"Why is it reasonable to believe in prisons, but not in the hell?"

[rado84]

[RozzerusUnrelentus]

from Wikipedia:


This is not a man we should respect. 

You claim you were kicked off Facebook for atheism, but I wonder if it had to do with advocating serious crime.

So, when religiturds kill and burn people alive for not having the same delusions - that's normal. But when people strike back and start burning churches, that's a serious crime? You're seriously messed up, you need professional help.
If we wanna get rid of the religious tyranny, we should burn down ALL religious temples, regardless of the religion and let them become myths. When there's nothing visual left to remind the sheep of their delusions, in 3 generations tops religion will take its rightful place as a mental ilness in psychiatric textbooks, right next to the schizophrenia where it belongs.

You're looking for revenge. Seems like you'd like a universal law change to 'justifiable arson'. I wonder who really needs professional help.

Churches are symbolic, but they also contain a fantastic history of our cultures (the UK is littered with Norman churches, for example), the advancements in architecture to enable the building of the great cathedrals and minsters, often exquisite design and decor (ironically sometimes by atheists).

You can't re-write history, but you can learn from it without trying to destroy it physically.

[Belacqua]

So, when religiturds kill and burn people alive for not having the same delusions - that's normal.

That's not what I said.

If we wanna get rid of the religious tyranny, we should burn down ALL religious temples, regardless of the religion and let them become myths. When there's nothing visual left to remind the sheep of their delusions, in 3 generations tops religion will take its rightful place as a mental ilness in psychiatric textbooks, right next to the schizophrenia where it belongs.

Tyranny is bad. You just want a different kind of tyranny.

But your thinking is normal these days. Every movie and TV show teaches that the person who makes the most effective use of violence is the good guy. It's a very widespread point of view that if you believe something really strongly then violence is OK. So you have learned the mainstream lesson properly, and have become a good sheeple.

---

You can't re-write history, but you can learn from it without trying to destroy it physically.

Obviously there are all kinds of atheists. Atheism is just a conclusion regarding certain metaphysical propositions.

But I think that among anti-religious people there is a larger-than-usual percentage of philistines. People who can't appreciate and don't value what is good in culture.

[rado84]

violence is OK.

It would be violence if you trap the sheep inside the church and then set it on fire. But that's not what I said. I said "burn the churches", I never said "burn the churches along with the sheep". If I'm gonna burn a church, first I'll make sure every dumb sheep has left the church and then set the church on fire.
You think burning churches is wrong but you forget that this is exactly the same thing christian religiturds did to the pagan religions - tore and/or burned down their temples and built christian churches on top of the remains and also killed the pagans. And now, thanks to the very same thing religiturds did to the pagan religions, the pagan gods are nothing but myths. The point of burning all christian symbols (churches included) is to send the 2000-years old zombie in the myths where Zeus is.

[Belacqua]

You think burning churches is wrong but you forget that this is exactly the same thing

I think that two wrongs don't make a right.

The term "violence," by the way, applies to property damage as well as murder. And in a world of increasing ugliness, destroying beautiful things should not be encouraged. 

Are you aiming at a goal in which only true things are believed? Then stamping out the pagan myths was a good thing. They were false, too.

The Christians, according to you, did a good thing by eliminating false beliefs, and now you wish to continue their project of violence by eliminating their beliefs as well. So you are similar to the Christians you despise.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

violence is OK.

It would be violence if you trap the sheep inside the church and then set it on fire. But that's not what I said. I said "burn the churches", I never said "burn the churches along with the sheep". If I'm gonna burn a church, first I'll make sure every dumb sheep has left the church and then set the church on fire.
You think burning churches is wrong but you forget that this is exactly the same thing christian religiturds did to the pagan religions - tore and/or burned down their temples and built christian churches on top of the remains and also killed the pagans. And now, thanks to the very same thing religiturds did to the pagan religions, the pagan gods are nothing but myths. The point of burning all christian symbols (churches included) is to send the 2000-years old zombie in the myths where Zeus is.

Promoting terrorism is against Forum rules, as is misquoting other members.

I suggest you stop doing both.

Boru

[Rahn127]

Rado84,

I would like to hope we've grown a bit more from the ways of our ancestors from a few hundred years ago.
Your way of thinking is like doing surgery with a hammer.

It might be more helpful to engage with people and talk to them about their beliefs and give them time to question why they have the beliefs they have.

Churches are a source of entertainment and a place where people can gather together to meet their neighbors.
Some people take it seriously and some don't.

How about you take a step back and advocate for removing the tax break that churches now enjoy. I think that might be a more constructive use of your time versus what you have been advocating.

[Belacqua]

In the 16th century the Spanish explorers brought back hundreds of artworks from Central America. These went on display in the capitals of Europe, and despite their extreme foreignness, their beauty was recognized and acknowledged by nearly everyone.

Albrecht Durer, one of the greatest draftsmen who ever lived, described the artifacts in a letter and asserted that the men who made them had to be geniuses, of great worth, and not inferior to Europeans. It was an important step forward in the recognition that one's own taste is not necessarily the only possible taste, and that a multi-cultural world is a good thing.

But of course the Mayan and Incan and Aztec gods DO NOT EXIST. And some people thought that it would be wrong to preserve the reminders of these falsehoods. So all the objects were eventually melted down and no visual record of them remains.

Today most people consider this to be a terrible crime. Yet other people would reproduce this crime, on a different set of artifacts.

[FlatAssembler]

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

What is wrong with posting some things in Latin? I think texts (and videos, such as the 

Moderator Notice
link removed

 I recently made) in Latin about atheism are a useful tool against pseudo-intellectuals who won't listen otherwise.

What's wrong with it is that we have a rule against it.
What makes you think a post in a language people don't understand is going to have more impact than a post in a language they DO understand?
Boru