Conquer Club

Posted: **Sun Sep 06, 2020 4:37 pm**

God Bashing at Its Best by Christopher Hitchens

https://youtu.be/oYwXQf8f828

Not intended for people unable to "click" a link or copy paste a link in the u tube search bar.

Posted: **Sun Sep 06, 2020 5:53 pm**

armati wrote:I've been posting on the CC forums for four years and still can't work out how to embed a YouTube video.

Fixed

Posted: **Sun Sep 06, 2020 7:43 pm**

mrswdk wrote:
armati wrote:I've been posting on the CC forums for four years and still can't work out how to embed a YouTube video.

Fixed

It is a nice collection of Hitchens, though.

Posted: **Mon Sep 07, 2020 10:07 am**

Don t know that guy but everything he says there is pretty interresting.
I still think he didn't cover my belief... that there might be a creating entity, but that his concerns are about the universe or the many universes he created and life or inhabited planets accross those universes are not something with relevance for him.

Posted: **Mon Sep 07, 2020 11:07 am**

He has previously referred to the Abrahamic religions as the 'axis of evil' so you know that he is both very intelligent but also super edgy.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/peop ... 42892.html

Posted: **Mon Sep 07, 2020 11:36 am**

mrswdk wrote:He has previously referred to the Abrahamic religions as the 'axis of evil' so you know that he is both very intelligent but also super edgy.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/peop ... 42892.html

I didn't know he sued Kissinger. Some great lines in that interview!

Posted: **Mon Sep 07, 2020 1:20 pm**

mrswdk wrote:He has previously referred to the Abrahamic religions as the 'axis of evil' so you know that he is both very intelligent but also super edgy.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/peop ... 42892.html

Well... why only monotheists? Like Hindus are great towards minorities in India for example. He could just say that religious fanatism is the axis of evil... and then turn that to fanatism in general. Nowadays, anything is worshiped and criticizm isn't accepted. You're either rooting for team A for life or you're a team B.

And lulz on mother Theresa. I'd love to quote that to my nun aunt that has been serving her in Calcuta, but I don't think she'd approve.

Posted: **Mon Sep 07, 2020 1:51 pm**

betiko wrote:
mrswdk wrote:He has previously referred to the Abrahamic religions as the 'axis of evil' so you know that he is both very intelligent but also super edgy.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/peop ... 42892.html

Well... why only monotheists? Like Hindus are great towards minorities in India for example. He could just say that religious fanatism is the axis of evil... and then turn that to fanatism in general. Nowadays, anything is worshiped and criticizm isn't accepted. You're either rooting for team A for life or you're a team B.

Don't forget that jokes have to be read in context. That interview was in 2002, when George Bush Jr. was in full-bore Crusader Mode and the term 'Axis of Evil' was part of every conversation. Hitchens has been known to ridicule the term, which I suspect is why one of the question writers decided to lob it at him as a question. He probably could have come up with a better answer if he took more time to find one, but the question really didn't deserve that much effort.

betiko wrote:And lulz on mother Theresa. I'd love to quote that to my nun aunt that has been serving her in Calcuta, but I don't think she'd approve.

75% of the money raised by Mother Theresa was not spent on her missions but on opposition to birth control and on other ultraconservative Catholic positions, holding the tide against modernists and reformers that would like to move the Church into the 20th century. Needless to say, lack of birth control is one of the main drivers of poverty and helps generate the need for orphanages, etc.

But even the 25% that is spent in the missions is misspent. You can find hundreds of testimonies like this one:
https://newint.org/features/2014/09/01/mother-teresa-torture-kolkata

One woman bore over 50 finger-sized holes in her scalp, and we spent more than an hour nipping at the larvae with our tweezers as she screamed in agony. It required five more days of plucking to cease the infestation. As Sister C scrubbed and hacked away at another patient’s infections, I administered topical saline solution and iodine. A handful of male volunteers restrained patients who were sobbing and howling for their gods and their mothers.

‘Aren’t you giving them morphine?’ I asked.

The nun vehemently shook her head. ‘No. Only Diclofenac.’

Diclofenac is an analgesic painkiller commonly used to treat arthritis and gout. It is not an anaesthetic and does not eliminate sensation. Yet this was Sister C’s treatment of choice for patients undergoing severe pain – despite the fact that directly across the hall was a room brimming with supplies provided by Catholic hospitals around the world. Local anaesthetic is often one of the first items donated.

Sister C’s rationale, however, can be summed up by a statement made by Mother Teresa at a Washington press conference shortly before her death in 1997: ‘I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people.’ This clearly indicates that Mother Teresa and, by extension, Missionaries of Charity believe that suffering enhances holiness.

Posted: **Mon Sep 07, 2020 2:32 pm**

Apparently, the only nazi to be excommunicated was Geobbels, I guess he married a protestant.

Ive watched alot of Hitchens vids, he is a pretty knowledgeable and astute.

Posted: **Mon Sep 07, 2020 6:09 pm**

betiko wrote:Nowadays

Posted: **Tue Sep 08, 2020 2:17 pm**

armati wrote:God Bashing at Its Best by Christopher Hitchens

https://youtu.be/oYwXQf8f828

Not intended for people unable to "click" a link or copy paste a link in the u tube search bar.

It would be mighty convenient for you if there was no God, because then human lives wouldn't matter and it would be perfectly acceptable to be a racist. Also, there would be no external definition of truth so nobody could accuse you of disinformation for posting dishonest conspiracy theories.

Posted: **Tue Sep 08, 2020 2:39 pm**

Sad Doom, you need a god for you to understand racism,truth or the validity of life?

Actually thats pretty "normal" , I hope that some day people will learn to think critically for themselves.

Thinking is hard for some people,which is why they prefer others thinking for them.
Try it sometime, and dont give up, you might surprise yourself. ;-)

Posted: **Tue Sep 08, 2020 8:18 pm**

DoomYoshi wrote:
armati wrote:God Bashing at Its Best by Christopher Hitchens

https://youtu.be/oYwXQf8f828

Not intended for people unable to "click" a link or copy paste a link in the u tube search bar.

It would be mighty convenient for you if there was no God, because then human lives wouldn't matter and it would be perfectly acceptable to be a racist. Also, there would be no external definition of truth so nobody could accuse you of disinformation for posting dishonest conspiracy theories.

I’m atheist, is it ok for me to not be racist too? Or must I default be racist because I’m an atheist?

Didn’t uber-religious Southerners use The Bible to justify their ‘Peculiar Institution’?

Also.... um most people who aren’t religious believe that external definitions of truth are found through the Scientific Method.
As an atheist I can actually provide demonstrable evidence for my beliefs through the Scientific Method.
As a religious person you are unable to provide demonstrable evidence for the existence of God or most things the Bible states as Truth.
You can only get your Truth through your Faith, which BY DEFINITION is not demonstrable... if it were demonstrable it wouldn't require “faith”.

Posted: **Tue Sep 08, 2020 9:43 pm**

If truth (or "Truth" with a capital T if you must) only comes from God, and can be confirmed by God then why is there more than one church?

Posted: **Wed Sep 09, 2020 11:41 am**

jonesthecurl wrote:If truth (or "Truth" with a capital T if you must) only comes from God, and can be confirmed by God then why is there more than one church?

It’s the “My Truth is more true that your Truth” syndrome.

... or if you’re a really really True Believer... there’s only one True Church... the rest are just fake news.

Posted: **Wed Sep 09, 2020 11:45 am**

DoomYoshi wrote:
armati wrote:God Bashing at Its Best by Christopher Hitchens

https://youtu.be/oYwXQf8f828

Not intended for people unable to "click" a link or copy paste a link in the u tube search bar.

It would be mighty convenient for you if there was no God, because then human lives wouldn't matter and it would be perfectly acceptable to be a racist. Also, there would be no external definition of truth so nobody could accuse you of disinformation for posting dishonest conspiracy theories.

let's face it... you just need someone to take you by your hand because you are unable to take care of yourself on your own. religion is your comfy blanket that helps you sleep at night.
Why would humans lives not matter if there was no god? If you think such think then you are a dangerous sociopath... you know it and you rely on those BS beliefs to save yourself from yourself.

Posted: **Wed Sep 09, 2020 11:46 am**

jonesthecurl wrote:If truth (or "Truth" with a capital T if you must) only comes from God, and can be confirmed by God then why is there more than one church?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_v ... cene_Creed

We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.

Wiki doesn’t capitalize this appropriately... in the missals I remember from my youth,
it read like this...

We believe in One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.

THERE IS ONLY ONE CHURCH.
(Or at least that’s what each church believes.)

Posted: **Wed Sep 09, 2020 11:47 am**

jimboston wrote:
jonesthecurl wrote:If truth (or "Truth" with a capital T if you must) only comes from God, and can be confirmed by God then why is there more than one church?

It’s the “My Truth is more true that your Truth” syndrome.

... or if you’re a really really True Believer... there’s only one True Church... the rest are just fake news.

and fake Churches! unless you mary someone from any other Church, then that Church is fine.

Posted: **Wed Sep 09, 2020 11:14 pm**

(mormon)GOD wrote:Don't f*ck The Baby f*ck The Frog

Posted: **Thu Sep 10, 2020 2:28 pm**

jimboston wrote:
I’m atheist, is it ok for me to not be racist too? Or must I default be racist because I’m an atheist?

If there is no God, then it doesn't matter if you are racist.

jimbo wrote:Didn’t uber-religious Southerners use The Bible to justify their ‘Peculiar Institution’?

Aye, but they could have also used Greek philosophy or eugenics science. They would use whatever they could to grasp power.

Also.... um most people who aren’t religious believe that external definitions of truth are found through the Scientific Method.
As an atheist I can actually provide demonstrable evidence for my beliefs through the Scientific Method.
As a religious person you are unable to provide demonstrable evidence for the existence of God or most things the Bible states as Truth.
You can only get your Truth through your Faith, which BY DEFINITION is not demonstrable... if it were demonstrable it wouldn't require “faith”.

Many things that you believe are not demonstrable by science. For example, you might think you live in Massachusetts, but this is not demonstrable with science (there is no experiment that proves it).

Likewise, many things that ARE demonstrable you do not believe. For example, I can demonstrate using historical data that wealth of white people in the south is reduced after the Civil War. So, it can be demonstrated by certain metrics that slavery is better. By what standard can you say that metric is wrong?

Christianity has always been a demonstrable religion. That is why we taught the world literacy, so I can take you to a Bible and show you that it is written "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life".

betiko wrote:let's face it... you just need someone to take you by your hand because you are unable to take care of yourself on your own. religion is your comfy blanket that helps you sleep at night.
Why would humans lives not matter if there was no god? If you think such think then you are a dangerous sociopath... you know it and you rely on those BS beliefs to save yourself from yourself.

I can demonstrate that human lives don't matter in a scientific sense. Every culture in the world has several words for warrior. A toddler does not need to be taught the rules of boxing, they instinctively understand that the person knocked out lost. People are comfortable exploiting other people until the furor grows enough that they care. You wouldn't buy clothes made in Bangladesh if you thought that those garment workers' lives had the same value as yours.

jonesthecurl wrote:If truth (or "Truth" with a capital T if you must) only comes from God, and can be confirmed by God then why is there more than one church?

That's just how truth works some times. It's like there is an objective reality at the center that we are orbiting. There is only one Sun, but there are many sun gods.

Posted: **Thu Sep 10, 2020 4:35 pm**

DoomYoshi wrote:
jimboston wrote:
I’m atheist, is it ok for me to not be racist too? Or must I default be racist because I’m an atheist?

If there is no God, then it doesn't matter if you are racist.

Why?

A racist is an ass and wrong.

It doesn’t matter to me if that racist believes in God or not... he/she would still be an ass and wrong.

I BELIEVE a non-racist atheist is still a better person than a racist who has a stated belief in God. Continuing with that line of thinking, a world filled with non-religious humanists who are anti-racist would be a better work than a world filled with racist God-fearing Christians. No? Do you disagree?

DoomYoshi wrote:
jimbo wrote:Didn’t uber-religious Southerners use The Bible to justify their ‘Peculiar Institution’?

Aye, but they could have also used Greek philosophy or eugenics science. They would use whatever they could to grasp power.

... but they didn’t. They used the Christian Bible.

DoomYoshi wrote:
jimbo wrote:Also.... um most people who aren’t religious believe that external definitions of truth are found through the Scientific Method.
As an atheist I can actually provide demonstrable evidence for my beliefs through the Scientific Method.
As a religious person you are unable to provide demonstrable evidence for the existence of God or most things the Bible states as Truth.
You can only get your Truth through your Faith, which BY DEFINITION is not demonstrable... if it were demonstrable it wouldn't require “faith”.

Many things that you believe are not demonstrable by science. For example, you might think you live in Massachusetts, but this is not demonstrable with science (there is no experiment that proves it).

In this case you are only correct if your refuse to acknowledge that definitions and language are a thing. If you acknowledge that words have meanings then I can absolutely prove I live in Massachusetts using the Science of Surveying.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surveying

DoomYoshi wrote:Likewise, many things that ARE demonstrable you do not believe. For example, I can demonstrate using historical data that wealth of white people in the south is reduced after the Civil War. So, it can be demonstrated by certain metrics that slavery is better. By what standard can you say that metric is wrong?

This is insane logic. You are using the term ‘better’ without the qualifier ‘better for landowning slaveholders’.

You can prove almost anything using this logic.

So you don’t believe in logic?

DoomYoshi wrote:Christianity has always been a demonstrable religion. That is why we taught the world literacy, so I can take you to a Bible and show you that it is written "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life".

Showing me a book with something written in it is not “demonstrating” this as a fact.
I can write anything in a book. This does not by definition “Make it So”.
(I know you believe that the Bible was written with Divine Inspiration... but just because you believe it doesn’t make it true.)

Also, who is this “we” you talk about. The Catholic Church didn’t want the general public to read the Bible and interpret it for themselves. That was blasphemy! They kept saying Mass in Latin until the 20th Century specifically so people COULDN’T understand what was being said!

Posted: **Fri Sep 11, 2020 2:06 am**

Quotes really got messed up here.

jimboston wrote:
Why?

A racist is an ass and wrong.

It doesn’t matter to me if that racist believes in God or not... he/she would still be an ass and wrong.

I BELIEVE a non-racist atheist is still a better person than a racist who has a stated belief in God. Continuing with that line of thinking, a world filled with non-religious humanists who are anti-racist would be a better work than a world filled with racist God-fearing Christians. No? Do you disagree?

There is no standard to judge whether it is wrong or right. The only principle we can deduce from nature is that might makes right.

jimbo wrote:
Many things that you believe are not demonstrable by science. For example, you might think you live in Massachusetts, but this is not demonstrable with science (there is no experiment that proves it).

In this case you are only correct if your refuse to acknowledge that definitions and language are a thing. If you acknowledge that words have meanings then I can absolutely prove I live in Massachusetts using the Science of Surveying.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surveying

I will acknowledge that words have meanings. But that isn't your point. You said "most people who aren’t religious believe that external definitions of truth are found through the Scientific Method". I would like you to demonstrate that using the scientific method, which ideally involves experimentation. Either it is not an external definition of truth, or it is. You can't have it both ways, as in "I only believe truth proven through the scientific method, except for when I can't prove it that way, then I just accept it on faith". We don't even have to get into the axiomatic definitions of science. I mean when people drew a map of MA, what was the scientific research that they did in order to distinguish it from Vermont?

DoomYoshi wrote:Likewise, many things that ARE demonstrable you do not believe. For example, I can demonstrate using historical data that wealth of white people in the south is reduced after the Civil War. So, it can be demonstrated by certain metrics that slavery is better. By what standard can you say that metric is wrong?

This is insane logic. You are using the term ‘better’ without the qualifier ‘better for landowning slaveholders’.

You can prove almost anything using this logic.

So you don’t believe in logic?

What exactly is illogical here? If a steady supply of free labor causes wealth then not having a steady supply of free labor will cause a decrease in wealth.

Posted: **Fri Sep 11, 2020 1:06 pm**

DoomYoshi wrote:Quotes really got messed up here.

jimboston wrote:
Why?

A racist is an ass and wrong.

It doesn’t matter to me if that racist believes in God or not... he/she would still be an ass and wrong.

I BELIEVE a non-racist atheist is still a better person than a racist who has a stated belief in God. Continuing with that line of thinking, a world filled with non-religious humanists who are anti-racist would be a better work than a world filled with racist God-fearing Christians. No? Do you disagree?

There is no standard to judge whether it is wrong or right. The only principle we can deduce from nature is that might makes right.

What standard does 'religion' offer, when there are dozens if not hundreds of different religions in existence each offering different standards? You first have to assume one is more right than the others. If halal food better in gods eyes than kosher food? Are we all going to hell for eating pig? There are no standards in religion unless you live in a believer vacuum bubble of only a single religion under the assumption it's the 'right' one.

Posted: **Fri Sep 11, 2020 1:40 pm**

mookiemcgee wrote:
DoomYoshi wrote:Quotes really got messed up here.

jimboston wrote:
Why?

A racist is an ass and wrong.

It doesn’t matter to me if that racist believes in God or not... he/she would still be an ass and wrong.

I BELIEVE a non-racist atheist is still a better person than a racist who has a stated belief in God. Continuing with that line of thinking, a world filled with non-religious humanists who are anti-racist would be a better work than a world filled with racist God-fearing Christians. No? Do you disagree?

There is no standard to judge whether it is wrong or right. The only principle we can deduce from nature is that might makes right.

What standard does 'religion' offer, when there are dozens if not hundreds of different religions in existence each offering different standards? You first have to assume one is more right than the others. If halal food better in gods eyes than kosher food? Are we all going to hell for eating pig? There are no standards in religion unless you live in a believer vacuum bubble of only a single religion under the assumption it's the 'right' one.

Well, I'm not gonna stop cutting out my enemies hearts on my stone pyramid to make the sun come up... just in case.

Posted: **Sat Sep 12, 2020 3:15 pm**

mookiemcgee wrote:
What standard does 'religion' offer, when there are dozens if not hundreds of different religions in existence each offering different standards? You first have to assume one is more right than the others. If halal food better in gods eyes than kosher food? Are we all going to hell for eating pig? There are no standards in religion unless you live in a believer vacuum bubble of only a single religion under the assumption it's the 'right' one.

Religion is not the standard, God is the standard. And there would be no way to know God were it not for His revelation to us. Thankfully God speaks and acts through history. If He didn't, he would be an idol. While there are always trouble makers and people stuck on small issues, there is a broad agreement among churches on many issues. Jesus Christ is the standard, not the religion he observed nor the religion that follows him. He is the standard.

Conquer Club

God Bashing at Its Best

God Bashing at Its Best

Re: God Bashing at Its Best

Re: God Bashing at Its Best

Re: God Bashing at Its Best

Re: God Bashing at Its Best

Re: God Bashing at Its Best

Re: God Bashing at Its Best

Re: God Bashing at Its Best

Re: God Bashing at Its Best

Re: God Bashing at Its Best

Re: God Bashing at Its Best

Re: God Bashing at Its Best

Re: God Bashing at Its Best

Re: God Bashing at Its Best

Re: God Bashing at Its Best

Re: God Bashing at Its Best

Re: God Bashing at Its Best

Re: God Bashing at Its Best

Re: God Bashing at Its Best

Re: God Bashing at Its Best

Re: God Bashing at Its Best

Re: God Bashing at Its Best

Re: God Bashing at Its Best

Re: God Bashing at Its Best

Re: God Bashing at Its Best