Dad links son's suicide to 'The God Delusion'

[Psalm 23]

"Is it possible to feed people without religion"

Yes, it's possible, but take away the thousands of Christian organizations, and what do you have left?

"Christian organisations appeal to christian people for money"

Yes, Christian orgnizations are crying out for help to feed these starvation children.

The answer you were looking for is "yes, it is possible. Oxfam, red cross, etc also advertise and don't need a religious backbone to do it."

You mentioned two, that is wonderful!! Now, do you want me to start mentioning the thousands of Christian organizations that donate more than you could ever image? You don't see my point. I'm not trying to make it a "we give more than you" arguement.

The point is.. Us "delusional" people are helping out just as much as you "normal" people.. so why the criticism?

We are proving we are just as generous as you "normal" people.

Where does delusion come into place? When I look to the sky and say "God please help this planet you have created, and look after those who are in need of help in this time of crisis?" How do you justify calling that a delusion if you cannot disprove it.

So, by this arguement, you are claiming all atheists are normal logical thinking human beings? And the other 90% of the world suffer from a mental disorder that has no scientific credibility behind it?

I don't know about you, but I wouldn't present this arguement to a Atheist Vs. Theist debate session.

Mental disorders and delusions are detected by medical examiners and psychiatrists. So far, no proof God is a delusion.

As a matter of fact, most psychiatrists in the U.S are Christian. Are they plagued with this "horrible delusion?"

What about most U.S Doctors? They claim they are Christian believers. Do you place your trust and blind faith into someone who is delusional behind the knife to save your life? Hmm? It sounds like you are jumping into dangerous waters..

[LukeMC]

Where does delusion come into place?

When you say "there IS a god and he has properties x, y and z". This has nothing to do with your generousity. If you're doing good things because of God, the acts are still good but your ideas about God actually existing are what we refer to as the delusional part.

So, by this arguement, you are claiming all atheists are normal logical thinking human beings? And the other 90% of the world suffer from a mental disorder that has no scientific credibility behind it?

I can't even begin to imagine where you pulled this from. I know some stupid, illogical, ignorant atheists, and the same for religious people. I don't believe atheists are logical. I believe their position on God is pretty logical, but this doesn't reflect their character as a whole.

What about most U.S Doctors? They claim they are Christian believers. Do you place your trust and blind faith into someone who is delusional behind the knife to save your life? Hmm? It sounds like you are jumping into dangerous waters..

Nope, I place no trust in US doctors, I've never been to the states
But even so, I'd place my trust in them because they are probably very logical peple who understand their job thoroughly. They just have one illogical stance in their free time, but this doesn't affect my treatment.

You mentioned two, that is wonderful!! Now, do you want me to start mentioning the thousands of Christian organizations that donate more than you could ever image? You don't see my point. I'm not trying to make it a "we give more than you" arguement.

Nor am I. I was just pointing out that religion isn't necessary for good deeds. Religious charities defintely help, nobody is denying this?

[Edwardo Piet]

So, in reality, who is delusional? I would think if God can be scientifically disproven, then I would believe religious people may suffer from schitzophrenia. But since the God idea cannot be deflated in any manner.. I don't see the reason for insulting religious folk by calling them delusional.

How many times have I told you? And I am yet to hear a satisfactory answer. All I've got is mere pathetic contradiction. "No it isn't on me, the burden on proof is on you. You have to disprove God". What kind of an argument is that? As I have said God doesn't need to be disproved! Why? (I give a reason unlike you) Because there's no evidence of or even structure to "God", TO be disproved in the first place. The burden of proof is on the believer. Why can't God be deflated? because he's already deflated. And he always has been. The whole thing IS - and always has been - just an idea with no evidence to support it. God's already deflated. Because there's nothing to deflate. There's Zero evidence of "God" to be deflated in the first place. He's already deflated.

[Psalm 23]

When you say "there IS a god and he has properties x, y and z". This has nothing to do with your generousity. If you're doing good things because of God, the acts are still good but your ideas about God actually existing are what we refer to as the delusional part.

I claim God exists, you claim he doesn't. There is zero scientfic studies that prove God is a delusion of the mind. Atheists always demand evidence before they can believe in something. So, what's the difference with this arguement compared to many others? Atheists have no evidence that "God is imaginary," so, if there is zero evidence of this statement, then how can atheists put so much faith into something that cannot be explained by any mortal man?

I can't even begin to imagine where you pulled this from. I know some stupid, illogical, ignorant atheists, and the same for religious people. I don't believe atheists are logical. I believe their position on God is pretty logical, but this doesn't reflect their character as a whole.

According to the atheist bible "The God Delusion," the atheistic fearless leader Dawkins claims, "All religions are delusional." If you cannot see he is claiming all atheist are normal, and religous people suffer from delusions, then you better re-read his book.

Nope, I place no trust in US doctors, I've never been to the states. But even so, I'd place my trust in them because they are probably very logical peple who understand their job thoroughly. They just have one illogical stance in their free time, but this doesn't affect my treatment.

Well, it doesn't matter if they understand their job, right? These Doctors believe in God, so therefore, they are delusional and insane. I'm glad you would put your trust into a delusional schitzophrentic to save your life.

Nor am I. I was just pointing out that religion isn't necessary for good deeds. Religious charities defintely help, nobody is denying this?

And I agreed.

[Edwardo Piet]

LMFAO this is hilarious. Dawkins is not an 'atheistic fearless leader' he's a promoter of science and reason who's also a militant atheist. He's been called one of the most if not the most prominent atheist.
Anyway. Saying "all religions are delusional" does not imply that "all atheists are normal". Thats stupid. Because of course you get atheist criminals and lunatics too for example. You get mad, bad and sad atheists too.
The point is that a supernatural belief in a God or gods is delusional. And atheists by definition do not share this (or these) delusion(s).
And on the subject of intelligence for example, Dawkins does NOT say "All atheists are more intelligent than theists". He simply wrote about (in TGD) a huge survey over the span of several years that took place. And the results showed that on average atheists have higher IQs.
Futhermore,
These two:

I claim God exists, you claim he doesn't. There is zero scientfic studies that prove God is a delusion of the mind. Atheists always demand evidence before they can believe in something. So, what's the difference with this arguement compared to many others? Atheists have no evidence that "God is imaginary," so, if there is zero evidence of this statement, then how can atheists put so much faith into something that cannot be explained by any mortal man?

So, in reality, who is delusional? I would think if God can be scientifically disproven, then I would believe religious people may suffer from schitzophrenia. But since the God idea cannot be deflated in any manner.. I don't see the reason for insulting religious folk by calling them delusional.

VS this:
How many times have I told you? And I am yet to hear a satisfactory answer. All I've got is mere pathetic contradiction. "No it isn't on me, the burden on proof is on you. You have to disprove God". What kind of an argument is that? As I have said God doesn't need to be disproved! Why? (I give a reason unlike you) Because there's no evidence of or even structure to "God", TO be disproved in the first place. The burden of proof is on the believer. Why can't God be deflated? because he's already deflated. And he always has been. The whole thing IS - and always has been - just an idea with no evidence to support it. God's already deflated. Because there's nothing to deflate. There's Zero evidence of "God" to be deflated in the first place. He's already deflated.

And if you claim the burden of proof is on either both of us or neither of us. This is of course incorrect. As I have said. Its on the believer.

[LukeMC]

I claim God exists, you claim he doesn't. There is zero scientfic studies that prove God is a delusion of the mind. Atheists always demand evidence before they can believe in something. So, what's the difference with this arguement compared to many others? Atheists have no evidence that "God is imaginary," so, if there is zero evidence of this statement, then how can atheists put so much faith into something that cannot be explained by any mortal man?

You believe in a something without evidence = delusion
I refuse to believe in this being as there is 0 evidence = safe stance
Lack of belief =/= belief

According to the atheist bible "The God Delusion," the atheistic fearless leader Dawkins claims, "All religions are delusional." If you cannot see he is claiming all atheist are normal, and religous people suffer from delusions, then you better re-read his book.

I haven't read his book. I will agree with him however that religious beliefs are pretty delusional (in regards to God). I doubt Mr Dawkins is incinuating that the people who are atheist are logical and the people who are religious are illogical. He's just talkign about the specific belief being garbage (I assume).

Well, it doesn't matter if they understand their job, right? These Doctors believe in God, so therefore, they are delusional and insane. I'm glad you would put your trust into a delusional schitzophrentic to save your life.

They have one delusional belief. One. They don't realise it is delusional, they are probably logical human beings who think they are being logical and would probably trash the idea when presented with evidence and ideas. When we say "religious people are delusional", we only mean "delusional in regards to their belief in the supernatural". We aren't making any implications about the rest of their lives.

[Psalm 23]

How many times have I told you? And I am yet to hear a satisfactory answer. All I've got is mere pathetic contradiction. "No it isn't on me, the burden on proof is on you. You have to disprove God". What kind of an argument is that? As I have said God doesn't need to be disproved! Why? (I give a reason unlike you) Because there's no evidence of or even structure to "God", TO be disproved in the first place. The burden of proof is on the believer. Why can't God be deflated? because he's already deflated. And he always has been. The whole thing IS - and always has been - just an idea with no evidence to support it. God's already deflated. Because there's nothing to deflate. There's Zero evidence of "God" to be deflated in the first place. He's already deflated.

First off, I've said it once, and I will say it as many times as it needs repeating.

The only way anyone can use the, "Lack of Evidence" arguement is unless every option has been explored and examined.

And you know it, and so do I, That is an impossible task to complete.

The lack of evidence arguement has been declined until someone can prove God does not exist in the entire Universe, or beyond. Until the day scientists can say, "Ok, here's the entire Universe, Look, No God." Then you have an arguement.

You made the statement, not me.

All I'm asking is for you to prove your lack of evidence theory.

I'm assuming you have obtained complete knowledge and information about the entire Universe and Beyond?

[LukeMC]

All I'm asking is for you to prove your lack of evidence theory.

I see no evidence. I hear no evidence. I taste no evidence. I smell no evidence. I feel no evidence.

Until I find some evidence, why would I place my belief in something?
There might be evidence, but until we find it we have no reason to believe in God. None.

[Daystar]

All I'm asking is for you to prove your lack of evidence theory.

I see no evidence. I hear no evidence. I taste no evidence. I smell no evidence. I feel no evidence.

Until I find some evidence, why would I place my belief in something?
There might be evidence, but until we find it we have no reason to believe in God. None.

Do you believe in love?

[LukeMC]

All I'm asking is for you to prove your lack of evidence theory.

I see no evidence. I hear no evidence. I taste no evidence. I smell no evidence. I feel no evidence.

Until I find some evidence, why would I place my belief in something?
There might be evidence, but until we find it we have no reason to believe in God. None.

Do you believe in love?

I have no position on the matter.