• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Religious tend to support torture more often

Here's the Bible's definition of religion. Welcome to religion my friend.

Well the I guess according to this part :

If anyone considers himself religious and yet does not keep a tight rein on his tongue, he deceives himself and his religion is worthless.

You're full of ****.
 
] If an atheist is good to their fellow man are they religious?

No.

Is that a tenet of atheism that indicates that to be true?

There are no tenets in atheism.


No, so the answer is no.
I'm not arguing what the definition of "is" is, you're arguing it's either "black or white". It isn't.

Of course it is. You're arguing that my wife is not religious because she doesn't go to church every single Sunday. While I'm arguing that the only standard for being religious is believing in a mystical creator like oh...say....God.
 
Why would you attend a religious service if you're not actually religious?

1) The Girls
2) Tradition/Social Obligation
3) The meal after
4) Play with your friends (what do you think Obama did as a kid at the Mosque?)
5) Exchange presents on Christmas Eve
6) The Easter egg hunt
7) Choir

I can keep going. There are plenty of reasons to go Church that actually have relatively little to do with God or religion
 
This is true. Precisely why Steven Wright will never be a good comedic writer, but is a great performer.

I think Steven Wright is a GREAT comedic writer. Of course, my sense of humor is pretty twisted too. :mrgreen:
 
1) The Girls
2) Tradition/Social Obligation
3) The meal after
4) Play with your friends (what do you think Obama did as a kid at the Mosque?)
5) Exchange presents on Christmas Eve
6) The Easter egg hunt
7) Choir

I can keep going. There are plenty of reasons to go Church that actually have relatively little to do with God or religion

Yeah for some reason I doubt this poll went after the under 18 demographic.
 

It was rhetorical, but as I thought.



There are no tenets in atheism.

It was rhetorical, but as I thought.

Of course it is. You're arguing that my wife is not religious because she doesn't go to church every single Sunday. While I'm arguing that the only standard for being religious is believing in a mystical creator like oh...say....God.

No, I'm arguing the opposite, and here's the proof in an earlier post:

I have not attended a religious service in 20+ years, and am still one of the most religious people I know...and people who know me would agree.

Believing in God is not the only standard. Nor is going to church. Believing in God is one standard. Others depend on your religion.
 
This was a pretty interesting read.

Survey: Support for terror suspect torture differs among the faithful - CNN.com

The statistics show that the more often you attend church... the more likely to support torture. When I read this I found it interesting but not surprising. Thoughts?
Actually it American religious people that tend to support it more and it only 12%(or was it 8%?) more. Could that simply represent the ideological pathways within America? The religious are more likely to be the usual Republican rightwingers and the less religious more likely to be the democrat liberals.

Hardly a great indictment of religion as a whole.
 
Last edited:
I think its a really small racist poll being used to demonize a specific group of people and faiths.


The analysis is based on a Pew Research Center survey of 742 American adults conducted April 14-21. It did not include analysis of groups other than white evangelicals, white non-Hispanic Catholics, white mainline Protestants and the religiously unaffiliated, because the sample size was too small. See results of the survey

Now lets see them do the black voodoo one....and see the left say looks like blacks are kooks who support torture.:eek:


(Fuel for the Far Left/Left..who are currently on a campaign to demonize Christianity especially if the practitioners are white. They chicken out hard if there's any kind of color involved-ironicaly Obama is a good example of this.
Hell it even relies on a murky headline. :roll:)

Once upon a time you could read the news and expect more.
 
Last edited:
Believing in God is not the only standard. Nor is going to church. Believing in God is one standard. Others depend on your religion.

So if you don't believe in God you can still be religious? What next? You don't have to believe that Jesus is the son of God and still call yourself a Christian?
 
Once upon a time you could read the news and expect more.


Amen to that, The media is so partisan today. Thank god for the Wall Street Journal, the National Review, and Fox News. Without them we would only ever hear the liberal dribal spewing from the majority of the media which tows the lefts party line.
 
Ah, the Left; those paragons of tolerance and acceptance, love and civility, politically correct terminology and so forth.

Unless you're not Leftist, of course, then its perfectly okay to insult your God, your religion, your politics, your intellect, and anything else.

When people make disparaging remarks at work about Leftist-protected-classes, they get sent to "Sensitivity training". When Leftists make even worse remarks about things dear to the hearts of non-Leftists, they get a pat on the back. Nice.

Funny how most religious people I know are far more polite to atheists, than the reverse.

G.
 
Funny how most religious people I know are far more polite to atheists, than the reverse.

G.

Interesting.
I have witnessed the opposite.
The religious tend to treat them like a pariah
 
Stalin killed what 100 million? you fail.

700,000 in the Great Purges, around 1.5 million deaths in Siberia, up to 1.5 million in the Russian famines, perhaps 4 million in the Ukranian famines; most historians say from 20-30 million, and the highest estimate I found was 60 million, but that was uncommonly high. Most of these fell to famines or cold weather and weren't directly tortured. Twentieth Century Atlas - Death Tolls

Remember that Stalin had fewer than 200 million people under his control, and your number begins to appear ridiculous. I won't use the word "fail", but I certainly could.
 
Last edited:
700,000 in the Great Purges, around 1.5 million deaths in Siberia, up to 1.5 million in the Russian famines, perhaps 4 million in the Ukranian famines; most historians say from 20-30 million, and the highest estimate I found was 60 million, but that was uncommonly high. Twentieth Century Atlas - Death Tolls

Remember that Stalin had fewer than 200 million people under his control, and your number begins to appear ridiculous. I won't use the word "fail", but I certainly could.




you're right, my bad.... but hardley "fail"

even at 30-60 million, will's bigotry and lies are noted.


communism, when you add stalin, pol pot, etc, reaches 100 million. ;)


In sum the communist probably have murdered something like 110,000,000, or near two-thirds of all those killed by all governments, quasi-governments, and guerrillas from 1900 to 1987. Of course, the world total itself it shocking. It is several times the 38,000,000 battle-dead that have been killed in all this century's international and domestic wars. Yet the probable number of murders by the Soviet Union alone--one communist country-- well surpasses this cost of war. And those murders of communist China almost equal it.

MURDER BY COMMUNISM
 
30 Million is still more then the inquisition managed to kill.
 
I think a lot of it has to do with the Christian tendency to embrace torture as an article of faith, as witnessed by the huge success of the movie "Passion of the Christ", which revelled in the supposed torture of Jesus. After seeing what their Savior went through, Christians would consider waterboarding a leisure activity.

I'm not a practicing Christian, but I find this offensive and absurd. Trying to draw a causal effect of religion and views of torture is absurd. I would agree they are correlated, but the causal argument you proposed it ridiculous. Most practicing Christians tend to he Republicans. Republicans tend to have a different view on torture than Democrats.

Imagine how offensive it would be if someone took the issue of abortion and said that gays, blacks, union employees, any group who tend to vote Democrat, and then claim that they support killing babies. Then took it one step further and attempted to justify it through some misconstrued logic. It shows a lot about someone's character when they say things like this.
 
What I find of particular interest is the following part of that article:

CNN on a Pew Research Center survey said:
The religious group most likely to say torture is never justified was Protestant denominations — such as Episcopalians, Lutherans and Presbyterians — categorized as "mainline" Protestants, in contrast to evangelicals. Just over three in 10 of them said torture is never justified.

The reason I find it interesting is because evangelical Christians tend to be regarded by non-Christians and the non-religious as being less tolerant and more cruel than their "mainstream" counterparts.
 
The reason I find it interesting is because evangelical Christians tend to be regarded by non-Christians and the non-religious as being less tolerant and more cruel than their "mainstream" counterparts.

Ah yes, we evangelicals are terribly cruel. It's horrible that we often run Crisis Pregnancy Centers, trying to help young girls with unwanted babies to deal with it without abortions. We are heartless for running soup kitchens and outreach programs and paying for them out of our pockets. Our cruelty knows no bounds when we send missionaries into the Amazon, bringing not only the Bible but medical care and other aid to primitive natives at great personal peril.

Sometimes, we even go around knocking on doors and inviting people to come to church on Sunday...OH THE HORRORS!!!

PUH-leese.

G.
 
Ah yes, we evangelicals are terribly cruel. It's horrible that we often run Crisis Pregnancy Centers, trying to help young girls with unwanted babies to deal with it without abortions. We are heartless for running soup kitchens and outreach programs and paying for them out of our pockets. Our cruelty knows no bounds when we send missionaries into the Amazon, bringing not only the Bible but medical care and other aid to primitive natives at great personal peril.

Sometimes, we even go around knocking on doors and inviting people to come to church on Sunday...OH THE HORRORS!!!

PUH-leese.

G.
Defensive much? Alongside "your" virtuous and noble deeds, there've also been bigoted and hateful things evangelicals have been known to say and do and stand behind in support, or are you implying such simply has never been the case?

Not that I'm saying "you" are all that way, of course, or any way in particular, but I do think it's absurd for you to raise any objections against others' negative impressions of "you" as though "you" were being unfairly maligned, when not only do people have these impressions — flawed in terms of being irrational generalizing as they may be — for a reason but that you are very likely similarly ignorant and prejudiced in a similar way but regarding a different demographic and for similarly based on experiences and hearsay.

It would be rather nice if you stopped charging the homeless in this country to sleep in "your" shelters, though. I can honestly say I don't recall a single instance in which Jesus charged anything for his charity.
 
Last edited:
30 Million is still more then the inquisition managed to kill.

The Jacobins rivaled the inquisition in a few years and it was not the inquisition that did most of the killing, the secular authorities did that. The inquisitions death tolls over centuries in many countries is only in the tens of thousands I think.
 
Last edited:
Whenever you get a group of humans together, the side with the most power/people/authority/money whatever, tends to be the most likely to be assholes.

If you get 100 people, and 51 beleive in X and 49 That believe in Y folks and put them in a room and clearly announce that the minorty is the Y believers...

The X folks are more likely to be jerks.

That's just human nature.

You see it in daily life, you see it in churches. If you get a bunch of holy rollers and toss in an athiest, you can bet the athiest is gonna have a hard time, reverse the situation, and the holy roller will be miserable, and marginalized.


Both sides of the relgion divide have nice, caring good people that won't act like jerks, and they have those who wear their arrogance on their shirts.

I can ignore atheist, I feel sorry for them. When a self proclaimed Christian (of any flavor) starts touting how great they are because they believe, I get annoyed.
 
Back
Top Bottom