good idea! but of course Jesus had the advantage of superstition.

BTW Im not saying Jesus didnt excist. Im just saying he isnt the son of God and didnt rise from the dead. No offense

I, personally, have a lot to thank Jesus for. Making me an atheist, for one thing!

Amen to that brother:p

In fairness, it was going to a Catholic school that made me atheist. They tried to be liberal and told us alternative theories to religion. All that did was make me go "Hang on, these make MUCH more sense!"

Every atheist goes through an angry faze, angry that they were duped for so long. I've gotten over that and people rarely mention religon to me if I don't to them. I agree, it does a lot of damage but it can be overcome. Saying that people are blind to it doesn't help and will only make them cling to it more. I think that it has been very damaging throughout history but frankly, I am more concerned about the tabloid and mainstream media warping people's minds than I am about religion doing the same.

Being an angry atheist helps no-one. You're either going to have your words fall on deaf ears or preach to the choir.

Then again, maybe my apathy is worse. I sometimes think it is.

I worship the Christian Devil.

A mate of mine thinks I belong to a horror cult. I suppose in a way that's true.

I wonder who the God of the horror cult is? Satan or Bruce Campbell?

Fuk Bruce Cambell. Hahah

No there is not places of worship and then there is not. You do not stop believing in your religion once you are out of your Church, your Mosque or your Ritual chamber and so on, for a religious person our faith is not something we do, it is something we are, it is a part of everyday life as well as times set aside for worship. Please tell me what is fanatical about this.

I do not like football, should I demand that everyone who have this interest refrain from talking about it, reading about it, or having football themed music on their cell phone as it might expose others like me who do not like fotball to it without our consent?

Incidentally your argument here is exactly the same argument that gay people often face, do not kiss or hold hands in public you might expose someone to gayness without their consent. Here is the thing, as long as people are not harming anyone, is nothing nagging people and are not loud and obnoxious people should be allowed to do whatever they please in public, that be kissing their same sex partner, recite a table prayer or watch a football match on their tablet PC.

And how do it harm these people to see me whisper a grace over my hamburger and chocolate milkshake at Burger King?

So what you are saying is that one should never behave in a way which is contrary to the norm of one's culture in public? Goths are horrible people? What about the women in Iran who wears as little head covering as they can get away with and fight for their civil rights, that is against the social norm, or for that matter male nurses in Western hospitals also against the social norm. Or is it just when it comes to religion one should follow social norms?

There are many people who are quite secular about their religion, they go to Church every Sunday and do not give a shit the rest of the week, however there is allot of people to where religion is a part of our lives and is not something just practiced at sites of worship. I will not hide my religion in shame because some Atheist might be offended at seeing me pray for my food or meditate on the buss.

First off all I am not saying one is in a meditation position preying all day. Some religions have daily practice which can be disruptive to a normal job, like Muslim prayer time, other religions daily practice might be a muttered grace, or a whispered thank you to the God's when something favorable happens, it takes seconds and do not impair productivity. It is not disrespectful to show that one is religious nor is it disrespectful to behave, dress or be in a manner which do not conform to social norms. It is not disrespectful to be strange.

First of all if a guy walk around with his arms around him like if he is still steering his car, do it harm you in any way? If that is how this man prefer to walk how is that any of your business? No one have denied you the right to think religious displays in public strange, however from that to wanting to deny people the right to do these things that do not harm anyone else just because your view of the world do not include the supernatural or anything Spiritual is as bad as Christians or Muslims trying to prevent people from being Atheist.

I do not have a problem with it, every so often we have a Jehovah's Witness or other on the door, I say no thank you and they leave, and are usually more polite than other door to door salesmen. Off course there are aggressive converters and they are idiots and are a pest and it is not acceptable but if someone try to give me information about their religion I am not offended.

I do not think schools should try to raise children into any religion, however to not mention it at all would mean allot of world history having to be skipped over. School should not be a way to learn about religion, but to be so afraid of religion that it is not even mentioned is equally wrong. Religion have played an important part in world history for good and for bad and this should not be forgotten.

I agree, however if the parents is religious then it might be difficult not to have any influence on the child in this regard. If I had a child then I would teach them about many religions, and also about science and let them choose when they wanted to choose.

So do I.

One problem I have with Atheists is that they go and say religions make no sense and religious people do not think, and then they turn around and do not think themselves. It is popular to give religion the blame for every war. However think for a moment, do you really think for example with the unrest in the Middle East that religion have anything to do with it? Religion is the banner, it is the rallying point, however the reason for the war is two peoples both wanting the same piece of land.

If you look at religious wars from the Crusades to the present you see the same. Religion is the rallying point, and allot of shit have been done in the name of religion to be sure, however to think that the wars will all go away if there where no religion is naive. Religion is not the cause of these wars, various far more practical reasons are, social injustice, greed, the desire for power and so on and so on. If there where no religion the wars would still be fought, just under new banners. Just look at various Communist nations where religion is often forbidden, the same shit, the same wars just a new banner. Religion is not the big bad, people are.

Yes. Yes I do.

I do not mean any disrespect but then you need to read up more about it. Religion is a banner, but the heart of the conflict is about land, about the Israeli and the Palestinians warring for control over land. They both want the land and they use religion as an banner to fight under, but take away religion and they both still want the land and will still fight for it.

Ive never seen so much nonsense.

I actually agree with BookZombie.

Personally, I don't get it. I don't think that is a bad thing but I simply don't get it. I don't understand how it feels to be that devoted to something. There really isn't an example. It may be a bit sad. In fact, I think it is. Maybe when I have felt like that I will empathise but for now I'll have to settle for logically understanding that I don't understand.

As offensive as I may be at times, there are 3 things I try to stay away from here:.....my sex life(or lack of one)......my religious beliefs........my political beliefs........:p:D:p

Amen!

...........

So you can not counter my arguments you can just say that they are nonsense, what a great debate technique. Tell me do you think Israeli and Palestinians will immediately become friends if they where not religious? Then please tell me how would they solve their conflict over land which obviously would be quite easy if this one factor was taken out of a very complex issue, if you think I am wrong, then prove me wrong, that is nonsense makes about as much sense as when I saw this guy make a long and detailed post on why there is a difference between men and women in terms of willingness to take risks and a feminist on the thread answered biology is nonsense, no refuting his points, no actual intelligent addition to the debate just biology is nonsense, guess who won the debate.

You're right. I probably should steer clear when those subjects come up. Also the subject of child-rearing (though that's less common here).

sure religion is not the only problem in the middle east but religion is mostly the reason why other countries are pro Israel or pro Palenstine

Yes people's choice of who to support is often based on religion, though it often is also based on fear as many support Israel regardless of what they do as they are afraid of Muslims, though I guess fear of a religion can also be considered a religions reason for choosing a side. But the conflict itself is based on land.

I didnt read all that shit. You type too dam much. Isreal? Palestine? I dont give 2 flying fucks about them and what theyre doing. If you aint my religion, fuck your religion. BTW, do you wear a wig?

Is that it? I know i hurt your feelings with wit. But gesh. Try and be a little more creative with your.....O wait. You think bill maher is leet. never mind.

If someone wants to pray in public they should be able to. It is what living in a free society is all about. If seeing someone say a prayer in public is distressing to you, then you are in need of a phycologist. If one can't say a pray in public because some how it exposes someone to religion without their consent. Then all forms of public demonstrations should be banned. I never gave no one permission to expose me to their political ideas. One thing about living in a free country is, if you see someone praying. You can always turn your head or look away. What you're proposing is a form of dictatorship.

Yeah, religious people be as peaceful as the atheists who, started ww1, ww2 . Or the countless genocides they introduced on the world.,

That shit is easy to handle. I tell people off all the time. If its on my mind, i say it.

Okay, I apologize to Wufong for comparing him to a Viz character. I'm still rather steamed up for what he did to Elvis Christ.

Ehm...eh...right I think you need to take you medication my dear. Either that you you are making a joke and I am not just getting it and it is I who need a sense of humor. :P

Word! Great points.

Love the fact that nobody spotted the irony of this post! [Intentional, I presume, Nev?]

what religion are you if you dont mind. i noticed you wear a cross, but you're an occultist? im confused.

ok, so i read its a popular symbol. itm still curious though.

I am Pagan, though the God Jehovah and Jesus is one of many Gods I worship. Mostly though I like the cross since it long before Christianity begun using it was a symbol of the material's meeting with the Spiritual and the soul's yearning for Spiritual development.

Its kinda like wearing a swastika and not being a nazi. Though it is alot older than a 20th century symbol, by wearing one most people (in Western society) will assume you are a nazi.

Good analogy Ferox13, though usually sun cross when worn by Buddhists and a few other religions that use it have it turned the other way, but yes basically the same symbol as the swastika though given a different meaning.

Before the nazis sullied the image of the swastika the Boy Scouts used it as a good luck symbol. I came across an old boy scout "good luck" swastika coin as a kid and was kind of confused. Had to have my father explain it to me. Sorry for going off topic but that post just reminded me of that.......lol

Actually the whole thing with the sun cross piss me off. It is actually illegal to wear the symbol in public in Norway which is in reality religious persecution. I mean many Buddhists have this symbol as one of their most holy and they can not wear it in Norway. However there have happened allot of shit under the banner of the cross to, I wonder what would happen if they tried to forbid that.

Also as a side note I think it is wrong to forbid people who are Nazi to wear the symbol, I think Neo Nazis are messed up in the head and I could not disagree with them more. However part of the freedom of speech is that even idiots get to express themselves. If they harm anyone throw their asses in jail but if they just want to go around and hate and wear the swastika then by all means let them, it also makes it easier to identify them to keep an eye on them.

That's an interesting point. At what point does something become offensive enough that it has to be banned? I mean, the swastika literally means good luck. Hindus have used it for years as well as boy scouts.

But as for its use in relation to Nazi beliefs, I wonder. Consider this. Racism is illegal, or at least, public racism is illegal. As in, you can have your views, however the second they leave your mouth you are guilty of prejudice biggotry and if it offends, you can get in serious shit. The swastika has unfortunately come to represent views precisely of that nature, and therefore, in wearing it, a neo-nazi is physically displaying their hostile views with intention of letting others know. Is that different from announcing publicly in the streets "I hate n*****s and Jews!"? It has potential to offend many.

The issue with freedom of speech is that there is no way to "measure" offensiveness. Anything has the potential to offend anybody. And when it does, you're breaching their freedoms. Something as widely offensive as racism is publicly recognised as outrageous and therefore it is controlled. However the classic argument is "I have a right to my views!" and therefore in suppressing them you are removing the racist's freedoms, because they have in turn breached the offended person's freedoms.

It's a continuing cycle. I don't know. To be honest, I don't think broad laws can be put on matters which are entirely based on personal reactions such as how offended people are, because it differs so much from person to person. I just hope people aren't so disrespectful of their fellow humans that they would do something so widely recognised as offensive.

I think that one of the most important rights we have is the right of free speech, and I see it as a breech of this that Nazis and other racists can not express their views. Granted I mean there is limits to what should have been allowed, for example bothering people on the streets for example is out of the question, posting racist messages on billboards and the like to is out of the question. However wearing person symbols of one's views that should be allowed, the same with having websites or writing books and so on as long as they do not encourage people to hurt one another.

Again I do not support racism, I think it is both stupid and indescribably ignorant, however if people want to be fools I think they should be allowed to be fools as long as they do not harm anyone. I think that if someone want to say publicly I hate such and such people, that is their business what is not okey is to incite to violence or try to tarnish other's reputation or walk up to people in the streets bothering them.

I see your point, but again, the issue is that it is likely to result in public unrest. Being homosexual, if I were to see somebody with a placard telling all queers to go to hell, I'd probably get fairly pissed and start an argument. Whilst I'm aware there's a difference between holding a placard and wearing a symbol, to some they will have the same effect. Arguments, fights, street brawls and perhaps even deaths could ensue.

A religious symbol usually won't have this effect because these are simply symbols of spiritual belief - for the most part they are used in a positive way. However a racist person using a racist symbol is outwardly displaying generalised hatred towards a great deal of people. Freedom of speech is important, however it must be weighed against the result and if the cost is too great, I can understand the censorship.

Yeah, it is funny! In the UK our society says to the fascist 'we accept your right to express your beliefs of repression and control and we would fight to the death to defend these rights'. That's democracy for you. I also love consumerism and capitalism with proper taxation, imports and exports.

FYI Rudyard Kipling's works were initially released with the elephant and swastika crest on the cover but he soon stopped when National Socialism took off. It seemes strange that a symbol of Hinduism for 2000 years can be hijacked and ruined after 30 years of a distasteful association.

It's a fine line between exercising your right to free speech and inciting a riot. If some moron decides to preach white supremacy in the middle of Harlem, he's going to cause big trouble that will inevitably involve the police. That sounds like inciting violence to me. I don't know the story behind banning the swastika in Norway, but it wouldn't surprise me to hear that every time some fool decides to wear one, he gets his butt kicked and has to be rescued by the cops. Maybe they got sick and tired of all the trouble it was causing.

The Reverend Phelps seems to know exactly where that line is drawn. He's managed to avoid any legal trouble as far as I know.

Exactly.
...

Well I'd say neither but you make an interesting point as to who the god (or leader or whatever) of the horror cult could be. Who is the spiritual leader of horror? Who do members of the horror cult worship? We could say anything really-HP Lovecraft, Dario Argento, Freddy Krueger etc-any horror writer, director, character, producer, artist, filmmaker-another question could be=do we worship such people when we are self confessed fans? Especially as fan is short for fanatic...