Gosh, people like you annoy the fuck out of me. You criticize one word because you hate me for being Atheist, yet you are so stupid and unaware of how much the actual argument destroys your religion as a whole.
If you want to reply to me, get the damn argument and dispute it, piece by piece.
Great. Ignore everything else in my argument.
They are NOT getting paid. YOU are the one who has forgotten how unrighteous keeping slaves is. You are the one who shows no effort to find out anything about it, keeps preaching his double standard and with no responsibility in sight deludes himself into thinking his liberal agenda has anything to do with righteousness.
Calm down mate... why the need to blame me for everything?
Where is your distinction between wage labor and slavery? There is no way to avoid violence or exploitation but you want to avoid responsibility. You don't have the balls to do what is necessary.
Way to blow things out of proportion. Have you considered the fact that I was thinking about the people who work for Cadbury? You can't expect me to have instant expansive knowledge of the people who produce chocolate...
You don't have the balls to do what is necessary.
Wow, where the hell did this come from? You can't expect me to know everything about the slave children and chocolate!? And you also can't expect me to leave my house, travel to poor countries and give all my money away? Because seriously, what the hell am I meant to do about this shit when I'm still in school?
And how could you make such a shitty assumption that I am for some reason exacerbating slavery and being completely oblivious to slavery for not knowing one thing?
Seriously, wtf?
AND, just because slavery currently exists in the world DOESN'T make it morally acceptable. You're the one here following the Cult of Christianity which supports slavery in the bible. I can give you verses, some of which say that you must beat your slaves to the brink of death- all of which are included in the bible, ordered by God himself.
Suck on that.
(And thanks for rape-down-voting me like an explosive noob. It really helps. Because it's not like I would do it to you; I'm cool like that.)
We do already "have slaves". How do you think your chocolate was made? Delusional liberal, and that's not even counting wage labor, which is essentially the same thing if you think about it. There's no way to avoid exploitation or violence (the more humane version of it, because there is at least direct responsibility) to arrange society unless you're a utopian.
You're embarrassing your own humanity with this religion.
The bible has verses that state that you must beat your slaves. The people who make chocolate? At least they are getting paid, and not getting chained up.
And have you forgotten how unrighteous keeping slaves is? Seriously, you are the delusional one.
Only if necessary but that's the mans decision in the first place. I suppose there's a point that it's unnecessary with the new technology and so on, but I would argue it's not morally better to have a robot beat her instead.
It's not moral at all.
Is this what you want? A whole world of enslaved women?
It's a natural reaction, but it is one that is barbaric. I don't think preventing the death of more humans is idiocy. Actually, I believe that most criminals can be rehabilitated, instead of thrown in a cage. (mental issues analysed and treated with medicine or Psychologists.)
The methods you are thinking of should be methods of the past. We as the human race should look forward from barbarianism, an immature, unenlightened way of thinking. It's impossible to think we would still do this in the future, taking many lives, possibly innocent lives, by law, since it has happened before.
I'm not saying that I wouldn't want the murderer to suffer, but there has to be a way to get over that phase of revenge, since it does nothing but tarnish the human race. The murderer should get rehabilitized to become a functioning member of society, as that would be the most productive thing to do. When a person does something horrible, we no longer see them as a human that values their life, we just see them as an epitome of hate. We need to see through that, think of the possibilities and methods that can fix them. If there is no solution in sight, pitch them as slaves, to be imprisoned in a productive manner. Slavery would be a better, far more productive alternative than death, so why is it legal the other way around?
But you are slightly demonstrating his point. I've begun to find this site unappealing for a while now. I'm not sure what's wrong, but I've been seeing a shit-load of trash debates about people calling each other faggots and that manhood101 crap.
Aliens are not real according to human and scientists. On mars, there is no life. No one can prove that there are aliens
Each of your statements are incredibly incorrect, except for the mars part, but they are still searching. Humans and Scientists believe, or want to believe that they are true. On the new found planet of Gleise, Scientists are hopeful and are 99% percent sure that there would be life on it, at least in the form of tiny cells. These cells are aliens, nonetheless, and have the potential of becoming what we have become. Add this 99% percent certainty to the possible infinity of the universe, and it is more than certain. There are already soo much planets around us that are similar to Earth and that can hold life that it is obscene just to ignore the possibilities.
The word "census" means asking everyone in a population, seeing as many people have yet to be surveyed in their religion, a global census has yet to exist.
It still displays change.
As I said later on in my argument those statistics showed information for 57 countries our of over 193. Please explain how your statistics can possibly be relevant for the entire planet, instead of just calling me "ignorant".
57 of the major countries. Not the little ones in between. These major countries hold most of the world's population.
And you had the audacity to call me ignorant? You assume that they are both communists (Russia is in fact now capitalist) and that Communism automatically leads to dictatorship (Russia is a democracy with elections as do China)
But they aren't countries that would be considered... admirable. Russia is packed to the brim with deadly weapons. So is China. These countries are flooded with pollution, stricken with poverty and enslaved by their military. Their crime rates are way too high, so are their death rates.
I've yet to deny that my own country is growing in atheism.
It's already 40-50% Atheist.
You did not link me to statistics, you linked me to a site giving an interpretation of those statistics, which was biased.
The site has both statistics and interpretations of them.
You cannot just dispute a statement with another statement, that gets us nowhere. You need to dispute the statement with a statement supported by statistics.
It was carrying on from what was said before. That there is an obvious change; a difference.
What? I've just disproven how your survey doesn't fairly represent the whole globe (in contradiction to your biased site) and the only thing you can think of to dispute back is "this survey does show change" with no reference to the survey and no statistics from the survey.
Because surveying a large chunk of the world that carries most of the population is not enough to show even the tiniest amount of change...
Oh dear, you've gone at it again.
I will not be replying to your argument if you choose to dispute this one, my debate with you is over.
Ermahgerd. Not this again.
I did check, if you can find a global census on what people believe in then please enlighten me on the matter.
I did, later on in my argument.
In certain countries, not the world.
Are you seriously this ignorant? I have already shown you the statistics. And those statistics show a large amount of change.
So you've stated that 2 countries which had a strong Christian faith are now having a growth in atheists, that does not mean you can say the whole world is growing in atheism.
While Christianity may be depleting in countries like Britain and America, it is growing in nations which had previously been mainly atheist, such as China and Russia, the world's most populated country and the world's largest country.
Those communists have no freedom any way. And it's odd how those imprisoned countries are more religious than the free ones. It's really a compliment to Atheism.
Atheists have existed for as long as theists have, they've just often not voiced their beliefs due to political reasons.
There were less Atheists, and they did not voice their beliefs due to how much religious there were. I already know that Atheists existed, I'm just saying that there was not much compared to now.
You're starting to sound like Nummi.
Well, with you denying your own country quickly depleting with religion, why not?
Well at least you surpassed Nummi in the ability to provide statistics. However, i try not to provide biased websites as sources, I'ld appreciate it if you took the liberty to do the same.
Just because this site was owned by Atheists, doesn't mean it was biased. It displayed statistics. Statistics are not biased.
While the website says "A recently released global survey on religion and atheism has found that atheism is on the rise and religiosity is declining." It doesn't say how the survey supports such a claim, nor does the report from the survey itself make such remarks.
But it does show the statistics of Atheism and religion, and how they have changed from Atheism rising, and religion depleting.
It also goes on to talk about how the 'international survey' questioned 50,000 people (when several countries have over 100million people) in 57 countries (out of over 193).
And with how much you wish it not to be true, this survey does show change, no matter how small it seems.
So, once again, the is no global census on what people believe in, so comments such as "I'd say yes, as religion is slowly fading. Now why do you think is that? Why is religion fading? I'll give you a hint - it's not because we are getting dumber" are riduclous.
So, with Technology developing, new inventions and cures to diseases are arising (Recently on the news Scientists have developed a treatment for pancreatic cancer, and a way to lessen the symptoms of Alzheimer's). We are definitely getting dumber. Because, clearly, with access of practically infinite information increasing (the internet) we are certainly getting less informed of the world. As stereotypical of your opinion that the world is getting dumber, you should get more informed of how worse it was in the past.
I've mentioned this several times already, I tire of listening to the arrogance of atheists. I will not be replying to your argument, now stop trying to provoke me into doing so.
Why is it arrogance. Tell me why my argument was arrogant, instead of being the hypocrite and displaying arrogance of yourself. There is a reason you are not replying to it... and it is because, I have choked you. Unless you tell me otherwise, I will continue to believe I have triumphed over you.
Religious wars should not happen at all--at least any involving "Christianity."
This debate is not only about Christianity. It is about other religions too.
The fact that they do is due to GREED. ALL wars are caused by GREED first,
World War I, an Arch Duke was assassinated due to his people disliking the changes he was planning to make on their country. They wanted to retain their own independence as a country, so they assassinated him, sparking distrust in countries and alliances, leading to the first World War.
The American War of Independance; was about Independence. See, not all wars are about greed.
and religion is only the secondary issue.
When a famous Shiek declared a Fatwah (Death sentence) on Salman Rushdie for disgracing the name of their God, he did so despite gaining anything except for murdering a man who insulted their 'religion of peace'.
Religious wars involving Christianity happen because the warmongers have lost their Christianity, are not living up to its principles as taught in the Christian Bible, and are putting GREED in first place in their lives, which amounts to idolatry.
I don't know what the hell you're on about. In the Crusades, they were driven by religion, justifying their killings by God. If they didn't have a religion to give them a drive and justify their killings, they would just be wasting their time. And the Christian Bible? It has genocide, slavery and child-murdering.
there is no global census asking people what they believe in.
Don't blatantly claim that to be true, without checking yourself to be correct.
The wikipedia article doesn't state how fast atheism isgrowing compared to religions.
Well, if you looked deeper, it showed how much Atheists exist in those countries currently in comparison to how little they were before- and how religious beliefs were depleting.
The rest of your sources ony apply to the United States as I had said before, there is no global census asking people what they believe in.
All countries add up to 'Global'. England has changed from almost 90% Christian to 50% in the span of a few decades. The United States is a country that is powerfully religious. It's more religious than the country that gave them the religion, and this is giving birth to the Westboro baptist church- yet the number of Atheists is growing dramatically. The Global percentage of Atheists is in 4th place behind Christianity, Islam and Hinduism, (Atheism almost above Hinduism.) There are currently 850 million Atheists in the world, and a few centuries back, there was pretty much 0. How can you explain those changes? Or how can you be this buried in your own beliefs to deny the obvious? If those links are not good enough for you, how about this: http://www.atheistalliance.org/
And about that previous debate we had, where you were ever so reluctant to reply; were you defeated? If not, I'll ask for you to dispute my argument that has been waiting there for so long.
Thats the whole problem, we gotta stop FIGHTING evil, and just accept it, as bad as it sounds, let me explain: violence begets violence. In my beliefs, if we as a species raise our vibration to a high enough frequency, including the planet, then lower frequency beings will not be able to reside here anymore.
By fighting evil, I mean for peaceful solutions if possible. Like planting forests, socially communicating and fixing problems, lowering drug use, preventing death, violence and disease. I'm not sure about this vibrator stuff though. How does our species raise the vibrations? Do we have to ban the purchasing of vibrators to make it less worse?
We just have to practice love.
That's kind of hard to do when no one is stopping evil from taking over, causing us to go at war, be greedy and kill. And isn't the goal of practicing love promoting every soul to be greater?
And for the cattle and lions and bees, idk why things exist like that lol, i dont have an answer for that, at least not a plausible answer
I thought before you said that we would reincarnate as one of these things if we lived a bad life.
So every animal has a soul that belongs on a hierarchy of petty to greater souls? I've heard of this reincarnation thing before, but the thing I don't get is; if every soul was 'good/greater' then we wouldn't have Cattle to feed from, bees to pollinate the anthers of flowers that rely on vectors for cross-pollination and provide honey. Lions would also have no prey to feed on. Heck, lions wouldn't even exist at all. This would also shockingly destroy the equilibrium, bringing death and starvation among all.
A conclusion that can be drawn from this is that 'ergo, Evil is necessary'. But if we are striving to fight evil from this world, then we will end up killing ourselves by disrupting the order, for every soul is greater, no lesser beings shall incarnate from their souls, when it is these 'lesser' beings that we needed all the time.
I believe we die, go to the afterlife, rest, reflect, learn about what we learned, and then choose a new path in life when we are ready to go back to a physical experience.
But concerning our relative primates, how can they consciously 'rest, reflect, learn and choose a path in life? Is full advantage over the afterlife just restricted to humans?
Well I'm glad you feel that way, but we all do want to believe in an afterlife. It's just that the current 'proof' for an afterlife is less than pleasing. But other than that, we are all just animals. And animals don't really have an afterlife do they? Some animals can't even understand what life is. And what use would our evolved body parts be? In an afterlife, you wouldn't need anything that usually helps you survive in the physical world. The apes we are related to; what would happen to them?
Of course the argument may be rash, and not backed up with evidence, but the statement it is making is correct. So correct, in fact, that it may excuse it's lack of self-explanation and degrade you in your lack of knowledge on this matter- because it is so obvious.
I'm going to go a step further than he did, and provide for you the proof:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_atheism
http://old.richarddawkins.net/articles/
Read them. Or skim through them.
Do whatever; at least get the truth into your head.
