Do Christians and Muslims Want World Dominion?

tosca1 said:

You don't have any evidence either that that's not the case.
On the other hand, the behaviour of the people running that shelter is more consistent with scam artists with no scruples. They want to project an "image" to visitors. People who visits shelters are usually interested to give financial support or donations.




I've provided one reason to say that it's most likely they're scam artists, while you don't have anything at all to support your assumption they're not.

Click to expand...

It's not most likely......it's just possible.

If you make the claim you must verify it.

:usflag2:

Vox said:

It's not most likely......it's just possible.

If you make the claim you must verify it.

:usflag2:

Click to expand...

You made the assumptive claim. You must verify it.
All I did was simply respond to your claim - along with a reasonable explanation to my response.

Btw, that's the second assumptive claim you made. Your first one crashed, big time - you were trying to pass it off as a fact, which means you haven't really read your article.

So, most definitely you must support your next assumptive claim.

A claim is a claim.

My claim was that you claimed that Christians were victimized.

My claim is is verified by your own words.

However, you have no proof for your claim.

These are the facts.

:usflag2:

tosca1 said:

LOL. Never mind about invisible pink unicorns. or religious bigotry. Never mind parroting what you've read in
anti-God blogs. :lol:
You're not getting it when I say, you raise your own kids to your values.
That's all the point there is.

What you think of religious values are irrelevant to me, and I'm sure what I think of yours, are also irrelevant to you
If you can't even grasp that, how can you discuss this seriously? Really?

Click to expand...

I can't discuss this seriously for a couple of reasons. First of all religion itself cannot be discussed seriously because it is a subjective, abstract fantasy and not a measurable aspect of reality. Secondly, this discussion is bound to go the way of all religious discussions because you refuse to acknowledged that the previous sentence is accurate.

It may not have occurred to you, but there is a lot of irony in people who call their religious opinions "absolute truth" then advocating for an environment where it's impolite to tell another parent the values they teach are wrong. Is it truth or not and can a thousand different versions of "truth" actually be true? You see, atheist parents can discuss their values with the goal of seeing them evolve, based upon new knowledge but religious values are stagnant anachronisms that, if they're ever right, are by accident, like a broken watch is right twice daily.

I think that if you really thought about what is most important to teach children, those values could be expressed as secular values. The idea that children benefit by being threatened with Hell rather than having their human compassion nurtured through rational moral consideration is absurd whether you admit it or not.

All things are not equal, just because the first amendment protects the stupid and the agenda-driven liars along with the rest of us. Children have it hard enough without having to exist in perpetual judgment and inferiority to a figment of their parents' ignorance and weakness.

D_NATURED said:

I can't discuss this seriously for a couple of reasons. First of all religion itself cannot be discussed seriously because it is a subjective, abstract fantasy and not a measurable aspect of reality.

Click to expand...

And yet religion has been discussed seriously for millennia by minds far greater than yours or mine.

nota bene said:

And yet religion has been discussed seriously for millennia by minds far greater than yours or mine.

Click to expand...

Often by people who just didn't know any better. That's why when the religious dig for scientists who were staunchly religious, they often have to go back centuries, when the churches had significant political power and people had to believe or be penalized for being heretics.

Cephus said:

Often by people who just didn't know any better. That's why when the religious dig for scientists who were staunchly religious, they often have to go back centuries, when the churches had significant political power and people had to believe or be penalized for being heretics.

Click to expand...

That's why I said "millennia." You know, back when only the few even knew how to read/write.

nota bene said:

That's why I said "millennia." You know, back when only the few even knew how to read/write.

Click to expand...

But in that case, are they really minds who know more than we do? We certainly know more about science these days than they did.

nota bene said:

And yet religion has been discussed seriously for millennia by minds far greater than yours or mine.

Click to expand...

It has NOT been discussed seriously, it has been murdered and oppressed into existence and importance because it's never been able to stand on its intellectual feet. The actual tenets of religion are not up for discussion except in the mutual pretense of "respect" whereby two different religious groups exchange ideas for which no true respect is warranted or given. Nobody grows from the experience and nobody changes. They merely learn where the walls are built between them and the violence continues as a backdrop to their charade.

If a serious conversation about religion had ever happened, there would have never been a crusade or a suicide vest or a single law against gay marriage. The history of our species would be much different. What we have is not conversation, it is patronizing and insidious in what is intentionally NOT said. It is two pedophiles bragging about their dedication to children. *wink* *wink*

Cephus said:

But in that case, are they really minds who know more than we do? We certainly know more about science these days than they did.

Click to expand...

Science aside, the claim that the minds of olden days were sooo superior to ours is a common conservative fantasy. The truth is, we are better than we have ever been and will hopefully continue to improve, provided we can shake off our reverence for the over rated characters of antiquity. The greatest minds haven't been born yet.

By dragging me into his statement of fake humility, nota bene was insinuating that religious scholarship is legitimate philosophy and not the sad, silly story of a species who tried to imagine itself to death. If Jesus were alive today, he'd be called a transient hippie, not a savior. Muhammad would be in jail.