(May 12, 2016 at 10:27 pm)Love333 Wrote:(May 12, 2016 at 9:47 pm)TheRocketSurgeon Wrote: Did he just paraphrase the Parable of the Good Samaritan, as if we didn't know what it was?!
*BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!*
What makes you so different from the priest or lawyer?
A high status person who is expected to do good walks past the sufferer and does the opposite.
You laugh at this in mockery and yet you say you have an interest in securing justice and fairness in society.
No, genius, I was mocking the fact that you thought we wouldn't recognize an "adapted" version of the Good Samaritan story.
You should have made the hero of the story another race, since that's the "issue" in our time. Samaritans were universally loathed and seen as almost sub-human by the Hebrews, so the point of the story is not only that good deeds were done, but that the person who is doing right is the "sub-human" who knows the Way (as you put it), not the "herrenvolk" (here, the Hebrews) so full of their own racial importance and self-righteous adherence to their Holy Laws that they forgot what it was really all about-- religion is supposed to unite people, not divide them, to cause us to be kinder to one another, not hateful.
By the way, you just (again) restated a major principle of Secular Humanism, as I pointed out to you before. Not all atheists are Secular Humanists, of course, but many of us are. Since you appear not to be aware of what SH represents, I invite you to look it up and listen to the people who actually are SH tell you what it is, not just others.
Short version: We already believe the things you're "teaching" us.
A Christian told me: if you were saved you cant lose your salvation. you're sealed with the Holy Ghost
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
