Guest posts by bigreen69

1

Religion / Re: How did you choose your religion? Or was it chosen for you?

« on: March 30, 2012, 06:15:47 am »

I don’t see how the examination of ideas and beliefs that have no evidence to support them could possibly be called extreme.  Especially when these ideas or premises can and often do harm others. These beliefs need to be called into question.  I am not talking about culture never once mentioned it.  However while on the topic if your culture has a tendency to harm, oppress or threaten other members of humanity, it should be viewed with the same skepticism with out apology.  I am pretty sure it is quite fine to look at religion and culture thru this lens.


My aids example was not to illustrate causation.  The fact remains there is a lot of people that are infected by this virus in certain African countries.  That is the fact, not how it happened which does not matter to this argument.  The ridiculous thing is that still to this day Catholicism preaches against the use of condoms.  I would like to think that using condoms would help curb some of this human suffering.  Apparently the pope and many of his loyal followers see it different.




The example of the health care is an example that is happening in modern day United States. The cultural argument makes no sense these people live in a country that has multi-billion dollar per year pharmaceutical industry.  I would assess the only thing that differentiates this group is their belief system not culture.  I would access that to sit idly by and watch a child die of strep throat is indeed sinister.  What ridiculous cultural value is this beneficial?  Religion be the cause, and I cannot see how it is in any way helpful to humanity.  Why not question it?


Aves that is about as plain as I can make.

2

Religion / Re: How did you choose your religion? Or was it chosen for you?

« on: March 30, 2012, 02:44:13 am »

I think apatheism is selfish and immoral on the grounds that there is little regard for the harm that religion and other fantasies can cause.  If it is because you are ignorant of these threats to humanity, it is sad.  If it’s because you do not care for you fellow man it’s immoral.  I think it is a selfish stance because it does not seem to hurt you, you think you need not care.  Maybe I should have just called it lazy, that might suit it better.  I see this view as the standard ostrich with its head in the sand.  I think mankind can do better.

Take an easy example of the threat, circumcision.  If there is no religion, baby boys and some girls would not get bits of them cut off.  You might say big deal it is just foreskin and a clitoris.  However circumcision does kill children every year.  I cannot think this is remotely possible without religion. 

Even easier example, some adherents of religion deny their own children of basic medical care.  Why you might ask, their religion forbids it.  I do not see this as a noble act of faith; instead I think it is more akin murde to murder.

How about aids riddled Africa were missionaries teach the populous not to use condoms because they will go to hell.  Really, millions infected and dying, but they have the false hope of heaven.

These are things that are happening right now in the world, I would like the see this change and I see the debunking and skepticism of religion to be one means to facilitate this change.  In short I refuse to stick my head into the ground.

3

Religion / Re: How did you choose your religion? Or was it chosen for you?

« on: March 30, 2012, 01:30:42 am »

My dear ddevans96 I understand completely your world view.  I think you view is fairly selfish and immoral.  To criticize a critique of religion is utterly shameful.  The fact that you have no views on god is secondary.  I insist to not see religion as a threat to rational thought and civilization in an error.

Also Stalin is a poor choice of an atheistic villain; his regime is much more closely related to the Russian Orthodoxy than anything.  Just because he used secular language does in no way remove him as the head of his church.  What self-respecting dictator would not take advantage of this vacuum of power? Please don’t use Hitler either, he was catholic and supported by the pope until the end of the war. You should look to the French revolution.  There you will find bad behavior by secular peasants. 

4

Religion / Re: How did you choose your religion? Or was it chosen for you?

« on: March 30, 2012, 01:08:37 am »

I have to disagree about the burden of proof.  They make these extravagant claims that they believe give them authority over others.  If someone says they are King of the world, I think they need some evidence to accept the throne.  This is dangerous, as I have stated before.

On your Kantian and Utilitarian examples I must apologize.  I over looked them.  They are idealistic extremes however I think you can be a little more pragmatic.  I think do unto others as you would have others do unto you is a good place to start.  I do not think this would be objected to by the majority of civilization.  This simple rule that is evident even in other primates I think would serve humanity well.  I don’t know if you could advance morals any further, nor should you have to. 

5

Religion / Re: How did you choose your religion? Or was it chosen for you?

« on: March 29, 2012, 11:38:20 pm »

Oldtrees, i figured you were not a theist, the whole logic thing kind of points to that.  About the Watchmen, I’m not into graphic novels.  I can understand an agnostic view, been there.  I felt like it was very lethargic position for me.  The argument I don’t know and you don’t either is nice.  I think the fact that you cannot prove that there is a god is enough evidence to disregard religion.  The burden of proof is upon the believers not me.  They are the ones making fantastic claims with no evidence.  I am trying to simply point out that if you cannot prove there is a god, there I absolutely no reason to continue to practice religion. 

I am against people that make decisions based of beliefs they have no evidence to back up, because sometimes their decisions hurt other people.  That is my line of thought.  Even at the unassertive position of agnostic I think you can reach this conclusion or at the least follow this line of thought.   If you do think it is ok for people to hurt themselves or others bases on beliefs that have no supporting evidence, I would call you immoral. 

In response to ddevans96 I would like to say shame on you.  I think Kamikaze pilots in World War II to present day jihadist illustrate beautifully the dangers of religion.  These along with Crusaders, genocide, witch trials, genital mutilation, and pedophile priests illustrate this danger well.  I do not think that these are acts that rational people would come up with on their own.  When one mentions religion people have desire to be politically correct.  I find this disgusting.  This need for congeniality only allows these beliefs to persist unchecked.  It gives them the luxury to hide in the shadows behind your world view.

6

Religion / Re: How did you choose your religion? Or was it chosen for you?

« on: March 29, 2012, 08:42:40 pm »

I admire your semantics, however I think anti theism is a reasonable stance when it comes to these issues.  Religion is a dangerous, fraudulent and servile world view.  It is used to justify mad men, extort resources and enslave the minds of its adherents.   I would argue that it is the greatest threat to civilization.  Take a quick look at the all the evil that religion has brought into the world i.e. genocide, human sacrifice, genital mutilation, witch trials, subordination of women, slavery, etc.   A rational person would not participate in this, were it not justified by religion. 

The argument about religion is the only thing that will make a good person do evil is still valid.  Just because you redefine the process that alters the state this rational person’s mind does in no way eliminate religion as the prime mechanism.  In fact name another mechanism.  Better yet find me a good deed that a moral non believer would do that religious adherents participate in.  Then name me an evil deed that a moral person would do without religion.

There is more no way to prove that there is a god, none.  Even further there is even less evidence to support the attributes of said god.  If you choose to believe in some irrational construct, by all means go ahead.  However keep that garbage to yourself.  Do not ask the state to support it, pressure others to believe it, and lastly don’t go suicide bombing buildings to place yourself on the fast track to the “afterlife”.

7

Religion / Re: How did you choose your religion? Or was it chosen for you?

« on: March 29, 2012, 05:52:15 am »

Unfortunately I was born in the buckle of the bible belt in the United States.  Both of my parents are adherents of the protestant Christian faith.  I grew up believing and practicing this faith.  However, I gave up these delusions in favor of reason and logic.  I am anti-religious.  I would like to stamp out religion and any other the erroneous beliefs.  I studied History in college and the best I can tell is that religion in the most evil thing that humans have ever created. Good people will do the best they can, evil people will do evil, however to make a good person do evil you need religion.

god bless ; )

8

Religion / Re: The greatest atheist in history

« on: March 29, 2012, 05:01:17 am »

I recently have been enjoying the works of Christopher Hitchens.  He had a nice blend of humor and boldness.

I like when atheism is said to be a religion.  I would say it’s not, in the same way that anti-tooth fairyism is not a religion.  However it does represent a distinct world view.  It is a view that values reason, logic and the scientific method instead of mysticism and supernatural garbage.

9

Death / Re: Aflatoxin | Aflatoxin

« on: March 29, 2012, 03:14:59 am »

thank you zanz, Aflatoxin has been one of my long time favorites, and this is a justified buff.

10

Crucible Archive / Re: Cursed Pendant | Cursed Amulet

« on: March 08, 2012, 09:32:18 am »

Nice card, cost i dont know if the activation cost has to be overly high.  You are sacing life for counters.  So that would make it tough to use in a if you were getting rushed or if they had access to poison.  With that said I think the cost could come down.  Anyway thats my two cents, wonderful card.

11

Card Ideas and Art / Re: Trench | Trench

« on: March 08, 2012, 09:18:17 am »

I like it. I think it would be a nice addition to earth.

12

Buff This Card! / Re: Flooding|Inundation

« on: March 06, 2012, 09:37:53 am »

I actually like this card a lot.  I use it in one of my false god grinders.  I find this card very useful against these foes because it eliminates all but 5 creatures.  It really cuts down on the spam.  Add in a few Malignant Cells and one Parasite and you can lock down almost any deck.  However this is a stall deck that is completely bulit around Flooding. 

I believe that as other cards are added it will recieve more buffs.