Fuck This "Xtian Nation" Shit!

[Minimalist]

"Crusades"

On both sides!

[Polaris]

He started the first Baptist church in the United States. It seems someone who you know starts a church likely practices the religion, but I doubt you know enough about American history to know anything about Roger Williams.

Nice. Assumptions, and poorly-placed ones, at that. I would say I expected better, but I'd be lying.

You kind of went for the face value of my reply and didn't bother to spend much more than the most minimal amount of time thinking about it, so let me delve a bit deeper, here.

He studied theology. He studied the practices of the churches all across Europe, and he saw what happens when a church was sponsored by the state; war. Lots and lots of bloody war. Why is that, I wonder? Why is it you can force a nation of people to be educated and literate and nothing happens? No conflict resulting from it? Why is it when you force a nation of people to believe in religion suddenly wars break out?

Mr. Williams was a fairly intelligent individual, but he stopped short of understanding what it was exactly that caused wars to break out because of nationalized religion, namely that ignorance fosters contempt, and contempt breeds conflict, and religion induces ignorance.

He was starting to come to a conclusion many today are starting to realize to be truth; religion is the greatest catalyst and pettiest reason for war...and moreover that religion is little more than opinion. And when you try to force an opinion on someone else who does not share that opinion, conflict will always arise.

So, to summarize: He studied religion, and advocated it not being something that had any place in the affairs of government and vice versa based on his findings and research. He saw what happened when you tried to force religion on people. He also saw Christianity for what has been since damn-near day one: An excuse to grab for power. Though he never came to that latter conclusion.

So where is the part of your post that is rooted in history? Conjecture of that nature is far from academic.

Remember history is not English or philosophy class.

[Waratah]

That's interesting, because the link you provided gives entirely different numbers.

The link I provided was to the ABS AUSSTATS - Aust Govt. Look at table S7.5.

I'm not afraid of being proven wrong but thanks nonetheless for not going into any actual statistical details in your *cough* rebuttal post.

I think it is about time to admit all your mistakes, lies and twisting of data. You have been caught out many times in this thread by me and others.

[Marshmallow]

"you want to use government genocide to get rid of us"

???

If you had to choose between brutal murder and torture at the hand of a 15 year old Myslim and peaceful, gaseous euthanasia by Americans, what would you choose?

[Polaris]

"you want to use government genocide to get rid of us"

???

If you had to choose between brutal murder and torture at the hand of a 15 year old Myslim and peaceful, gaseous euthanasia by Americans, what would you choose?

American genocide has been anything but peaceful.

[Faith No More]

Can there be such a thing as peaceful genocide?

[IATIA]

"Crusades"

On both sides!

True, the church started it and the state finished it, of course with the 'blessings' of the church.

[Creed of Heresy]

You're right. There's nothing academic about adding 1 + 1 and coming up with 2.

Guy studies religion, particularly nationalized religion, and from what he sees of the effects of nationalized religion, pens the idea of separation of church and state. Clearly he came to the conclusion that nationalized religion is a bad thing, and he was right. He understood that forcing someone to believe like you do is simply wrong, regardless whether or not you think you're doing it for the right reasons. He just never touched on something that is rather obvious to anyone with a modern understanding of history; Christianity has been used as an excuse to wage war countless times; OF COURSE war is going to break out if you give it national identity and power. For being a religion of "peace," its history is perhaps the bloodiest of any religion. Even Islam can't lay claim to that! How bad of a system of belief do you have to have where you claim to be a religion of peace yet the religion condemned in modern times for being the most aggressive actually has far fewer counts of atrocities committed in its name than your own??

You can pish-tush that away with claims of misinterpretation all you'd like, of course, and I'm sure you were about to until you got to this point, but that's bullshit because the claim is made that Christianity is the "universal belief," and of course, that the bible is infallible. Neither of these are true, clearly, given how many schisms, divisions, and interpretations of the bible there are; they can't all be right because they are all in contradiction to some extent. I am sure you probably think your interpretations are more valid than these war-mongering brothers in belief in your religion's past were, but really, are they? Or is that just your opinion, unsubstantiated and subject to someone else telling you you are wrong and laying out a vast network of points to show why, points that neither of you will ever reach reconciliation on, thus proving what exactly happens when you have two people who BELIEVE in unsubstantiated claims but coming away with different opinions on what the claims mean?

Oh yes, Mr. Williams had it right, but he just didn't really know why. He thought it was because it was coming from forcing other people to believe. He's right, of course, but more the underlying problem is that even WITHOUT nationalization, religions are going to induce conflict, even if not always physical.

[Polaris]

You're right. There's nothing academic about adding 1 + 1 and coming up with 2.

Guy studies religion, particularly nationalized religion, and from what he sees of the effects of nationalized religion, pens the idea of separation of church and state. Clearly he came to the conclusion that nationalized religion is a bad thing, and he was right. He understood that forcing someone to believe like you do is simply wrong, regardless whether or not you think you're doing it for the right reasons. He just never touched on something that is rather obvious to anyone with a modern understanding of history; Christianity has been used as an excuse to wage war countless times; OF COURSE war is going to break out if you give it national identity and power. For being a religion of "peace," its history is perhaps the bloodiest of any religion. Even Islam can't lay claim to that! How bad of a system of belief do you have to have where you claim to be a religion of peace yet the religion condemned in modern times for being the most aggressive actually has far fewer counts of atrocities committed in its name than your own??

You can pish-tush that away with claims of misinterpretation all you'd like, of course, and I'm sure you were about to until you got to this point, but that's bullshit because the claim is made that Christianity is the "universal belief," and of course, that the bible is infallible. Neither of these are true, clearly, given how many schisms, divisions, and interpretations of the bible there are; they can't all be right because they are all in contradiction to some extent. I am sure you probably think your interpretations are more valid than these war-mongering brothers in belief in your religion's past were, but really, are they? Or is that just your opinion, unsubstantiated and subject to someone else telling you you are wrong and laying out a vast network of points to show why, points that neither of you will ever reach reconciliation on, thus proving what exactly happens when you have two people who BELIEVE in unsubstantiated claims but coming away with different opinions on what the claims mean?

Oh yes, Mr. Williams had it right, but he just didn't really know why. He thought it was because it was coming from forcing other people to believe. He's right, of course, but more the underlying problem is that even WITHOUT nationalization, religions are going to induce conflict, even if not always physical.

Do you always talk out of your ass?

[thesummerqueen]

Now THAT would be a talent. Could you film it for us, Creed?