It is only called delusion if you are not religious!

[mauer]

I think we should kill all religious people. Those people are barbarians. No children have ever been killed by crazy rulers, the state, atheist, homosexuals, socialist, anarchist, or any other thing of the sort. I hate religious people cause their people, and none of the afore mentioned people are people. I think that if we want to kill children, it should be because we feel like it, and not because a large group of people claiming to worship a deity feel like it. I want to kill a baby fish right now......brb

[Lt. Killer M]

Originally Posted by mauer

I think we should kill all religious people. Those people are barbarians. No children have ever been killed by crazy rulers, the state, atheist, homosexuals, socialist, anarchist, or any other thing of the sort. I hate religious people cause their people, and none of the afore mentioned people are people. I think that if we want to kill children, it should be because we feel like it, and not because a large group of people claiming to worship a deity feel like it. I want to kill a baby fish right now......brb

This is exactly the kind of reaction that is
a) typical for strongly religious people
b) typical for the Old testament Judeo-Christian God

Why am I not surprised?

[mauer]

Not sure how I offended you, but my apologies none the less. Cheka, your a smart feller, and surely you see that my point is that people are people. People do horrendous things. Under the guise of many different things, of which religion is included. In your opinion, religous people are stupid, low lifes, and on and on. Good for you.

[akots]

Originally Posted by mauer

... People do horrendous things. Under the guise of many different things ...

+1 Don't blame the code, blame the executioner. (Badly translated Russian saying)

[Robi D]

Darkness pretty much somes up my feelings.

Religion is not to blame, it is the people who use it for their own power and greed at the expense and suffering of others. The same can be said about governments as well.

Yes there are 'religions' where they teach people to harm/kill others in the name of the religion. Those should be banned and people following it that commit crimes should not be treated more leniently or as a special case.

[Lt. Killer M]

Originally Posted by mauer

Not sure how I offended you, but my apologies none the less. Cheka, your a smart feller, and surely you see that my point is that people are people. People do horrendous things. Under the guise of many different things, of which religion is included.

I thought you'd see through my taunt! Sorry!

You did not offend me at all, I just pretended not to notice the irony in your post.

In your opinion, religous people are stupid, low lifes, and on and on. Good for you.

Ah, nope. I do not think so, and I am (somewhat) sorry if you got that impression. In fact, I think the problem is not the people, who may (and often do) appear stupid. Rather, the problem is religion, especially organized religion, that uses every trick in the book to make people obedient. And in their obeisance, they do and say stupid things. This is also true for many other things, concept or control, systems of loyalty, etc. Religion is one form of 'cancer of the mind', and in contrast to many other forms it does have its beneficial sides. But as the example here shows, it also opens the door to horrible wrongs. This baby did not die because they did not give him food under the guise of religion, he died because they let him starve because of religion. Because of, btw, a central point of Judeochristian religion.

[mauer]

I don't think that the definition of fasting is forcing someone else not to eat because they don't say amen. Starving someone because they don't say Amen has nothing to do with Christianity. You are too smart to even attempt such an assertion.

[Lt. Killer M]

Originally Posted by mauer

I don't think that the definition of fasting is forcing someone else not to eat because they don't say amen. Starving someone because they don't say Amen has nothing to do with Christianity. You are too smart to even attempt such an assertion.

Oh, it doesn't have any thing at all to do with Christianity? With the superstitious nonsense, encouraged by the catholic church, that demons exist? With the belief furthered and demanded by every Christian church that there is a invisible guy who send part of himself to earth as a man and has to be obeyed and pleased?

If that is so, why did the mother believe the weird nutcase women who claimed that said invisible guy wanted the baby to say 'Amen', and that the fact that the baby did not say 'Amen' was caused by a demon? And that that demon had to be made to go away?

If that is not directly linked to religion, and Christianity in this special case, then I do not know what else is. maybe that funny wood-carved figure mounted on crossed sticks is also not related to religion in general, or Christianity especially?


It is disgusting to see how people defend such a ridiculously stupid notion as organized theistic religion, even when its worst facets rear their ugly heads. We are talking about a typical exorcism here, which is nearly as perfectly religious as things can get.

now, you can argue that Jesus did not intend religion to be like this, and I wholeheartedly agree (both with him and you). But the fact that the BASIC CONCEPTS of religion predispose people to such 'errors' is still true.


Why do thousands of Christian churches claim that they are the only and sole true Christians, and all others aren't? What sort of hubris and arrogant stupidity is this? They have no clue whether Jesus ate roasted babies for dinner or not. There are no historical sources that can be considered anything like neutral, or without a (huge) agenda. And the blind belief in a text that has been proved to be heavily edited and much wrong is just ridiculously dumb. Believe, if you want, but don't blame others for pointing out that this requires switching your brains off an awful lot, and your morals and hearts sometimes.



and, mauer, what is that nonsense about the definition of fasting? Trying to sneak a strawman into the discussion here? Or did you not understand the article I posted, because your belief makes you refuse the provided data? This is not about someone fasting, this is about someone performing a stupid version of exorcism through enforced fasting. Slight differenc,e so you should talk about exorcisms, not about fasting.

[mauer]

You're making this too general. This is a specific event where these people made up these "rules". Forcing someone to fast....aka starving someone....aka a crime....as a form of exorcism? Not Christianity. Their own created form of religion I'll agree to. None the less, call it what you will, and we'll probably still disagree.

[Lt. Killer M]

Originally Posted by mauer

You're making this too general. This is a specific event where these people made up these "rules". Forcing someone to fast....aka starving someone....aka a crime....as a form of exorcism? Not Christianity. Their own created form of religion I'll agree to. None the less, call it what you will, and we'll probably still disagree.

Hm, funny, but can YOU give a definition of Christianity that makes sense?

So far I have never heard one that is not another version of 'I am right, all others wrong', or so general that basically anyone who SAYS he is a follower of Jesus is included. The first kind is useless, the second kind includes the murderers.