world wide thinks about this "idea" of yours. Meanwhile amish population in the US increased from 3000 in 1900 to 300 000 currently, virtually only through procreation. You see, these religious whackos, unlike you, actually have children, so they dont even have to argue you. They will just breed you out of gene pool, like they did in ancient Persia and Roman Empire.

There will be no freedom of religion, until the end of days, at least. Freedom of religion is slipping away fast. Churches are have desecrated recently. People are suing others for not doing something they consider a sin (when it's not hurting anyone). We, religious people (and Christians in general), are headed towards persecution.

Though I argue with the validity of the conclusions of the graph shown, especially when it's 7 years old, I don't argue that there are less religious people nowadays, and less fully committed (versus the sin on a weekday, repent on Sunday types) religious people. It was prophesied to happen, it's just being fulfilled right now.

Over time, extremists everywhere and every which way, either change, or wisely find a niche, or die.

"stronger than ever"? I doubt it. I do realize that there seem to be a kind of pendulum effect with religiosity. secularism and religiosity have been battling for millennia. There can be extreme and barbaric anti-religion secularism, as there can be extreme and barbaric religiosity desperately protecting itself from any outside influence. I think extreme religious acts are increasingly frowned upon I believe that there will always be less people willing to act violently to further their ideology. In the age of the internet, making sense is a must.
Nowadays, religions of old are looking less and less appealing. New religions and reasonable religions (or religious sects) will prevail. That will be an increase in religiosity, but its base values will be humanistic. Slavery is seen as barbaric by Christians across the US, yet it was seen as completely normal for most 300 years ago.
The strengthening of the values of freedom of religion and freedom from religion will ensure that the pendulum of religiosity/secularity will be a swing in people's ideology, not what extremist party people will be subjugated to.

This fallacy is called appeal to authority.
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-authority

You assume because they have PhDs that their arguments are valid. If their arguments are based on science, then produce the studies that support your argument. Lots of people who have PhD write books with nothing but bullshit in them to make money, because they know people like you will buy them because they support your bias with persuasive writing. That doesn't make them experts, or make their premise fact. Scientific studies and empirical data makes facts.

You can provide that scientific data at any time...

Do you think theists are scared? It's been predicted, that many would have fallen and lawlessness would rule in the end, that is until Jesus comes back.

I think it's funny the title of this thread is about "killing God" versus "killing religion".

You know what I think? This belief in science as the be-all end-all is a religion. You've made it clear to me. You believe in it so much without questioning your beliefs. In lieu of having real scientific arguments, you believe everyone else who argues with you to be a theist. The real eye-opener for me though, is that you want God to be killed, and not religion. You want religion to live out, just in the worship of science.

If you had written that "sex will kill religion", I would never have to this conclusion, so thanks for clearing it up for me.

Edit: Just going to point out if you take those silly lines off the graph the "Very Important" was in an uptick, and you have it going down, and the "Not very important", looks like it was headed down, and the line goes up. Your science should have a better graph/statistics these days than that to come to those conclusions, it's been 7 years... have a recent one?

If you pay close attention you may notice that the authors of Sex at Dawn and most of my other books have PHDs, and the books come with extensive works cited sections at the end. What kind of degrees did the authors of the bible have, incest and slavery degrees perhaps?

Internet blew up around 1995, so of those 4,000 years only the most recent 20 are relevant to the cultural-social-political situation today.

I'm sure it would've been easy to dismiss the death of Feudalism just five years after the invention of the Printing Press. Less so 25 years after, far less so 50 years after.

Take a look at 1996 onward in the chart below, notice the shifting of the pattern?



TLDR Theism is a dead idea walking.

Your delusions have nothing to do with me. I have never made a theist based argument to support my points. Your biases and prejudices have nothing to do with me and are simply a mechanism you use to defend your frail ideology, because you have no facts or logic behind your arguments to defend against some one arguing facts and science. There is no endless argument about an invisible man in the sky for you to hide your ignorance behind with endless bickering over things that can literally never be proven.

You claim I am a theist but you have faith in your ideology just like a theist does, without factual basis, and you claim scientific backing, and instead of the bible you hold up books filled with your ideology and claim it is science. You are no better than these ever present theists you see all around you. Funny how you still have found even more excuses to not provide scientific sources for any of your arguments. You know those theists, always demanding scientific data...