(June 2, 2011 at 5:40 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: Actually I said "atheist leaders", and I assure you all three of those nations had them. I don't enjoy your biased statements anymore than you enjoy mine. I am not offended, baffled maybe... :-)
As I have mentioned before, atheism is not what drove them to kill. How absurd of you to twist history to suit your faith. Why do you have to demean other beliefs to get a better handle on your own? Atheists simply do not believe in god. Period. That is fucking it! They don't believe people should run around committing genocide. Your ludicrous arguments suggest that. The worst part is that you only use these arguments because you can't stand for someone to piss on your religion without being able to turn around and say, "Hey, look! You guys did it too." Guess what? There is no "us guys." For fucks sake, the people who murdered in the Inquisitions were Christians. You are a Christian. Those people killed in the name of their god -- your god. I am not Chinese, Cambodian, Soviet, German or fucking communist, so what is your goddamn point? You don't believe in unicorns. Holy shit! Neither did John Wayne Gacy. That means people who don't believe in unicorns are psychotic serial killers and bum touchers! That is what your argument sounds like.
(June 2, 2011 at 5:40 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: Yes, killing thousands of people in holy wars pales in comparison to killing over 100 million of your own citizens. How can you say they were done in the name of Christianity? Where did Jesus say to kill Muslims and take land? It sounds like they were done for personal gain to me. Stop pointing to ancient history and start learning your recent history.
Um, the people who did it said they were doing it for god. They had crosses on their uniforms, horses, swords and other various items. You are refuting the claims of the very people who did it. That is fucking awesome. Oh, and I will point to whatever part of history I want to point to. Tough titty, Stat.
The next bit of your post were a bunch of quotes taken from "answers.com." That is a user generated source that does not need to be backed up by fact. Those are just opinions. In fact, one of your quotes was someone refuting someone else's answer. Scholarly sources will back up your assertion.
(June 2, 2011 at 5:40 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: So you don’t think that regular bombing has lasting effects? Ever heard of unexploded ordnances?
Yes, I have. Have you ever heard of ovarian cancer and sterility? Did you know you can avoid unexploded ordinances by moving or that it is possible to disarm them later? Sometimes, it doesn't work that way, but it can. Have you ever heard of a growing new limbs for a child born limbless? No bombing is okay in civilian areas. However, an atomic bomb is vastly more damaging to the Earth and the people and animals on it. You know this, yet you continue arguing. This isn't Devil's advocate material. Shoot straight or stop wasting my time.
(June 2, 2011 at 5:40 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: What kind of answer was that? “Slavery is wrong because putting people in chains is wrong!” You have done nothing to demonstrate why they are wrong; you have only said that dropping bombs is wrong because killing people is wrong. Why is killing people wrong?
Oh, surprise! My answer wasn't good enough for you. The answer I give is far better than yours. "Because that ancient fucking book says so." I like how you ignored the bit about you pretending to have a monopoly on being good.
