I have a question for athiests.

Originally posted by Alfheim
Ok heres what could be argued.

"Well lets put it this way. Bob is a born again Christian lets ask him what he was like before he became born again.

Bob: Well I used to lie cheat and steal and I didnt care about anybody or anything, but since I found the Lord I have become a better person.

Brad: So what did you believe in before you became born again?

Bob: I didnt believe in God so the way I saw it I could just do what I like but since I became born again its given my life purpose.

It could be argued that his disbelief in God caused him to do bad things because he felt he had no purpose, so there is connection and cause.

I dont think this applies to all athiests but could apply."

Could being the operative term. I understand your argument, but it seems to me that it lacks foundation so far.

What evidence do you have of that being the case?

Originally posted by Alfheim
Yes but did they do it because of religon or did they do it because they're assholes? Theres an aesop fable where a wolf decides to kill this sheep and the wolf makes up these excuses for killing the sheep. The sheep rebuts all of the wolfs accusations but the wolf still decided to kill the sheep in the end.

In saying that though I think belief systems are like guns not the true cause of the problem but it can make things worse.

A good question of course. So would they do it if they didn't have the excuse of Religion.

And an even more important question, what about those that get indoctrinated since their youth to hate people that go against their Religion.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Could being the operative term. I understand your argument, but it seems to me that it lacks foundation so far.

What evidence do you have of that being the case?

Im pretty sure if you did a survey of born again Christians or people in general somebody would say that. What do you think and im pretty sure ive met people who have said something along those lines but I did not record the conversation.

Originally posted by Bardock42

A good question of course. So would they do it if they didn't have the excuse of Religion.

Probably.

Originally posted by Bardock42

And an even more important question, what about those that get indoctrinated since their youth to hate people that go against their Religion.

Yes that is an example but essentially that is still not religon causing them to be indoctrinated it some ******* who decided to use religon as a tool. Religon isnt the problem, people are.

Originally posted by Alfheim
Im pretty sure if you did a survey of born again Christians or people in general somebody would say that. What do you think and im pretty sure ive met people who have said something along those lines but I did not record the conversation.

Well, they might say that, but is there any hard evidence. I mean, to be fair born-agains are biased.

And I don't think there is any statistical indication that atheists are more likely to commit crimes. I am not aware of any study that would say that at least.

Originally posted by Alfheim
Probably.

What do you base that on?

Originally posted by Alfheim
Yes that is an example but essentially that is still not religon causing them to be indoctrinated it some ******* who decided to use religon as a tool. Religon isnt the problem, people are.

I am not sure if you don't underestimate Religions there. It seems to me that certain Religions are indeed the problem.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Well, they might say that, but is there any hard evidence. I mean, to be fair born-agains are biased.

And I don't think there is any statistical indication that atheists are more likely to commit crimes. I am not aware of any study that would say that at least.

Well look as I said before I dont have any hard evidence really what im trying to do is use logic as my evidence. Its not for you to take as gospel its just a suggestion for you to conisder. When I say I mean logic is my evidence this is what I mean im pretty sure if we did a survey regardless of wether they were born again or not some people would make remarks like that and for those people who would respond like that atheism could be considered to be a ngative influence. Due to the fact that it is a likely occurence this is my evidence. Also bare in mind that I dont think athiets are inherently evil I used to think like that but not anymore.

Originally posted by Bardock42

What do you base that on?

Well actually come to think of it I could use Islamic History. There are certain people who when they became muslim didnt change at all. Two people I can think of are Abu Bakr and Khalid, apart from personal experience these are actually indidividuals you can read about that could be used as evidence. Im sure there are others but thats all that springs to mind.

Originally posted by Bardock42

I am not sure if you don't underestimate Religions there. It seems to me that certain Religions are indeed the problem.

Well remember I used to be muslim maybe its because I have been around really religous people that has given me this insight and from personal experience they just use it as an excuse.

Originally posted by Alfheim
Maybe. You do realise you can still go to chruch and be an Agnostic right. From personal experience people who dont go to Chruch are like "Well im not sure if god exists....mmmm...dunno maybe." They tend to fluctuate. The thing is eventhough surveys are not obvoulsy useless it seems to me that you have surveys and then you have the real world. For example if you were to go down to Whitechapel in East London most people would say they were muslim but when you actually discuss with them individually there like "mmm...dunno".

Originally posted by Alfheim
Yes but that doesnt change the fact that just because people say they are muslim, christian or whatever doesnt mean thats what they believe. You might laugh and say that means the survey is null and voids but thats the truth.

Originally posted by Alfheim
All I can tell you is that the survey was done at School Of African and Oriental Studies (SOAS) its a Universcity in London and it took place in the early 90s. My words were never to be taken as gospel.

Originally posted by Alfheim
Al ready explained.

No, it really isn't.

Nope not really.

Actually yes - Odinism doesn't literally mean they are worshipping Odin. The only people who would say that are the ones basing their entire understanding of the belief system on the title. How this is relevant to Atheism is tenuous.

Well I already explained how it could be.

Incorrect, the best you have done is to imply that on a personal level some Atheist might live a life without direction by "take what you can and don't get caught."

In no way have you provided any evidence or any real theory that Atheism can be used as a motivator/justifyer in the way politics/religion/philosophy can be.

Wow went completely over your head.

No, it was a pointless comparison by you - "just because Atheism says it is only the lack of belief in divinity doesn't mean other beliefs don't stem from this, just as Odinism doesn't literally have to have anything to do with Odin."

Well I dont think thats why he did what he did actually.

My apologies, I wasn't aware you had some evidence to support the idea Sade's motivations where more linked to his Atheism then to his well researched stance as a pivotal and definitive libertine and problems of other kinds.

Please post away, I will be fascinated to see your take on why he did what he did.

Really?

Considering you keep saying "other beliefs can stem from Atheism" and you use words like "Atheist principles" then yes, really.

What are you actually admitting that I could be right, if so thats all im arguing shall we call it a day? If somebody provied this as an excuse then we could assume that in his case thats what caused him to behave that way.

That totally went over your head. A person, not people. since Atheism covers all Atheists a small number who use it as an "excuse" doesn't actually deliver any validity to your claim or Atheist principles or beliefs stemming from Atheism.

Well you just agreed that I could be right.

Incorrect, just as I explained. A principle defines some set, predetermined rule for operating as a member of that group. Unless you can provide evidence to support that "take what you can, don't get caught" is sufficiently followed and supported by enough Atheists to define Atheism in addition to its true principle - non-belief in divinity - you don't have an argument that such beliefs are stemming from it.

Well considering that I said your not supposed to take ti seriously and it was just some food for thought and your telling me now that it should be taken seriously....are you being an argumentative pain in the neck.

So because you say four pages after you used it to try to support a theory you had about the "take what you can" mentality suddenly now you never intended it to be taken seriously? It sounds more like since it isn't really supporting what you have been trying to say that you are downplaying the study you yourself brought up, misrepresented while assuming "Now.... I dont know what they're beliefs were but since we live in a less religious society I would assume most of them were agnostic. Since "It doesnt matter if I dont get caught is not a relgious principle", I would assume those people probably were not very religious."

Why is it if somebody says god made me do it its religon but if somebody states that it his lack of belief in god that caused him to do it, it not religon.

Well since I struggle to think of many cases of people saying "my lack of belief in something caused me to rob this bank before eating a baby" I can only imagine it isn't much good.

Because the difference is simple - Atheism doesn't tell you to do anything. Religion/politics/philosophy, through mouthpieces (alive or not), do. The mouthpeices can tell you to do good things, or bad things, or claim bad things are good things and you should do them.

No such mechanism exists with Atheism. A person can not say "Atheism said I should do this" because Atheism does not work that way.

Originally posted by Alfheim
Well look as I said before I dont have any hard evidence really what im trying to do is use logic as my evidence. Its not for you to take as gospel its just a suggestion for you to conisder. When I say I mean logic is my evidence this is what I mean im pretty sure if we did a survey regardless of wether they were born again or not some people would make remarks like that and for those people who would respond like that atheism could be considered to be a ngative influence. Due to the fact that it is a likely occurence this is my evidence. Also bare in mind that I dont think athiets are inherently evil I used to think like that but not anymore.

Okay, happening to know a bit about logic, that's not the way to do it. It's not a logical approach. But though there is a possibility that people would say such a thing, it does not mean that it is accurate. We don't have to look for the opinions of people, but for the actual truth. I am sure many Christians would say that if they were atheists they would have no morals and kill randomly (exaggeration), but I think the facts support a different picture, that atheists are about the same when it comes to criminality as theists (if not less, due to other factors like, atheism mostly occuring in middle and upper class and more educated families, etc.)

Originally posted by Alfheim
Well actually come to think of it I could use Islamic History. There are certain people who when they became muslim didnt change at all. Two people I can think of are Abu Bakr and Khalid, apart from personal experience these are actually indidividuals you can read about that could be used as evidence. Im sure there are others but thats all that springs to mind.

What does that prove in your opinion?

Originally posted by Alfheim
Well remember I used to be muslim maybe its because I have been around really religous people that has given me this insight and from personal experience they just use it as an excuse.

That might be true, but if they didn't have the excuse some of them might not do as bad things.

And I was referring to Religions where aggressive behaviour towards certain people is a law. Don't you think that might influence some (that believe such a Religion to be true) to do bad things that they wouldn't do if they would not hold such a believe?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Okay, happening to know a bit about logic, that's not the way to do it. It's not a logical approach. But though there is a possibility that people would say such a thing, it does not mean that it is accurate. We don't have to look for the opinions of people, but for the actual truth. I am sure many Christians would say that if they were atheists they would have no morals and kill randomly (exaggeration), but I think the facts support a different picture, that atheists are about the same when it comes to criminality as theists (if not less, due to other factors like, atheism mostly occuring in middle and upper class and more educated families, etc.)

As I said even if there were not born again I think somebody would say that, dont you think? Thats all im saying. 😂

Originally posted by Bardock42

What does that prove in your opinion?

It could be argued that religon doesnt change people.

Originally posted by Bardock42

That might be true, but if they didn't have the excuse some of them might not do as bad things.

And I was referring to Religions where aggressive behaviour towards certain people is a law. Don't you think that might influence some (that believe such a Religion to be true) to do bad things that they wouldn't do if they would not hold such a believe?

Yeah.....but they dont have to follow that opinion...people can think. Im sure any decent person would start to question why they do things. Again from experience decent religous people will find excuses not to do things eventhough the law tells them to do it, assholes dont.

Originally posted by Alfheim
It could be argued that religon doesnt change people.

Which would fly in the face of its power to motivate, focus and direct large numbers of people in the same way politics or philosophy can and has.

Originally posted by Imperial_Samura

So because you say four pages after you used it to try to support a theory you had about the "take what you can" mentality suddenly now you never intended it to be taken seriously? It sounds more like since it isn't really supporting what you have been trying to say that you are downplaying the study you yourself brought up, misrepresented while assuming

I dunno man im pretty sure that I said that I dont think Sade didnt do what he did because of athiesm. Im pretty sure ive said from the beginning that it wasnt to be taken serioulsy and as a suggestion. Im pretty sure that I even said if atheists did use "if I dont get caught it doesnt matter " principle that it wasnt because of atheism but because they were basterds. Do you want me to give you the 100 million quotes indicating that its just food for thought? I could but it would be a complete waste of time because I shouldnt have to.

I gave you a ****ing survey and I dont have a link and I want you to take it as gospel? WTF. I dunno you've been debating with fundies too much.

Originally posted by Alfheim
I dont know if thats what Stalin thought but im pretty sure there are alot of athiests that belive that but thats because I think most humans are basterds.

What does this mean? Even if im wrong about atheists who belive in the "If I dont get caught principle" Doesnt it state that I DONT think it because they are athiest.

Originally posted by Imperial_Samura

"Now.... I dont know what they're beliefs were but since we live in a less religious society I would assume most of them were agnostic. Since "It doesnt matter if I dont get caught is not a relgious principle", I would assume those people probably were not very religious."

CONTEXT!! Read what else I said dont just take one aspect of my argument...damn im getting the Creshock syndrome.

Originally posted by Alfheim
I dont know if thats what Stalin thought but im pretty sure there are alot of athiests that belive that but thats because I think most humans are basterds.

If I said that before that statement that obvoulsy means that I dont really think atheism is what caused them to say that. 🤨

Originally posted by Da Pittman
This is where the + or – comes into play in polls and surveys, this is to account for people that either one do not understand the question or that the are being misleading for one reason or another. You can be an Atheist and go to church but I’ve seen very few people that go to church that are Agnostic and would also call themselves a Christian or whatever. Surveys and polls can easily be skewed by how the question is phrased like the old adage “He how forms the question wins the argument”. If the results were close I would judge the results with a bit more of a careful eye but these results based on population of religions has been done by many different people and with a great difference in groups.

Ok.

Originally posted by Da Pittman

This is the same as above, you can have people say that if you don’t go to church you are not of that faith or say that if you don’t take the Bible word for word you are not that faith but typically if someone says that they are of that religion the would have a strong believe in the deity of that religion.

Well like I said that depends. East London Whitechapel, they would say there were muslim because of thgeir parent.

Originally posted by Da Pittman

Didn’t say they were but you were using it as the basis of your argument.

Well as long as you took what I said into context its ok.

Originally posted by Alfheim
I dunno man im pretty sure that I said that I dont think Sade didnt do what he did because of athiesm. Im pretty sure ive said from the beginning that it wasnt to be taken serioulsy and as a suggestion. Im pretty sure that I even said if atheists did use "if I dont get caught it doesnt matter " principle that it wasnt because of atheism but because they were basterds. Do you want me to give you the 100 million quotes indicating that its just food for thought? I could but it would be a complete waste of time because I shouldnt have to.

I gave you a ****ing survey and I dont have a link and I want you to take it as gospel? Again are you being an argumentative.

This might help sometime in the early 90s there was a survey in SOAS and most men said that they would rape a women if they could get away with it. Now.... I dont know what they're beliefs were but since we live in a less religous society I would assume most of them were agnostic. Since "It doesnt matter if I dont get caught is not a relgious principle", I would assume those people probably were not very religous.

Even if the survey isnt true considering we live in a less religous society its not illogical to think most people are agnostic and its not completely illogical to think maybe some of the moral breakdown we are having is due to "It doesnt matter if we dont get caught."

Well what im saying exactly is this bad athiests find different reasons for why they do bad things, a religous person uses scripture but it could be argued that they are also pyshcotic as well. If you are going to deny what Marquis did what he did because of atheism then I could say the same about Mohammed.

The problem with forums is the stance from a few pages ago is still there for reference, and can be shown when what you are saying now doesn't quite gell with what you are saying then.

What does this mean? Even if im wrong about atheists who belive in the "If I dont get caught principle" Doesnt it state that I DONT think it because they are athiest.

I called you initially because you said "im pretty sure there are alot of athiests that belive that" - yes I saw your "I believe most humans are bastards" but I asked for proof about "alot of Atheists" believing that.

Your response was a study in which you said most man said they would rape a women if they wouldn't get caught, and that you thought, since it isn't a very religious thing, then the people saying it probably weren't really religious. You used it as a support for you statement. And then from that we got into you saying Atheism has other beliefs descending from it. My two questions have been the same throughout - justification for both comments.

If I said that before that statement that obvoulsy means that I dont really think atheism is what caused them to say that. 🤨

And? You still said you believed a lot of Atheists live by that. It doesn't matter if you qualified it as "most people are bastards" - you got yourself into this position by then posting a study and indicating you thought the respondants who said they would rape if they wouldn't get caught likely weren't really religious.

My questions never changed. All I have wanted from the beginning is something to back up your statements about other beliefs coming from Atheism, and the statement a lot of Atheist believe that. If your answer is "because people are bastards" then fine.

Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
The problem with forums is the stance from a few pages ago is still there for reference, and can be shown when what you are saying now doesn't quite gell with what you are saying then.

No, did you even see the bit where I said "MAYBE". I also think I made that statement about people beings basterds before those quotes.

Originally posted by Imperial_Samura

I called you initially because you said "im pretty sure there are alot of athiests that belive that" - yes I saw your "I believe most humans are bastards" but I asked for proof about "alot of Atheists" believing that.

Your response was a study in which you said most man said they would rape a women if they wouldn't get caught, and that you thought, since it isn't a very religious thing, then the people saying it probably weren't really religious. You used it as a support for you statement. And then from that we got into you saying Atheism has other beliefs descending from it. My two questions have been the same throughout - justification for both comments.

Yeah and you also stated that I said that I thought that atheism caused people to do things. As I stated from the very beginning I said it doesnt.

Originally posted by Imperial_Samura

And? You still said you believed a lot of Atheists live by that. It doesn't matter if you qualified it as "most people are bastards" - you got yourself into this position by then posting a study and indicating you thought the respondants who said they would rape if they wouldn't get caught likely weren't really religious.

Well you know what im cynical. I dont think athiets are inherently evil but I wouldnt be suprised if there were sometimes you might have used that to justify some actions but you wouldnt tell anybody about it......Im sure not all white people are racist but I wouldnt be suprised if white person had a bad day they might call a black person a ****** in their head. Doesnt make him racist he just had a bad day.

Originally posted by Imperial_Samura

My questions never changed. All I have wanted from the beginning is something to back up your statements about other beliefs coming from Atheism, and the statement a lot of Atheist believe that. If your answer is "because people are bastards" then fine.

I already explained. There are different ways of defining isms since odinism is not just the belief in Odin, atheism doesnt just have to be a belief. My point is that when they defined atheism and Odinism there was a logic and a reason why they did it. The same reason they defined Odinism as a system could be applied to atheism.

Tell me why does Odinism have to be defined as a system? So are you telling me that just because its defined as a system that it CANT be defined as just the belief in Odin?

The fcat of the matter is this atheism does not have to just mean a belief there is no god by looking at how they defined other isms

Yes and most people are basterds is my answer ie even if they used it as excuse that is not the true reason why they did it, my suggestion is that it COULD be seen logically as an athiest concept depending on how they answer questions.