Hello, Anyone interested in a debate?

[Anima]

God of the gaps goes multiverse (can't wait for the Marvel movie about that one)

It will be in 3D (so you know the studio really has faith in it!! <Bah-dump-bump> )

Kant was Nietzsche's shoe shine boy

Nietzche was Hitler's biggest critic. He was pissed Hitler waited so long to start killing Jews and was not killing more! (argumentum ad Hitlerum)

This is a ridiculous argument. Apples and oranges (to say the least).

Sounds like we got a couple of fruits. I wonder if they have somethings in common while still being different?

Bottom line, science works. You confirm aspects of physics every time you turn on the light switch, it's science that's enabling you to communicate via the internet, science cures disease ... religion tells fairy tales. Many may find those fairy tales soothing, but when they get sick they don't run to their priest do they?

Bottom line is reality works. Science is our effort to give explanation to it working. But, surprise, surprise, reality works even if we do not have an explanation for it!!!

HA HA!! Indeed they do. We will ignore that they are likely running to a Catholic Hospital, but it is called the anointing of the sick!!! (It is one of the seven sacraments )

Of course the laws are written by the establishment for the benefit of the establishment, hence, I'd agree with you (although I'm sure we're talking about two very different things).

So the catholic church did the inquisition, and then takes credit for ending the inquisition? Well done catholic church, well done ... Machiavelli would be proud

Actually the Catholic church did not start the inquisitions. Inquisitions were started in various countries by their respective monarchies (after all the establishment does what is in its benefit). Eventually the church entered into the various inquisitions (there is more than one) throughout Europe to put a stop to the witch hunts. Upon entering in the church established the rights you so love such as: The right to have an evidentiary hearing, right to know the charge, the right to face your accuser, the right to trial by jury, the right to an equitable and informed defense (right to an attorney), the right to have a judge recused, and the right to an appeal to name a few.

I think the passage is clearly aimed at subservience to the state ... totally inconsistent with everything else Jesus preached, but conveniently, very consistent with the interests of the ruling power structure that made christianity the official religion of the roman empire.

That would be the official religion with the conversion of Constatine in 313AD (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantine_the_Great). Which is to say after about 300 years of killing christians for fun.

"Constantine was the first emperor to stop Christian persecutions and to legalise Christianity along with all other religions and cults in the Roman Empire." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantin...ous_policy)

I am surprised at you. I thought you would agree with this passage. What it is clearly stating is that one should not use their religion as an excuse to violate the law! Or if you like separation of church and state (which was created by the Catholic Church as a means to protect the State from the Church. As it was common for the Spare of the Heir and the Spare to enter into the clergy. So if you were a prince and a bishop you had to renounce your title as bishop in order to act as prince or king.)

---

"Its to be held as true even when it isn't true. "

-and with thus, you have -completely- abandoned any expectation of my considering your opinions on the matter well reasoned, or you as a reasonable person.

Context matters