Why I do not respect Atheists

[leo_Invictus]

"Live and let Live in Pure filth"

lol

well Pure Filth his chat name lol he had the decency to try look at it from a meta physical standpoint unlike Bad Influence that goes off on his tangent

 

[Altair]

what are you talking about

I asked for an example of a high culture or civilization that came from atheism and you went off rambling about your views on religion lol

Can you read?

He can't help it...Just.!

He couldn't answer you.

But I can.

There is NO high Culture or Civilization from Athiest's.

That's the beauty. We have NO God's or Religion to rely on.

Science is our GOD..And Yes...We have to have FAITH in Science.

But we can replicate Science Experiments and PROVE them.

I say AGAIN....Science rules out the 'Supernatural'.

 

[Altair]

Lets all talk about the 10 Commandment's?

 

[leo_Invictus]

He can't help it...Just.!

He couldn't answer you.

But I can.

There is NO high Culture or Civilization from Athiest's.

That's the beauty. We have NO God's or Religion to rely on.

Science is our GOD..And Yes...We have to have FAITH in Science.

But we can replicate Science Experiments and PROVE them.

I say AGAIN....Science rules out the 'Supernatural'.

Science doesn't rule - universities and academia can become corrupted or ideological like any other institution

You act like having no high culture is a good thing - uninspiring art, no great works with cities filled with replications of tower blocks

 

[Bad_Influence]

Nothing in science precludes the existence of a creator. It is far easier to prove something does exist (something no religion has ever done) than to prove something does not exist.

However, science uses theory, then experiment to come to a conclusion. Then it tested to destruction or not. For example the laws of quantum mechanics have never been shown to be wrong despite many scientists trying to denounce the theory. Religious theory have never been proved.

 

[leo_Invictus]

Nothing in science precludes the existence of a creator. It is far easier to prove something does exist (something no religion has ever done) than to prove something does not exist.

However, science uses theory, then experiment to come to a conclusion. Then it tested to destruction or not. For example the laws of quantum mechanics have never been shown to be wrong despite many scientists trying to denounce the theory. Religious theory have never been proved.

A society based on pure religiousness and spirituality but low iq will get taken out or subverted by a higher iq neighbour

A high iq society based purely on science but lacks any religiousness or spirituality will end up destroying itself

needs something in the middle - A Balance

I don't think anyone on this thread has disputed the importance of science so I don't get where you are going with this?

 

[Bad_Influence]

You do like your massive generalisations don't you?

 

[leo_Invictus]

You do like your massive generalisations don't you?

What are you talking about now?

Why don't you just create a thread about a topic you wanna discuss instead of derailing everyone else's threads?

 

[Bad_Influence]

What am I on about??

" A society based on pure religiousness and spirituality but low iq will get taken out or subverted by a higher iq neighbour

A high iq society based purely on science but lacks any religiousness or spirituality will end up destroying itself"


That's a massive generalisation that you cannot prove. It's so easy to try to make claims when you don't need to back it up. I could claim that the future will be devoid of religion because the more intelligent and logical among us will accept that basing their lives on a fairy-tale is farcical. I can't prove it but hey that doesn't matter does it?!

 

[leo_Invictus]

What am I on about??

" A society based on pure religiousness and spirituality but low iq will get taken out or subverted by a higher iq neighbour

A high iq society based purely on science but lacks any religiousness or spirituality will end up destroying itself"


That's a massive generalisation that you cannot prove. It's so easy to try to make claims when you don't need to back it up. I could claim that the future will be devoid of religion because the more intelligent and logical among us will accept that basing their lives on a fairy-tale is farcical. I can't prove it but hey that doesn't matter does it?!

Civilizations reaching an intelligence threshold/a peak before they finally implode in on themselves

Empires do it all the time (with imperium being the last act of civilization according to Spengler) the sphere of influence grows too large, multculturalism, lack of religiousness, greed and thirst for power can lead to anti intellectualism from tyrants who aim to control society through sheer power (the iron fist) so it would not matter how intelligent the scientists are if they all get executed or put in prison or If that scientific knowledge is used for ethno masochist purposes or just evil within a society motivated by greed or ideological bias or just pure corruption

use of nuclear bomb/chemical warfare or mass propaganda of 'why dysgenics is good for society' as they strive for equality just 2 modern examples

These are opinions based in some fact from historical patterns within growth of culture and rise of civilization

It's why the birth of culture happens and why civilizations rise and fall

 

[goszt]

atheism is not a worldview. the definition of atheism is as follows: disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of god/gods.

beyond that, atheists can and do disagree on many other topics. there is no reason to believe that there is a specific thing that all atheists 'want at this stage for civilisation and society in general'

the generalisation doesn't make sense.

 

[leo_Invictus]

atheism is not a worldview. the definition of atheism is as follows: disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of god/gods.

beyond that, atheists can and do disagree on many other topics. there is no reason to believe that there is a specific thing that all atheists 'want at this stage for civilisation and society in general'

the generalisation doesn't make sense.

It is why i asked what atheists want as they are scattered across the political spectrum

It was a curiosity of how they view a godless society as no high cultures or advanced civilization has ever grown out of or evolved out of an atheistic people or tribe

So it makes perfect sense to me

Unless you have an example throughout history of an advanced civilization or empire which grew out of an atheistic people or tribe?

 

[ElsD]

Science doesn't rule - universities and academia can become corrupted or ideological like any other institution

You act like having no high culture is a good thing - uninspiring art, no great works with cities filled with replications of tower blocks

LOL, yeah unlike religious cultures and churches that are just so damn pure and clean. No corruption in religion. Get real.

 

[ElsD]

Religion is to blame for so many of the worlds problems. It is why adults and children went to see a concert, minding their own business and got blown up, all. In the name of religion.
The problem with religion in my personal opinion is that all the different versions of religious text is very much open to interpretation and people take it too far. Why have a war over something as stupid as what religion someone is? Mind your own business and love your own God, in your home or church with other like minded people.
SIR RICHARD BRANSON
JULIETTE MOORe
DANIEL RADCLIFFE
SIR IAN MCKELLAN
these are some famous atheists who have produced amazing art in film, have succeed in life with challenges. None of them needed a God, norse, Catholic, Christian, Islamic or otherwise.

To not respect a group of people who do not believe in a God when the one's you are opting to believe in led their people to come to our lands, kill the vicars and steal from our churches says more about you than any atheist here. You believe in God's that encouraged the disregard of many women, encouraged violence, but also a deep spiritual life is a religion of contradiction in my eyes.
To me religion should be about, respect, love, acceptance but it's not in many cases it is actually the opposite.

I'd rather be an accepting of all, except anyone that tries to mess with myself or my fmaily.
Trust me in that situation there is no submissive atheist then

 

[leo_Invictus]

LOL, yeah unlike religious cultures and churches that are just so damn pure and clean. No corruption in religion. Get real.

When did I say religious institutions do not suffer from corruption? Any institution can become corrupted be it academic, religious, governmental or financial

 

[ElsD]

When did I say religious institutions do not suffer from corruption? Any institution can become corrupted be it academic, religious, governmental or financial

You didn't but you did say about universities etc and failed to add as can religious ones so I thought I'd help and say it for you.

 

[leo_Invictus]

Religion is to blame for so many of the worlds problems. It is why adults and children went to see a concert, minding their own business and got blown up, all. In the name of religion.
The problem with religion in my personal opinion is that all the different versions of religious text is very much open to interpretation and people take it too far. Why have a war over something as stupid as what religion someone is? Mind your own business and love your own God, in your home or church with other like minded people.
SIR RICHARD BRANSON
JULIETTE MOORe
DANIEL RADCLIFFE
SIR IAN MCKELLAN
these are some famous atheists who have produced amazing art in film, have succeed in life with challenges. None of them needed a God, norse, Catholic, Christian, Islamic or otherwise.

To not respect a group of people who do not believe in a God when the one's you are opting to believe in led their people to come to our lands, kill the vicars and steal from our churches says more about you than any atheist here. You believe in God's that encouraged the disregard of many women, encouraged violence, but also a deep spiritual life is a religion of contradiction in my eyes.
To me religion should be about, respect, love, acceptance but it's not in many cases it is actually the opposite.

I'd rather be an accepting of all, except anyone that tries to mess with myself or my fmaily.
Trust me in that situation there is no submissive atheist then

1. They got blown up by a terrorist org that shouldn't of been in the country to begin with. The UK is an atheist nation now around 69% of people do not believe in god(s). Do you think a religious nation would be so lax on it's border control and who it lets into the country? I'd argue it's a failed multicultural society and lack of national security measures that caused that terrorist attack not religion. If the UK was still a fiercely religious and spiritual nation you would not have foreign terrorists running around in it.

2. The list you gave I don't find any of those people inspiring Richard Branson from a business perspective possibly but as a personality I can't stand him same with the other 3 you mention I wouldn't say I was inspired by them

3. Religion has never been about respect, love or acceptance that is just modern day liberal garbage. Religion is generally an extension of a tribe or an ethnicities culture even if a people is forced converted say the Chinese with Christianity or Persians with Islam those ethnic groups still adapted that religion to fit into their own peoples way of life and morality. Religion is war ,religion is enforcing your will on others religion is conquest religion is in no way pacifist or tolerant. It is why religion spreads not from tolerance but from the will to convert and in most cases dominate. All great civilizations and empire have been fiercely religious they all had gods that inspired them

The god(s) is metaphysical the god gives the tribe a biosphere and spirituality of culture that people die for or conquest and convert others for if your tribe no longer has a god to defend or to try convert others too you will end up getting taken out by a tribe that does.

4. Accepting people would depend on what you are accepting. Accepting of all? So you would accept all types of degenerates in your society? what a nonsense statement

 

[leo_Invictus]

You didn't but you did say about universities etc and failed to add as can religious ones so I thought I'd help and say it for you.

If you look back on the thread It is the reason I am not a Christian it has become pathetic, emasculated and corrupted

Religions need to be strong and dominant not weak and tolerant

I did state that previously

 

[Bad_Influence]

1. I'd argue it's a failed multicultural society and lack of national security measures that caused that terrorist attack not religion. If the UK was still a fiercely religious and spiritual nation you would not have foreign terrorists running around in it.

FFS Leo.... you are blaming terrorism on OUR laws???
Yes I only got that far into your comment before I knew it was just more nonsense.

You have seriously lost the plot sunshine. That bomb was placed to kill kids... in the name of a false god. Grow the feck up, open your eyes, and admit you're talking BS as usual.

 

[Bad_Influence]

If you look back on the thread It is the reason I am not a Christian it has become pathetic, emasculated and corrupted

Religions need to be strong and dominant not weak and tolerant

I did state that previously

And believe me I have no respect for you either but it's got nothing to do with your religious beliefs.