http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znxQOPFg2mo


People sure do love their wifi...Guy's comment from the audience FTW

Courtesy of CNET

Job For a Cowboy-Knee Deep

Nope, knowledge isnt the gift of satan. I really dont see how proving the claim that god made the earth flat and immovable, the center of the universe could be taken as a gift of some devil. Its sad, theres still morons that believe god made a flat earth that can be seen entirely from the summit of mt. sinai that call themselves flat-earthers. whether the truth we gain is positive or negative, its better to live in a horrible truth than a beautiful lie. With advances in modern medicine as well, this goes to show that knowledge isnt the work of the devil. The bubonic plague was claimed to be god's way of preventing overpopulation, but science proved that totally wrong. It was discovered that it the cure was high doses of vitamin c, not prayer.

Yup, read the Christian bible, the qu'ran, the works of primary founders of the wiccan/neopagan views like the works of alestair crowley and alexander gardner, the triptaka, the collective works of many regional mythos which were considered valid religions at points in time(i.e. greek mythos, persian mythos, several native american tribe mythos, roman mythos) and have been reincarnated in deity worship in several sects of neopaganism, the works of l. ron hubbard, and currently working on the tao-te-ching.

Tonsils are only shown to help fight off infections up till the age of 3. After that, they are useless. This is medically proven. After the age of 3, tonsils are simply a risk factor. A risk factor for easily getting infected. We might not need an arm also, but having an arm after a certain age never greatly raised the possibility of arm-related infections, but having tonsils after the age of 3 raises the possibility of respiratory-related infections.

My fault, wrong part indicated. You are right, the spleen is used, I withdraw my statement in regards to the spleen. But in correction, one could easily discuss the tonsils. The tonsils are virtually useless and can cause infection in the body. There was the scientific belief that the tonsils were needed throughout life to catch bacteria and other airborne infectious diseases. Medical science has shown that the tonsils have no purpose and are useless. The current thing is that they MIGHT have a use up until the age of 3, but even that is under heavy scientific scrutiny. Its the same concept of how circumcision prevents disease. Medical science has proven that circumcision does not do anything in regards to preventing infection of the genitalia. In the same sense, the tonsils do nothing for prevention of bacterial infection.

The proof of there not being a god is as simple as a spleen. The spleen is left over from our evolutionary process. It serves no purpose, but it used to. With adaptation and evolution, any purpose it used to serve is now unnecessary. To state there is the existance of god is contradictory, and the spleen is such simple proof of it. Ponder this, if we were made by god, then the spleen was added for no purpose. It would be a situation in which the creator sabotaged his grandest creation "in his eyes". Does this mean that god is deluded enough to intentionally sabotage his own work? Would this mean that if man was created in the physical image of god, then god himself is inherently flawed? If the creation is flawed and is created in the image of the creator, then the creator must be flawed also. But a perfect god cant be flawed. So, this brings the conclusion that if there is a god, then god inherently is not perfect. In mentality, god is easily jealous and is wrathful, both of which are mortal sins. So then, by conclusion, god is much more humanistic than we think. But for a god to be all powerful, but yet show some of the worst human traits, how can such a god truly exist? Therefore, such a god couldnt and doesnt exist. Its great how something so small and insignificant like a spleen can help us answer one of lifes greatest mysteries.

Sodom and Gomorrah (genocide, mass murder caused by a god), the story of Lot offering his daughter to the mob (holy men allowing rape with no reprocussion from god), the unification of the 13 tribes of Israel (the allowance of slavery and gods approval of war). These are in your religious doctrines, and it is clear as day. These are not lies nor assumptions, these are simply your doctrines.

In what I have listed, religion was a huge factor in these historical events, there is no logical way of denying this. The Crusades were about love of family? The Spanish Inquisition was about love of country? What next? A man gets his head sliced off on a bus because the religious nutjob said he did it because god told him to, but in fact it was for money?

This is one basic proof that religion is a poison of the mind. The religious side would claim that none of these actions were heavily motivated by religious belief, but the thing is, they were. There is overwhelming proof of this with the historical events I have listed. Even those with a basic knowledge of these events would easily agree. Fine, I guess that I have to explain.

The spanish inquisition was trials held to charge and put through trial blashpemers to religion. The reconquista was a movement to convert pagans to christianity/catholocism, and those that would not change their religious views were killed. The wars with Iraq and Afganistan is also because George Bush was told by god that every person wants to be a peace-loving christian, so that is what mainly decided his foreign policy. The crusades was about taking jeruselum from the islamic believers that were occupying it. The revolutionary war was a war waged for independence from a king that claimed he was gods figurehead on earth. The civil war was heavily based on the north believing that all should be free, but the south believing that god was okay with slavery and favored them. Even the death of jesus can be tallied up to a strong sense of religious intolorence. Religion has historically been a tool of subjugation used by monarchs, dictators, and other political figures. World War 2 was because the germans believed they were the chosen people of god, not the jews, and the emperor of japan claimed to be the personification of god on earth. World War 1 was a war in which all sides fought for country and god. All nations claim to fight for God and Country. How can that be denied? Our country is one of the biggest swingers of this phrase. Tribal genocide in Africa based on one tribe believing that they were chosen by god and that god told them to eradicate the other tribe or tribes.

Yes, people use whatever reasons they want to do things of an unspeakable nature, but religion has, throughout history, has been one of the biggest motivating factors used for support and subjugation. Religion, for thousands of years, has been a tool of controlling the masses. How can one not draw the conclusion that it is a poinon in the hearts and minds of men? How is waging war and death based on "what god wants" not as wrong as a man hitting a woman? Both are wrong in nature, and both are unjustifiable. The man that hits a woman claims he has the right because "the woman was wrong in challenging him" and the ones who wage war in the name of god claim that the opposing side was wrong for challenging god.

There are many things that motivate those with negative acts, but religion has been one of the biggsst motivating forces in many of the most atrocious acts in mankind's history. Religion has a tendency to bring out the darkest in people, and that is why I can call religion a poison which we are self-convinced is somehow beneficial.

One last note, Jesus did not always preach peace and love. The gospels show this. The incident in the temple in which Jesus went into a fit of anger, throwing a table to the ground and threatening the livelihood of the money changers if they did not leave. That is not peaceful, that is vengeful. Wrath is one of the 7 mortal sins, and Jesus clearly demonstrated this in that temple.

But thats the thing, what I speak of is not assumptions. As for the amish girls, look up Westboro Baptist Church sometime. The wars in Iraq and Afganistan were heavily influened by George Bush's religious beliefs, which was a heavy part of his foreign policy (his words). Historically, religious belief was a major factor in most wars (soldiers and leaders believing that God was on their side). As for hurricanes, tsunamis, earthquakes, all you have to do is listen to most fundamentalist christians. In regards to the deaths, look at the wars in which a big influence was fighting in the name of God. The crusades, revolutionary war, civil war, world war 1, world war 2, need I go on? Oh well, why not? The spanish inquisition, wars of roman conquest, the current fighting in the middle east, the persecution and slaughter of pagans in the early first few centuries A.D., and many more. These are not assumptions, these are factual correlations (check them out sometime). My assumption, based on piles upon piles of historical and biblical evidence (genocide, mass murder caused by a god, holy men allowing the rape of their daughters, slavery approved by god, an all-loving being that is easily jealous and vengeful, human sacrifice, the encouragement of war in gods name, and many more examples), it is safe to assume that religion has a huge effect in the negativity of mankind. We toss aside our survival instincts because "we arent afraid to die at all because we will go to heaven and be with god". Even many of the greatest preachers of peace and harmony were murdered because the ones who murdered them "claimed that god told them to". John Lennon, Martin Luther King Jr., John Kennedy, Robert Kennedy, and more. So from heavily religious, to somewhat religious, to not religious, murdered in the name of god. I can easily say that religion is a plague upon humanity because of the despicible actions it has inspired people to do, and still do. Ah yes, lets not forget the suni-shiite power struggle, the genocidal acts in Africa, the terror attacks between palestinians and jewish, among others, but whats the point of bringing those up too? Any christian would simply state, "but those hundreds of millions, even billions of people dont know God like I know God." I prove you wrong, these varied from very moderate followers all the way to the extremists, the ones who took the gospels as metaphors, to those who took it literal down to the exact word. I can safely say that religion is a poison based on the numerous actions of countless upon countless amounts of followers.

The second paragraph you bring up reminds me of an interesting story. Recently, in Europe, there was an advertising campaign on buses that said that god might not exist. There were protesters directed at the advertising firm for their ad campaign. It went to the courts to handle it. The courts mandated that they had to remove their ads from the buses because "as much as they couldnt prove that god exists, they couldnt disprove it either."

The birth of Jesus wasn't celebrated until over 100 years after his death. Christmas is such a huge religious holiday, but where in these doctrines does it commemorate that one single day as "a momentous day to be celebrated"? The only day Jesus spoke of to be commemorated in his life was his death. In the face of logic, there is no room for assumptions or blind faith. Test your hypothesis, then test it again, and maybe a third time to be safe. Answer me this, how many atheist gatherings do you see protesting funerals for girls raped and murdered, protesting because "they are amish and they deserved it for their religious upbringing"? Christians are some of the sickest, most depraved people on this planet. How many atheists do you see thanking God for wiping out New Orleans because it "was a haven of the devil"? How many atheists died in the name of God? How many wars did atheists start because some invisible mouth whispered in their ear that they are justified? More people have died in the name of god than any other cause. More people have killed in the name of god than for any other reason. Even God, in the Bible, killed over 2 million people, because "they didnt believe in him the right way". All I did was post a simple question, with a simple conclusion that was up for discussion, but "oh no, I dont consider myself a SERVANT to a LORD, whatever shall I do?" This was a simple question of morals and ethics, not questioning if your invisible master is real. Seriously, when many Christian scholars cant even agree on most of the foundations of the religion, how in the heck do you expect people to, not only take it seriously, but also become a slave to it? The God/follower relationship is one of slavery. You spend your entire life serving your Lord, then you die to go to heaven to serve your Lord. For every christian reading this, yes, you are an elitist. I guarantee at some point, you thought to yourself, "this person doesnt believe in my Lord, but its okay, he/she will burn in hell, not me." Heck, even Jesus was not perfect, and wasn't he the physical embodiment of God? Here is the perfect example: In the temple where Jesus threw the table in a fit of fury in regards to the money changers, then threatened violence against them. That is hypocritical to his teachings, plain and simple. As a whole, religion weighs us down. We arent supposed to look to finding logical answers, we are supposed to believe that its God's will. So, by discovering that volcanic eruptions, tsunamis, earthquakes, etc. are not God's will, is that blasphemy? How are users of the scientific method elitists? For testing hypotheses? For attempting to solve how things work? The christian method is bogus. "I dont have to question anything, I dont have to figure out how anything works, God knows how, and thats good enough for me." Religion is ignorance. Blind faith is the enemy of any kind of reasoning. The unexamined life is a life wasted. If you never question something but blindly follow, how can you even say you truly believe in something? If you cant rationally look at something to determine if it is correct, then whats the point?

But the ones who question the believers do not openly state, "For not believing, you will be cast to eternal damnation, while I, as a believer, will not." This is where elitism comes in. Elitism is to assume that persons that dont believe (...yet) will someday "admit they are wrong and will learn that your opinion is right". I like the plastic bag idea though, it's a better way for religious nutjobs to try to prove their myth instead of praying for us all to die. You know what I mean. The rapture, of course. One more note, christians are about as selfish as they are "elite". According to Christianity, the sabbath day is the day in which God rests. An all-powerful god needing to "take a break"? Plus, the sabbath day (sunday) is the most commonly-referred to day for christians to pray to their god for things. What kind of joke is that? "I know its your day off, but heres my list of wants..."

Okay, bad example for not being explained thoroughly on my end. With the human brain, 5-8 percent is used consciously, while the other 92-95 percent is used sub-consciously. There is still a lot of debate as to whether or not it is possible to use any of the larger percent consciously. If we can tap into more of the subconscious brain to use consciously, then we would be inherently flawed on creation. A better example of proof of God's non-existence would be the spleen. It doesn't really serve much of a purpose anatomically, but it used to. This is a piece of anatomy which, through evolutionary processes, does not have a purpose anymore. So, would God add something to the formula that is unnecessary and useless? Would this mean, as a creator, that a creation of God's, made in his image, was flawed upon creation? And if so, would this mean that the creator's ability and skill was flawed?

I do not say that brotherly love is impossible, I say to love your neighbors as you would love yourself is impossible. I will give one of the easiest examples to follow. Look at 9/11. How did Americans feel about the hijackers? Did Americans love them? Of course not, Americans demanded vengeance, Christians demanded vengeance. How is this wrong and hypocritical you may ask? Simple. The teachings of Jesus. To love thine enemy and when attacked to turn the other cheek. Did we have to go to war with 2 countries? Of course not. It showed us that security was lacking, that we needed better precautions, but it didn't justify bloodshed in large amounts.If you think mass killing overseas for 9/11 is justified, then you are hypocritical to your beliefs. An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.

Second of all, atheist propaganda? I proposed an ethical question, hardly calling your doctrines make-believe. And, yes, with Original Sin, we are born into this world as sinners in the eyes of God, according to religion. Does this not make us guilty of crime upon our entry into life?

If a person has questions about the beliefs of Christianity, wouldnt the best way to get answers be to examine your doctrines? That doesnt mean anything. Athiests choose that religion is bogus because they want to also. See, it works both ways.

I would like to point out one of the biggest points that has been illustrated by Thomas3474. Christianity is also immoral because it leads its followers to this type of elitism. Read hos words, this is the mindset of the average Christian. Is elitism moral? According to Christianity it sure is.

It instills the mindset of wanting the end to come, the rapture, the death of everything. Because with the rapture, Christians are supposed to rise up and go to Jesus, and as many Christians would put it, "and the rest of us can go straight to hell."

Personally, yes, I am an atheist. I dont follow Bronze-Age superstition. How many other Bronze-Age teachings do we still follow besides the doctrines of Christianity? I don't look for forgiveness through prayer, I look to be absolved through my actions. If one person hurts another person, and I go to the transgressor and say "Don't worry about it, you are guilty and you have my forgiveness," is that moral? No, its not. It is arrogance. So for Jesus to do the exact same thing, how is that not? The other person is still hurt, feeling the actions in which the transgressor took. Where is personal responsibility in this?

Keep in mind, very similar stories to many in the Bible were parts of other religions from the SAME REGION. Take the story of Jesus. Look at the story of the Egyptian god Horus. The similarities are remarkably similar. Also, I challenge the validity of the Bible, and here is one piece of information I challenge any Christian to refute. It was not until 342 A.D. that the church decided to add that the mother of Jesus was a virgin. Immaculate conception was not added to doctrine until 300 years after the death of Jesus. You would think that would be a pretty remarkable thing that wouldnt take 300 years to add.

To be fearful of God because your life could be ended at any moment, but love God because God lets you live...how is this not a sadomasochistic view? "I love you because you havent killed me yet, but I am afraid of you because at your whim, you can end my life."

Also, coveting someones possessions is a thought-crime by religious standards. That is the basis of an economy, and what keeps it going, but according to doctrine, its a thought-crime which can cause someone to be sentenced to an eternal prison.

It is not about negative, negative, negative. I have credited numerous times the ethical teachings, but there is also immorality within also, which I have shown. I am not asking if Christianity is true, or if God is real, I am asking if these basic foundations of Christianity moral or immoral. Questioning faith does not make someone an enemy of faith, or a blasphemer.

No.

athiests use logic? What kind of logic contends that humans came from monkeys when there are still primates in existence?


The logic is only one chromosome being different, the similar skeletal structures, that there are an overwhelmingly large amount of physical similarities. In religion there is no logic, that is where blind faith comes in. In atheism, there is a reliance on the scientific method. A person using this method doesnt necessarily look at something as it being entirely right without testing it rigorously. The science-minded person will take a hypothesis and conduct the tests with the aim of disproving old theories. Religion teaches us not to question our faith. There is no logic in not evaluating something. So, yes, atheists use logic, and are some of the most logical individuals out there. There are sub-species that are formed, but the original creatures in which the sub-species formed from are still in existence. There is absolutely no logic in that a deity made a man out of dirt, then breathed into his nose, then he came to life, or that a rib was taken from a man in his sleep, and formed into a woman. But, then again, thats where blind faith comes in.

Okay, well, the topic is if Chrisianity is immoral. As I have stated, many of the funamentals of Christianity are immoral, and at times, can get rather perverse. Since the topic kind of veered into the validity of the religion in itself as a whole, allow me to redirect to the main point. Is Vicarious Redemption immoral? My point is that vicarious redemption robs people of personal responsibility. When remorse is felt, then all that is needed is forgiveness of God. This robs any incentive of making amends to anybody affected negatively. For Jesus to say that even if the hurt doesnt forgive, that he does, and that makes everything fine, this is rather perverse in its own rights.

Also, Christianity teaches us to love each and every person as we would love ourselves, which is impossible. This in itself is an impossibility to love every person in the world as we would love ourselves, so we are always guilty of this crime.

Third, doctrines of Christianity teach us that we from the moment we are born into this world, we are guilty of crimes because we are born with Original Sin. Even from the moment of birth, we are guilty in the eyes of God. To be considered a criminal upon the moment of entering this world is a deranged view.

And, the believer-God relationship is a relationship based on the sadomasochistic premise. We are to be fearful of God yet strive every moment for all our lives to seek his love. To be fearful and loving is simply sadomasochistic.

Finally, Christianity is a totalitarian religion. There is no chance for any change, and the ruler is eternal. We are even convicted of thought-crimes under the religion. To simply have an urge is a crime that we are found guilty of. There is no need to commit the crime, but to simply have the thought, is something that will condemn an individual.

-On a side note, I would like to highly recommend the documentary of Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion. It is an excellent study by a former professor of biological theory at Oxford University.

Keep in mind, most of the Earth is technically considered inhabitable for humans. We have adapted. This is not God, this is a basic law of darwinism.

Evolution is a very long drawn out process, spanning hundreds upon hundreds of thousands of years. Proof of evolution would be sub-species. Many religious people fail to effectively prove how sub-species that form due to a change in environs as part of "God's great plan". It is easily explained by adaptation to a climate/environmental change.

Once again, the human brain is a marvel of evolution. The earth is older than 6 thousand years, thanks to carbon dating for that proof. There are human fossils that are over 1.4 million years old, not 6 thousand years old. Besides, we only use approximately 5-8 percent of our brains capacity. Thus, if the human brain was constructed by a God, it is faulty. So God is a prick with a sick sense of humor, or he screwed up.

I have seen no empiracal evidence of God, nor ever will. People used to believe God held us to the ground and that gravity was blasphemy. Through several theorums and tests conducted, we learn. Followers of God dont look to prove an existance of God, your only options are "believe it or else". It is so surprising that in an age of knowledge, we still cling to bronze age superstitions. And about the wind, people used to credit that with being God's presence, but that was disproven.

But there is also the ugliness of faith. Faith/religion drives people to do things that are unethical (war, genocide, etc.) because they believe that God is on their side. The only tangible evidence of the existence of God is the Scriptures, but when the history of the scriptures is delved into, even these are corrupt. For instance, the Virgin Mary. This would be considered an important event in those times, but was not added to scripture until 342 A.D. The scriptures have been translated from dead languages, to other dead languages, to the interpretations of monarchs, to what we see today.Christianity borrows from other religions (i.e. the story of the egyptian god Horus in regards to Jesus), and from the true preachers of the christian Bible, it preaches to followers to yearn for the end of the world. Believing in God brings about a sense of elitism. "i believe in God, therefore, when i die/the rapture comes, I will ascend to heaven. You will not if you believe in another religion, so I will go to heaven and you all can go to hell." Christianity takes away from the beauty of humanity. Christianity teaches that there is no moral basis without the belief in God, but humans are creatures of instinct. There is one question that I ask anyone willing to answer. Name one ethical thing that a Christian can accomplish that an atheist cant. By scientific/logical definition, the validity of Christianity doesn't quite hold up. Accounts told by those that have not seen said events with their own eyes, but recounting what they heard about someone else, many years ago, or a decade or two prior to the writings, based on heresay, not first-hand accounts. The christian bible speaks of many immoral practices (genocide, genital mutilation, slavery, rape, murder, human sacrifice, war, vicarious redemption) which is all approved by God. Religion is a poison that corrupts whatever it touches, and until we dissolve ourselves of these Bronze-Age superstitions, as a species, we will never reach our full potential.

The fact of the matter is, when proving there is or isnt, the burden of proof falls upon the individual proving that there is. There are many pieces of evidence in support that there is no God, but without scriptures, it simply falls upon statistics. The church claims that in the lake in which the Virgin Mary ascended into heaven upon her death, that for about 150 years, 80 thousand tourists go there and touch or drink the water for healing or miracle purposes. So, I will go ahead and take the burden of proof for busting this open. If you round it down to 50 thousand people a month for 150 years, that comes to 90 million people. 66 of these peoples ailments that went away were certified to truly be miracles. That is less that .001 percent. And with many of these, they are ailments that wouldve gone away with proper medical attention. In the regards to miracles, this could be used to show that there are not truly miracles, based on the overwhelmingly small statistic. There were no truly written accounts of the life of Jesus, the gospels were written 20 to 30 years after his death.Under any logical testing, this does not hold up. Also, in the mediterranean sea area, many stories very similar to the life of Jesus were passed around for thousands of years. Much of the story of Jesus could easily be claimed plagerism of the story of Horus. Both were considered the savior of humankind, both born to a virgin mother, both baptized in a lake at a young age, which the baptizer would be beheaded, both healed the sick, restored eyesight to the blind, both raised the dead, both were killed in a horrific fashion, both rose from the dead 3 days later and ascended into heaven. There are many cultural, scientific, logical, and historical examples that can be used to disprove God, but without scriptures, there really isnt much of anything to prove there is a god.