And fromwithin, abortion in some circumstances is very different from genocide. Just wanted to point that out since you banned me before I could reply to you; making it look like you won.

genocide: the deliberate killing of a large group of people because of religion or race. Abortion in SOME (not all, I support better alternatives when they are possible): only killing (terminating, whatever) fetuses (or babies, whichever you prefer) that wouldn't have a good life, be well taken care of, or be wanted. We aren't killing babies (fetuses) because we don't agree with their views. Mothers have the option to abort because they wouldn't be able to care properly for the baby or they would get harmed by the labor.

That's a good point.

I consider it a baby but it's still a fetus that should be able to be terminated because of the reasons you said.

Except I'm not descriminating people... Or being racist and bigoted... Or supporting genocide...

I'm saying the baby is still a fetus and its the mother's choice what she does with her body. (the baby is basically a parasite until birth)

It's not my right. The babies (however human they may be) are still parasitic of their mothers. I should not be able to force someone to have a parasite in them for nine months then have excruciating labor just to birth something that wouldn't have a good life anyway.

I'm not supporting Hitler. Hitler: genocide. Me: abortion in circumstances where it is the only (or best) option.

what i support is the option to have abortions, but also lots of education and help so mothers can raise their babies. If it is not the best option, I am not for abortion. I just think it should be an option that shouldn't be taken away from people.

Some people will abort for stupid reasons. I don't agree with that, but even if they were forced to bear the child, they wouldn't raise it well and might kill it anyway. People aren't going to change just because you ban abortion.

However, a compromise would be something I'd be fine with as long as abortion is legal for extreme causes. I just would prefer for people to have more freedom of choice.

Hahaha. Laughable.

I think if anyone was going to kill themselves, it would be the one who thinks good things await you when you die. I, as an atheist, believe in no God, consequentially I am in no great hurry to die where I will become nothing.

No, it's not. I'm not hoping to get out of reality. The people who believe God will save them from everything are.

Suicide is taking my own life. I'm not going to take my life voluntarily (the definition of suicide) just because I don't believe in God. What you're talking about is accidential and assisted suicide, which is very different.

Also isn't god too important to care what I think? Or does he go around killing atheists? Because then it's not free will, is it?

Going to hell does not mean God killed me. That would be after I am already dead. Dead things can't die.

That is a good point, yet only if God truly exists. If not, it is moot.

If you don't include the 'because only those who are wrong die', your point makes no sense. And you shouldn't include that if you are also saying the words are interchangeable, because if they are interchangeable, you wouldn't have to add anything to make them make sense.

I do know what I am saying. Do you?

No, I am talking about your god.

And I'm talking about your god because you brought up the subject and that's what you were talking about. I wouldn't start ranting about the Muslim God because that's not the discussion we were having.

Duh? Really? Are you twelve?

Obviously my imagination of you isn't you (unless you really are just a figment of my imagination... But we have no proof for that so I'll let it slide) but you said that since god created imagination that he's not an imagined being. However, that is only true if god is in fact real. If he's not real, then he didn't create imagination and he actually was imagined.

Sorry if that was confusing. Maybe I should slow down a bit so your mind can process what I'm saying.

That is a very good point. Why should you believe in what I imagine? Why should you believe in what anybody imagined? Why should you believe in god? You don't have any proof that he's not imagined...

Maybe someone imagined god to be everything, but he's really not since that's just whoever wrote the buble's imagination?

I actually wouldn't say that (regarding your last statement). I'd say I don't believe in any god. When you ask me which god, I'd answer all of them. The Christian, Muslim, the Roman gods, the Greek gods, I don't believe in any of them.

Maybe you are the fool, for believing in something that doesn't exist.

Maybe they do.

But maybe. Just maybe.

Even if it's not real control, I'd like to do all in my power to make sure I control (however fake it may be) my life. That means not submitting to a list of rules that I don't agree with and not wasting my life worshipping a 'god'.

Doesn't give you a clue. The alien could imagine that we think it's hot and that it burns us.

I never said I didn't think I was real. I do, since we don't have any evidence to prove otherwise. My point was: why is that any less likely to believe than in God? We have no reason to believe either.

Evolution. The Big Bang. Creation. Maybe we started existing from the beginning of time (not us, really, but the world, and life, and space) and nothing happened to create us. We just were. Maybe an extremely weak three-legged cat created the universe. But that's not my point. My point is that there are things other than God that could have resulted in life. You can't say life is proof that God exists, because there are too many other things that could have done the same (some I've just listed).

Nuclear war... biological warfare... The most reasonable ones.

I would prefer zombies since at least then I have a fighting chance.

But that wouldn't be the end of the world, just people. The world will live on forever, until everything on it dies. But then it's still not the end of the world. The world will still be there until it's broken up into a bunch of little bits.

It would still be a world though. Just a broken up world. And it's not like the pieces will ever go away...

Unless we get sucked into a black hole. Then I don't know what happens.

That's how the world is going to end... But people will probably die out from idiots (cough trump cough) starting a nuclear war.

Nope. He/she/they/it (I'll use he from now on because it's shortest and easiest to type, except it but 'it' sounds kind of demeaning) would be arguing with God who created his life, but not his life. Nowhere was he saying he didn't want to live, just he didn't want to worship the God (if there is one) who created his life. Not saying he doesn't want to exist. Just saying he's not worshipping anything there's not proof for. It seems like a bigger waste to spend all of your life on something that's going to happen after you are dead.

You could do that. But that would be a waste of your fake chemical life. I don't want to waste my chemical life spinning or worshipping God. I like it under my chemical control and nobody else's.

That's actually not evidence Existence could be caused by a number of things, and we also could be robots programmed to think that and act exactly like humans. We also could all be something that some alien dreamt up and is still living that dream. We might all be figments of that alien's imagination. We don't know for sure. However, we have reason to believe that we are not, as no evidence we have tells us we are.

There's also no evidence that God is real, so in my mind, believing in God is just like thinking we are all robots or figments of alien imagination. I don't have any reason to believe it, so I'm not going to.

Ask yourself why you believe in God but not this alien dream. We have the same amount of evidence for both. Was it how you were raised, did you just pick something to believe in, or are you so caught up in this fantasy (it is a fantasy, as one of the definitions of the word fantasy is defined as an idea with no basis in reality, and the only basis God has is the bible, which could easily have been made up by anyone) that you actually believe it?

Apparently you don't know what proof is, as that did not prove to anyone beyond a reasonable doubt that God exists. Fact check every once and a while. It would help.

But that's only true if god is in fact real. And we don't know that, do we?

God might be imaginary. If God's real, the statement God is imaginary is absurd, but if God's real, that is a moot point anyway.

The point isn't that people say God is imaginary but God created inagination so it's absurd to think that, but whether or not God exists in the first place.

If he was imagined, all the person had to do was imagine someone who created imagination.

If this was supposed to be some mind-blowing statement that would make all atheist immediately pray to God, it failed.

Better luck next time.

When you use the term 'therefore', the words are no longer commutative, as therefore means 'for that reason' or 'consequentially'.

Unless, of course, I was wrong, and therefore I should die.

Or should I say I should die, therefore I was wrong?

Doesn't work both ways, does it?

Bummer.

I also don't think it's right to make women wear berkas, but I do not know enough about their culture, so I'm not really going to make any statements about it. Maybe the women want to wear them. I don't know anything about this, but from what I've learned I don't support this religion. However, I support the freedom of religion, i.e. being able to believe whatever you want.

Democrats don't nessecarily support Muslims. They just don't support them being called terrorists just because of their religion.

(That's my opinion, anyway)

I criticize Christians more because I know more about them, and all the very outspoken, bothersome people telling me I'll get punished if I don't believe in their God that I've met are Christian.

I don't love any religion, but it's not like I hate Christians either. People can believe in whatever they want, so long as they don't get mad at me for not believing in what they believe or do anything to harm people.

Not all Muslims are bad, just like not all Christians are. To say you love or hate all of one religion is a very ignorant blanket statement.

Big fan of capitalization, aren't you?

I never said I don't support them. I don't usually think they are right. However, it's also not my right to say what other women do with their bodies and children. I think people should learn about alternatives, yet there should still be an option of abortion.

The compromise leaves out things that in some circumstances are the best choice.

Why should we compromise with something we think is sort of right when there is an option that is more right than that???

Yes I understand they aren't blobs of tissue. That's when I would consider them actual babies. However, there are circumstances that don't qualify for 'extreme' cases that it would be the best choice in the mother's opinion. I don't care if I'm banned and I'm not denying that it would kill babies. But it would also be better for the parents, possibly the babies (depends on if you think they go to heaven or not). But if you ban abortions, more babies will end up in dumpsters and left places that will cause them to suffer. More people will be forced into unwanted labor, and women will not have control over what they do with their body. I understand that abortions 'kill babies', and it is terrible, but it's the best option.

(Plus why ban everybody on a debate site? The point is to argue with people...)

I don't like not extreme abortion in most circumstances, yet I think it's not my decision to make. It's the mother's and I shouldn't oppress them by forcing them to have an unwanted child.

Also I think it's a life when it has human qualities. A lump of cells right after its conceived is not something I'm going to call a baby. Its just a lump of cells. Yes, it's technically 'human', but it doesn't have a brain or a heart or any thoughts that make it human.

To save someone I loved, yes I would kill it myself.

Just like how you would probably choose hitting a baby with your car rather than dying.

No restriction abortions take into consideration terrible circumstances that the GOP might not consider 'extreme' enough. There shouldn't be a limit, people should just be more educated on abortion and the other options they can take.

When the baby kicks or sucks his thumb.

Yet I would gladly abort a baby to save my own life, as you probably would your/your wife's. If you would choose the life of someone you don't know over someone you love, that's absurd. Even if it is 'killing a baby', I would still do it if my life was at stake. Especially if the baby was going to possibly die anyway. Or if the baby was definitely going to die and that would prevent further complications.

I don't like late term abortion, but sometimes there is no other option. In fact, I don't like abortion at all. Who does? It's terrible, and I would hate to abort a baby, but all circumstances are different and blanket statements aren't going to help the dead mothers who weren't allowed to abort their also dead baby.

Murderer? Really?

So you're going to force a teenager who was raped to have a baby that will possibly injure her and traumatize her?

it will not grow up in a good household, the teen isn't ready for the pregnancy and it will harm them, or for other reasons. No I am not supporting murder. I'm not saying 'let's go kill a baby today!' Yet I don't think it's your choice what they do with their body. You don't know. You've never had a rape baby (I'm assuming). You don't know what it's like for someone you love to be raped, and then forced to bear the baby. It could be traumatizing, and if the mother isn't ready to be a mother, it wouldn't be good for the kid either.

This is only some circumstances. I don't support reasonless abortion. However, people who say you should never abort, despite

what would happen to the mother, or the baby, are pretending the world is black and white, yet there are circumstances that would be better for everyone if the baby was aborted.

I did answer your question, second to last paragraph. Check again.

It hasn't even been a day yet. Do you expect everyone to just be sitting around their computers, replying to your post immediately after you post it?

Obviously it's a difficult topic. Is it murder? Should you be allowed to abort? What if the child was going to die anyway?

There is no black-and-white answer. Nobody aborts for the fun of it. But what about when the baby is going to hqve a terrible childhood, or not survive at all?

Yet it is also the woman's right. If she can't provide care for the baby, or isn't able to birth it without complications, it is her right to abort.

Everybody saying that you should always be pro-life doesn't know what it's like. Mind you, I don't either, but if it was your (or your wife's) baby, and it was going to die anyway, would you abort it to prevent possible complications? Would you let your wife die to save the life of a baby who might not even make it through?

What about a thirteen-year-old girl who was raped? Would you force her to have the child that may very well ruin her life?

Nobody will just wake up one day and decide they want an abortion for no reason. Either they aren't ready to care for one, or they can't birth it without complications, etc. But you can't just force women to have babies. Abortion is a terrible thing, and there are usually other methods, but sometimes there aren't.

Sometimes abortion is the only choice.

Whether the baby is human or not, I don't know. When someone murders a pregnant woman, that's two murders, so by law you're human. I say it's when the baby shows human-like ability. Sucking thumbs, kicking, being more than just a lump of cells.

Would I abort? Not personally. However, it's not your right to decide what other people do with their bodies.

I realize most of my rant thing wasn't really about your question. Sorry.

But you're stealing when you take it. It's like stealing a car but returning it. It's still illegal because you get to listen to it free.

Actually, I'm sure there's a delete button somewhere. Just not sure where it is.

There's an 'edit' one at least, so if that was supposed to be some grand analogy I guess it means you can edit your thoughts and you can get out of Hell because you can replace your 'posts' with a bunch of random letters.

Is Jesus is God, how did he die? And how does killing yourself do anything to other people's sins? Also isn't suicide a sin?

If he can pardon all sins except not believing in him, why didn't he just pardon them instead of dying?

It's also not merciful to kill every human not on Noah's ark.

You can't kill what you don't believe in, and you also can't hate what you don't believe in.

Also, how could I kill God if he's all powerful?

I'm not dead... And since I'm obviously not burning in it at the moment, either your argument is lacking some information or Hell's not real.

I don't know. Maybe God is 'merciful'. But that still doesn't mean I have to believe in him, or have to worship him. What is that question supposed to do to me? Make me think about how he's merciful? Because all that made me think was that oh, right, I'm not burning so I guess it's not real. That's the most obvious answer.

Why aren't you in heaven right now? Maybe because you're not good enough. Maybe because you're alive. Maybe because it's not real. I don't know. What do you think?

Bigoted? I don't believe my opinions are superior and I don't have a prejudiced intolerance of Christians. I have stated many times that I don't really care what other people believe in and that I'm sure they have their reasons. I don't know whether God is real or not. I'm not discriminating Christians by saying I'm not one. Do some more research before you insult other people.

Asking people questions based on their religion is not insulting. I'm not saying God sucks or that you are an idiot for believing in God. I'm asking why you believe in God. I'm asking you what you think about certain things in the bible. That's not bigoted. You have asked me questions, and I have answered them. Why don't you answer mine?

If I'm not worth reading, why do you care so much about replying to me? Nobody is forcing you to be here. Leave.

There's nothing to hate. I think he's nonexistent.

And how is that a problem, just because I don't agree with you?

Oh, I'm sorry, you did not refute this statement. Maybe if you spit out a wad of profanities you will feel better. ;)

See? I can do that too. It really doesn't prove a point besides that you're an impatient annoying idiot and that you're someone most sane people wouldn't want to hang around.

But while we're at it, didn't God kill Jesus? Jesus didn't sacrifice himself. God sacrificed him. Yes, he technically 'died for us', but he didn't have a choice.

God doesn't seem too worthy of worship to me. At least, he doesn't seem like a very good dad.

You know what? I tried to be nice. I tried to respect your views. But this isn't even about God. You haven't listened to anything I've said, all you said is that I was boring and asked me stupid questions about where you go when you die. If you look back, I already answered all of your repeating questions that you have spammed every single atheist with.

Why haven't you answered my questions?

Why should we fear God? What does that add to our lives, apart from not using free will because you're trying not to make Sky Dad mad? Why are you mindlessly following him? Have you actually read the bible to see that it promotes slavery, beating your kids, killing people who stand up to you, dying because you aren't straight, and many more terrible things?

Yes, I have 'refuted' your statements. But you haven't answered a single one of mine. Are you just that stupid? Or can you just not bear to maybe be wrong?

Do you follow God so you can have someone to blame your idiotic statements on? When you comment the same thing over and over it doesn't prove a point. It just makes you look like an idiot who cannot use logic when talking to others about controversial topics.

What? I wasn't trying to refute your statement. I accidentially commented and I was trying to figure out how to delete it.

I believe that people evolved from lesser species, like Neanderthals. I don't know how the Earth was created, might have been God, might have been a Big Bang. However, I do believe in things we have proof of, the theory of Evolution being one.

We have proof that the world was alive millions of years ago (dinosaur remains). I think evolution is how humans came to be because we have skulls and bones from human-like creatures and many well-trained scientists have logical explanations for how we evolved.

I seem to have a problem??

It seems that if anyone has a problem, it's the person who keeps complaining about me not being worth their time, then later responding to my argument. They must have thought it was at least important enough to respond to.

In regards to your other statement, I absolutely understand that. I don't care. I care about here and now, and not what happens after I die. I think I just die and don't go anywhere, but if I'm wrong, I accept that fact. The chance of that isn't enough to make me spend all my time worshipping something that I don't know exists. Instead, I'll spend my time doing things that matter to me (and not debating someone who clearly thinks their religion is the best and that anyone who doesn't agree with them is stupid.)

I don't know what happens. You probably don't either. At least I gave you the benefit of the doubt (something you should do more often. Maybe more people would like you). You could be right. You obviously don't think I could be. Maybe you are 'scared of God', as you put it, but I don't know if blindly following is a good thing.

I'm not saying you're wrong. I understand the 'penalties' if I am. I'm fine with it. I'm just saying you should think. Think about what you're doing with your life, and whether that is how you want to impact the world. Not by believing in God, but by the way you are handling other people not believing in God.

I respect your opinions, and if you believe in God, go ahead, but don't get mad at people just because they don't.

How do you delete a post?? I meant to dispute someone's post, but I accidentially just posted one. Sorry!!

Coming from someone who mentioned 'chemical fizzes' in their first sentence. And if you didn't read it, why comment something that showed you (sorta) understood what I was saying?

The first definition for 'dude' in Webster's dictionary is 'a man'. Just saying.

Not trying to get rid of God. Never said that. Feel free to believe. I don't know whether he exists or not, but I choose not to believe because he seems terrible and we have no proof that he does exist.

I don't care about the morals of someone who condones slavery (Ephesians 6:5, Titus 2:9, etc) and believes loving someone the same gender as you is a sin. If I have done wrong, I will go to prison. That's enough punishment to convince me not to do anything.

I don't care what Nye and Ham did, that's just one person from each group. I didn't watch their debate, but I'm sure others have different opinions on who won. Don't say just because one person was like that everyone else who believes in the same God or lack-there-of, will act the same.

Also, why should he fear God? Why should anyone fear someone we don't have proof exists? Why should I live my life in fear of accidentally doing something against Sky Daddy's will, when instead I could do what I think is right and not cower in fear for all of my existence?

Again, not stopping you from believing in God. Feel free, it's just not something I want to do.

You're right, that is pretty beautiful. But I think what's even more beautiful is that a dude in the sky has power over us. Him and his son who he killed. The ultimate sacrifice!

Haha, he could kill us if he wants, and he kills people every day from diseases he created. Wonderful guy, really. It just amazes me more and more when I learn about God! But no, we aren't his slaves, course not. To show us this so he gave us free will! Unfortunately if we use that free will to not believe in him or not follow his rules blindly, we are doomed for all eternity.

No, not right now, silly. Starting after we die, of course!!

He's just so nice and cheery all the time, and I love him and his dead son!

I don't really care what religion other people believe in. I'm not questioning the existence of God (like you said we atheists are always doing. Lookie there, Cartman was right about at least one person! Aw shucks!) He very well might be real, but I don't really care since he hasn't done anything to help me (or millions of others he lets suffer or kills). If he's all powerful, why doesn't he?

Someone who kills babies for fun (oh riiiight. It's the work of the devil. That makes so much more sense. Yeah, it's not like God created him or anything!) isn't someone I want to worship. If you do, go ahead. Worship away. I'm not trying to stop you. After all, free will, right?

You like the fact that he has no political experience?

Wait, no, it must be that he's so good at dealing with finances that his corporations have filed bankruptcy four times.

Oh, you definitely have me convinced now.

That's a nice thought, but everyone who's disgusted most likely won't do that. My mindset is a relatively common one (from what I've heard) and I doubt enough people to make a difference will change theirs. Do what you like, though.

I would rather have anyone than Trump. For me, that means picking the candidate who has the most likely chance of beating him (which is Hillary). For that reason, I am not going to vote for someone who doesn't have a high likelihood of beating Trump, even if I like them more.

I support Clinton, but if the race was mostly between Libertarians and Republicans, for example, I would pick the one to be (IMO) the lesser of the two evils (libertarians). Yes, maybe things would be better for me if my preferred candidate won, but I wouldn't want to take the chance of Trump winning because my vote wasn't where it needed to be to prevent it.

I understand where you are coming from, however, and although I don't agree, respect your opinion.

Isn't it a wasted vote to vote for someone who has slim to none chance of winning though?

It seems to me like the options are Trump or Clinton. Maybe you could add in Gary Johnson but he might not be in the debates, and even if he is, he still has only a very slight chance of winning.

I'd rather have someone I can't stand than someone I can't stand and I don't trust with nuclear weapons and launch codes.

(Not saying I can't stand Clinton. I don't trust her all that much, but I have yet to see a politician I trust wholeheartedly.)

I completely agree with you. Sorry if I didn't make that clear, that was basically what I was saying. To me it seems like even if you want less, there is a reason you are doing it, and maybe you want more of something(I.e. Happiness). I wasn't really just talking about materialistic things, more of the reason behind wanting them.

I completely disagree with demon hunter, although we take the same side. It's not about being saved. In fact, it's not about religion at all. It's about human nature.

Everybody wants something more. Whether that 'more' is more money, more happiness, or more success, it doesn't matter.

People a lot of times also want something different, but that 'different' coincides with the goal of obtaining more. However, sometimes people just want more of the same, so something more seems to me like the better choice.

Say someone wanted less money. They didn't want it for no reason. Say they wanted to have more real friends. Maybe they just did it out of the blue, because they want more spontaneity in their life. Even people who are 'saved by God' want God's approval. You want to please [God]? You might want Him to respect you more, or maybe you want to feel more satisfied in yourself. No matter what it looks like on the surface, it is human nature to want more. And under the surface, there will always be a cause.

I don't know everything. I won't pretend to. I admit that my 'always' in the last paragraph was a blanket statement, as of course that isn't always true. There is probably no one thing that people want. People in my experience do things because they want more than they already have. Maybe some people don't. It's a possibility that I won't disregard, but the above statement was the closest I could come to answering your question truthfully (to the best of my knowledge) within the two answer choices.

Wait so is this about racial bias?? Maybe I'm completely misunderstanding the question. If I am, sorry.