Bhutto killed
- Started
- Last post
- 72 Responses
- mrdobolina0
Dinesh D'Souza? Really?
Here's the main argument, such as it is. Why has al-Qaeda targeted America? "Not because of U.S. troops in Mecca," D'Souza writes. "Not even because of Israel. . . . The suicide bombers of radical Islam are not blowing themselves up because they are distressed over the Gulf War of 1991 or because they are in solidarity with the Palestinians." Rather, "what bin Laden objected to was America staying in the Middle East, importing with it the immoral ingredients of American values and culture." That makes the left "responsible for 9/11" because it "has fostered a decadent American culture that angers and repulses traditional societies" and has waged "an aggressive global campaign to undermine the traditional patriarchal family and to promote secular values in non-Western cultures." In sum, "the cultural left and its allies in Congress, the media, Hollywood, the nonprofit sector, and the universities are the primary cause of the volcano of anger toward America that is erupting from the Islamic world."
The guy is a fucking nut.
- The argument of the article I posted, had you read it you would understand, is that it is silly for secularists to use the "religion has dun wrong in the past", while at the same time ignoring the evils it has committed.teleos
- dskz0
She faked her death and went underground. Heh...she faked it, typical woman. 8D
- teleos0
mrdobolina and bonseff have made a career at NT out of committing the genetic fallacy and dodging the matter at hand.
Learn:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gen…It doesn't matter if it's D'Souza, Lane Craig, JP Moreland, Ravi Zaccharias, etc... the logic of the argument stands regardless of who is employing it. This is not rocket science.
- you are delusionalBonSeff
- your truth comes from christian science internet articles. save it flagellumBonSeff
- seriously, baby jesus weeps everytime you insult me.mrdobolina
- telos is flagellum?
FFS.madirish - maybe/maybe not - to me, they are all flagellum-
flagellum everywhere!BonSeff
- mikotondria20
"name one ethical statement made,
or one ethical action performed, by a believer that could not have been uttered or done by a nonbeliever. And here is my second challenge. Can (you) think of a wicked statement made, or an evil action performed, precisely because of religious faith"The second part I propose, covers the murder of Bhutto.
There is no answer to the 1st. Belief is not necessary for any action of compassion, generosity, kindness etc, trust me, it's how I operate. Even down to the 'human sacrifice' of christ, and beyond - any action carried out based on a 'faith' that it was right (rather than actual knowledge of same), has been carried out by people who see it as untirely unrelated to any superstition.
How can you not understand that humanity, compassion and kindness are intrinsic qualities of people, as are the senses of awe and wonder and connectedness that are labeled 'spiritual' and seen as entirely the governance of religion ?
Religion and religious leaders seek to convince everyone that they have special knowledge of these aspects of human experience, and that their particular extensive research into the philosophy behind them grants them (and therefore you) priveledges that include transgressing otherwise set rules on morality. Kill the unbeliever, lock up Galileo, change the textbooks, crusade against the heretics, and so on, and so on. Morality and religion are oil and water.
- dskz0
anarchists give me a headache
- teleos0
Mikotondria: How can you not understand that humanity, compassion and kindness are qualities which cannot be explained by blind material processes, but rather are the hallmarks of intentional design and purpose?
And again, you capitalize on incidents involving religious groups and then make broad sweeping generalizations. All the while discarding those inconvenient facts about all the good that has been done in the name of "religion" throughout the centuries. You lack intellectual honesty.
Further, I have not argued for "religion" as the source of morality. I have argued that morality only makes sense within a theistic framework where an absolute and objective standard has been established. Otherwise your only other option is to accept that morality is a pragmatic necessity resulting from material processes and thus dies when the human brain dies. This is absurd.
- you can't "logic" people into believing your mumbo jumbo...mrdobolina
- mrdobolina0
I am at a loss as to how my saying all non-religious people are immoral is in any way different than what you are saying above.
- or is it that I have this morality given to my by your religion even though I choose not to accept it?mrdobolina
- TheBlueOne0
"Otherwise your only other option is to accept that morality is a pragmatic necessity resulting from material processes and thus dies when the human brain dies. This is absurd."
A) Not Absurd.
B) Better than believing in some all powerful supreme nanny in the sky.
C) It's what adults do, take responsibilty for their actions in the real material world where real material things can help or harm us depending on our choices. Children believe in fairies, boogie men and the dumber ones, "god".
d) stop turning every freaking discussion about political events into your lame ass religious morality crap with a side order of you r half ass psuedo science discussion and cliff notes from freshman philosophy classes.
- Yes.madirish
- Corollary: If there were no humans, would there be "morality"?TheBlueOne
- That was my point. If there is no "mind" which set an absolute standard and gave us our sense of right and wrong, then no. The illusory notion of morality dies with the human brain.
teleos
- teleos0
blueOne:
1. If you go back a few pages you'll see that it was Mikotondria who turned this into a discussion about religion and morality. Care to do some intense investigation on that?
2. "all powerful supreme nanny in the sky." = Strawman (a term you should be well acquainted with by now). If not: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Str…
3. Children stop believing in fairies and santa claus, etc... They either keep believing or start believing in God on into adulthood. Hmmmm.
4. If there is nothing beyond material, then morals do not matter in principle. They are illusory. I don't know how many different ways I can explain it. Perhaps you could benefit from one of my freshman philosophy textbooks? Ok a remedial one then.
Got that? Write that down.
- how can a practicing christian be such a spiteful motherfucker?mrdobolina
- ...and 14 minutes later we get a response...you just live to respond to these don't you?TheBlueOne
- Spite? I'm having fun.teleos
- when in Rome. ;)teleos
- it's like you don't practice what your god preaches though. I don't practice it either, but I do not pretend to.mrdobolina
- I should have a more gentle tone. You are right. I am just prone to "giving it right back". I need work in that dept.teleos
- TheBlueOne0
Hahaha..you think I have time to devote to your rash of strawman setups with setups? Brother, I'm tired of every freakin' religious nut trying to steal my precious time to convince me that he's got some super secret to life. Get outta my way son, I got some livin' and dyin' to do. Just like I met and had some pleasant words with your Jesus fellow I left him far behind, just as I do now with you. I shant be engaging you or your lightweight time wasting viewpoints again.
- mikotondria30
** I think he's gone..** (Teleos)