Err....

Depends on the family. If they are kind, loving people probably it will make no difference to them. If they are hateful bigots, they will probably disown them.

No idea what the fuck that has to do with anything.

(August 6, 2015 at 12:11 pm)Anima Wrote: I think humanity in general has murderous intent toward other humans.  I would argue this falls under a desire to have control.  In the event that a person feels they are being denied control over their own person or choice the response is to fight.  In the further event that a sustained fight is unlikely to end victoriously the person will endeavor to engage in a succinct fight.  In the event the person does not feel they will come out victorious in a succession of succinct fights they will terminate the opposition upon victory of succinct fight.  This is speaking generally.

Oh, is that how you justify it? I see...well, let me just tell you...no. While it is true that all populations will have a certain percentage of murderously/genocidally violent individuals (in thought and/or action), the fact is that this is not the norm. As far as percentages go, violent crime is down world-wide. The warrior mentality is no longer the norm for average citizens of modern, civilized societies. If you as an individual have murderous intent toward any other humans for any reason, rationalizing it is probably one of the most dangerous and harmful things you could do.

Quote:More specifically it is easily shown that atheism conviction has lead to the death of far more people than religious conviction.  This is readily observable throughout the history of various countries which adopted atheist principles such as but not limited too Communist Russian and China as well as Facist Germany.

Ahem...horse shit. First off, Nazi Germany was expressly Christian. Ten seconds spent with Google will conclusively prove that to anyone who isn't just refusing to see the evidence for what it is. Hitler himself was likely Christian, and the Nazi movement was openly and expressly Christian at Hitler's behest. Lumping Hitler in with atheists is one of the most dishonest tricks in the christian apologetic bag. I'm sure you'll just dangle that little silk bag every Xtian keeps next to his nuts...you know, the one that contains the No True Scotsman fallacy? I'm sure you'll take that out and pet it a few times, but seriously...the Nazis were and still are mostly christians. Get over it.

As for Stalin, he may have been an atheist in terms of deistic belief, but there is some evidence that he believed himself to be a demigod of some kind (as is common with power-obsessed rulers like that), so he may have been a supernaturalist of some order. As for China, Mao created a personality cult centered around himself and used various religious tactics to build and enforce it...starting with "Thou shalt have no other gods before Mao." One could argue that Communist China's war on religion was only tantamount to the agenda of the state religion (aka the Communist Party).

While it would be difficult to argue that religion accounts for most of the violence in the world, it's also not logically sound to conclude that atheism can be blamed for more violence than theism.

Quote:Ha ha.  My favorite resort would be to cure disabilities, defects, and undesirable traits.  But I confess that I am lazy and killing takes a lot of work.  I would much rather prevent and cure and leave it at that.  It is less work in the long run.

Sure it would, buddy. Sure it would...so, do you also want to exterminate atheists? Are they a threat to society?

It's alright, we caught him. He's overplayed his hand, he is toying with us.

No one can be this ridiculous.

Right...?

Right...Anima, under what circumstances would you actually execute a gay person?

I'm actually from the UK, which abolished the death penalty some 50 years ago, (and fully abolished it for High Treason in 1998). Most people are against the death penalty here, and personally I'm vehemently against it under any circumstances - which is an entirely different discussion in its own right.

My point is, no matter how much you bleat and prosetylise about how it's 'only a last resort', the fact remains that in your twisted world view, homosexuals should be considered for extermination, simply for their nature. That to me speaks volumes about your own insecurity. In fact you often find those who call for the death of gays are that way inclined themselves, despise themselves for it and project that self-loathing onto the wider community.

TL;DR - how much do you crave The Sausage, Anima?

(August 6, 2015 at 12:29 pm)Anima Wrote: Are we now going to spend several pages of misrepresentation of what I have said followed by ad hominem attacks?

I understand it.  Fallacious arguments is all you have had from the beginning.  But it really is a waste of time and does nothing more than to detract from the discussion.

(August 6, 2015 at 12:20 pm)Ace Wrote: You guys do know that is discussion that he has been having was based on a hypothetical argument that was set up by others in this board right? "To argue just for fun." . . . .The man is not running for government here, or pushing any form of legislation, calling people to kill, nothing.

His conclusion thus far is the continuation in logical terms of the FAKE ARGUMENT that has been going on this board like some time after the court ruling.

I know, I even posted it.

(August 6, 2015 at 12:31 pm)robvalue Wrote: Err....

Depends on the family. If they are kind, loving people probably it will make no difference to them. If they are hateful bigots, they will probably disown them.

No idea what the fuck that has to do with anything.

It is some post back but it had to so with gay's not hurting anyone. I was asking that when gays come out to their family's do you not think that some are hurt by the news or everyone is happy or no one cares.
that is what it was pertaining to.

(August 6, 2015 at 12:38 pm)Ace Wrote:

(August 6, 2015 at 12:31 pm)robvalue Wrote: Err....

Depends on the family. If they are kind, loving people probably it will make no difference to them. If they are hateful bigots, they will probably disown them.

No idea what the fuck that has to do with anything.

It is some post back but it had to so with gay's not hurting anyone. I was asking that when gays come out to their family's do you not think that some are hurt by the news or everyone is happy or no one cares.
that is what it was pertaining to.

So you're very concerned about bigots' feelings getting hurt because their offspring is gay through no fault of their own, and you want to blame the gay for it? What choice did he have, pretend not to be gay?

Parents could be upset about any aspect of their child. What is so special about being gay that causes you such concern?

This is some desperate reasoning.

[quote='Redbeard The Pink' pid='1015211' dateline='1438878710']
As far as percentages go, violent crime is down world-wide. The warrior mentality is no longer the norm for average citizens of modern, civilized societies.
----
Ummmm   . .What are you talking about ?. . . . . .  You do know that we the civilized nation of America IS AT WAR RIGHT FUCKING NOW ?
There are many inter nations wars occurring and fights between nations are occurring right now. . .

________________________________________________________________-_____________________

[quote='Redbeard The Pink' pid='1015211' dateline='1438878710']
Ahem...horse shit. First off, Nazi Germany was expressly Christian. .

_----
Umm the Nazi's killed Christians also and other Nazi's. And no Facist Germany was very much anti-Christion and even attack and close many church.

Hitler diffidently beloved that he was some demigod of some kind

______________________________________________________________________________________-
[quote='Redbeard The Pink' pid='1015211' dateline='1438878710']
As for Stalin, he may have been an atheist in terms of deistic belief, but there is some evidence that he believed himself to be a demigod of some kind (as is common with power-obsessed rulers like that), so he may have been a supernaturalist of some order. [/color]

----
Yes, but he did  killed alot of religious people and sent them off to prison. All churches were closed and some were even destroyed. One was blown up to make a pool.

__________________________________________________________________________________-

[quote='Redbeard The Pink' pid='1015211' dateline='1438878710']
As for China, Mao created a personality cult centered around himself and used various religious tactics to build and enforce it...starting with "Thou shalt have no other gods before Mao." One could argue that Communist China's war on religion was only tantamount to the agenda of the state religion (aka the Communist Party).

----
Yes and china is still attaching Tibet and the Dalai Lma is still in India, he cant go back home.


[quote='Redbeard The Pink' pid='1015211' dateline='1438878710']
_________________________________________________
While it would be difficult to argue that religion accounts for most of the violence in the world, it's also not logically sound to conclude that atheism can be blamed for more violence than theism. [quote]
_-----
Umm World War II (Germany and Italy mostly) Communism affecting and killed a lot of people my friend. . . Eastern Europe, China, Korea, Vietnam, Latin America, Cuba, Middle East.




[/quote]

Ace, you need to use " " instead of ' ' when surrounding a username. Otherwise your posts just get completely broken.

EDIT: And also end a quote with [/quote], not just [quote]

(August 6, 2015 at 12:31 pm)Redbeard The Pink Wrote:

(August 6, 2015 at 12:11 pm)Anima Wrote: I think humanity in general has murderous intent toward other humans.  I would argue this falls under a desire to have control.  In the event that a person feels they are being denied control over their own person or choice the response is to fight.  In the further event that a sustained fight is unlikely to end victoriously the person will endeavor to engage in a succinct fight.  In the event the person does not feel they will come out victorious in a succession of succinct fights they will terminate the opposition upon victory of succinct fight.  This is speaking generally.

Oh, is that how you justify it? I see...well, let me just tell you...no. While it is true that all populations will have a certain percentage of murderously/genocidally violent individuals (in thought and/or action), the fact is that this is not the norm. As far as percentages go, violent crime is down world-wide. The warrior mentality is no longer the norm for average citizens of modern, civilized societies. If you as an individual have murderous intent toward any other humans for any reason, rationalizing it is probably one of the most dangerous and harmful things you could do.

Ha ha. I do like your statement about violent crime being down. This is in accordance to what I have just said. If they person in question feel there is another way to be victorious in the issue they will engage in a fight which will not involve the killing of the opposition. If not they are likely to resort to a fight which does lead to the killing of people. What do you think a revolution is?

Quote:More specifically it is easily shown that atheism conviction has lead to the death of far more people than religious conviction.  This is readily observable throughout the history of various countries which adopted atheist principles such as but not limited too Communist Russian and China as well as Facist Germany.

Ahem...horse shit. First off, Nazi Germany was expressly Christian. Ten seconds spent with Google will conclusively prove that to anyone who isn't just refusing to see the evidence for what it is. Hitler himself was likely Christian, and the Nazi movement was openly and expressly Christian at Hitler's behest. Lumping Hitler in with atheists is one of the most dishonest tricks in the christian apologetic bag. I'm sure you'll just dangle that little silk bag every Xtian keeps next to his nuts...you know, the one that contains the No True Scotsman fallacy? I'm sure you'll take that out and pet it a few times, but seriously...the Nazis were and still are mostly christians. Get over it.

As for Stalin, he may have been an atheist in terms of deistic belief, but there is some evidence that he believed himself to be a demigod of some kind (as is common with power-obsessed rulers like that), so he may have been a supernaturalist of some order. As for China, Mao created a personality cult centered around himself and used various religious tactics to build and enforce it...starting with "Thou shalt have no other gods before Mao." One could argue that Communist China's war on religion was only tantamount to the agenda of the state religion (aka the Communist Party).

While it would be difficult to argue that religion accounts for most of the violence in the world, it's also not logically sound to conclude that atheism can be blamed for more violence than theism.
[/quote]

Since I do not care to argue this at the moment (and it has been argued at length in another thread) I am willing to accept, at the moment, that theism and atheism do not account for any more or less violence in the world. So moving on.

(August 6, 2015 at 12:31 pm)Redbeard The Pink Wrote:

(August 6, 2015 at 12:11 pm)Anima Wrote: Ha ha.  My favorite resort would be to cure disabilities, defects, and undesirable traits.  But I confess that I am lazy and killing takes a lot of work.  I would much rather prevent and cure and leave it at that.  It is less work in the long run.

Sure it would, buddy. Sure it would...so, do you also want to exterminate atheists? Are they a threat to society?

If theists or atheists were a threat to society that could not be cured, integrated, banished, or contained... then as a last resort they should be exterminated unless their extermination itself is a threat to society. In which case we may argue they should be culled (exterminated to a manageable degree but not entirely).

Needless to say argument would be required to determine if they are a threat to society and the aforementioned steps of curing, integrating, banishing, or containing should be consider before extermination.