Pastor in US burns Koran, Afghans kill 8 UN workers in protest

[CaptainCrunch]

In my own twisted mind I just have this hilarious vision in my mind of an atheist dying.

All of a sudden he pops into a beautiful place with harps, hot chicks with wings, and all you can eat buffet and free beer.

He turns around and see's a man in a toga with a magnificant beard sitting on a throne. He's wearing a name tag that says "Hello my name is god"

The atheist walks up to him, and looks at the name tag and stammers out

"I don't believe it"

God smiles and says in a Yoda voice

"And that is why you fail . . . now pull gods finger"

[Traditional_Ale]

I got to side with Reggie on this one.

Atheism isn't an ideology. It's a choice to not participate in religious ideology.

I don't think it can be any more simple than that.

[Reggie Dunlop]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

In my own twisted mind I just have this hilarious vision in my mind of an atheist dying.

All of a sudden he pops into a beautiful place with harps, hot chicks with wings, and all you can eat buffet and free beer.

He turns around and see's a man in a toga with a magnificant beard sitting on a throne. He's wearing a name tag that says "Hello my name is god"

The atheist walks up to him, and looks at the name tag and stammers out

"I don't believe it"

God smiles and says in a Yoda voice

"And that is why you fail . . . now pull gods finger"

You're entitled to your delusion since it amuses you so.

[CaptainCrunch]

Boy Reggie . . . you used to be fun

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by blankall

One way (burning a book....well as long as you do it symbolically and not for the purpose of ensuring nooone else can read the content of the book) is a key part of free and democratic society. Murder for religious beliefs is everything a free society should be designed to avoid.

So I would say the two actions sit on very very opposite sides of the spectrum.

Uhhh, thanks?

[blankall]

Originally Posted by The Yen Man

I agree that the severity of what the pastor did (burning a book) vs. what the terrorists did (killing innocent people) are not comparable.

However, I feel the idiot pastor is just as responsible for those deaths because he basically dared the terrorists to do something.

If a psychopath was holding a little girl hostage and told a person if he walked forward, he would kill the little girl, and the person still walked forward daring the psychopath to do it, then I feel that person is just as responsible for her death.

What if the psychopath was saying the one thing you cannot do is exercise a right that every free person has, criticism of religion. A failure to exercise rights is equivalent to negotiating with terrorists. Once you give in, you dramatically and negatively change our society in a way that you can never take back.

If the people who commited these murders are no better than psycopaths holding people hostage, what is the correct action against them? I'm going to tell you this right now, giving in to their ideological demands (that islam should be help above all other ideologies) is not going to discourage anything.

[Thor]

Originally Posted by peter12

I guess I'd ask then, what is the point of atheism other than nihilism? This is such a shallow void of a belief.

Before I respond, what do you define as an atheist, ideologically, spiritually, philosophically and emotionally.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Traditional_Ale

I got to side with Reggie on this one.

Atheism isn't an ideology. It's a choice to not participate in religious ideology.

I don't think it can be any more simple than that.

Except that its a very strict ideology. It is arguably the strictest in that it leaves no room for change. Even religion has room for debate and none purport to know the exact defintion of god or the spirit world...except atheism, which is adament that neither exists without compromise.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop

Science is not a belief system. It is a method for perceiving, gathering, organizing and testing the validity of data.

You describe scientific method.

If you knew enought about science, you would no that nothing can ever be 100% certain. Every principle in science is in some way based on belief. That belief may be based on extensive evidence, but it is belief nonetheless.

[Traditional_Ale]

Originally Posted by blankall

Except that its a very strict ideology. It is arguably the strictest in that it leaves no room for change. Even religion has room for debate and none purport to know the exact defintion of god or the spirit world...except atheism, which is adament that neither exists without compromise.

Sorry if this sounds confusing. Religion exists because people participate in it wether God can be proven real or not. Athiests choose not to participate in Religion (which is real) because they do not believe in God (which cannot be proven).

[Thor]

Originally Posted by blankall

Except that its a very strict ideology. It is arguably the strictest in that it leaves no room for change. Even religion has room for debate and none purport to know the exact defintion of god or the spirit world...except atheism, which is adament that neither exists without compromise.

A baby is an atheist, what is the baby's philosophy?

[NuclearFart]

Originally Posted by blankall

Wrong. Communists attacked other communists who did not give up their religion. It had nothing to do with communism in many cases.

By your logic I could use the people who do X in the name of religion are not truely following the religion argument.

If anyone is using a straw man argument it's you.

OK, its clear your conceptual understanding of a straw man argument is on par with your grasp of atheism vs communism.

[The Yen Man]

Originally Posted by blankall

What if the psychopath was saying the one thing you cannot do is exercise a right that every free person has, criticism of religion. A failure to exercise rights is equivalent to negotiating with terrorists. Once you give in, you dramatically and negatively change our society in a way that you can never take back.

If the people who commited these murders are no better than psycopaths holding people hostage, what is the correct action against them? I'm going to tell you this right now, giving in to their ideological demands (that islam should be help above all other ideologies) is not going to discourage anything.

What the heck would burning a book prove though? That's basically telling all Muslims to go fata themselves and saying "I spit on your religion". Sure he is free to exercise his free will, and that's exactly what he did. But in the end, his action cost some innocent people their lives. I hope this pastor is able to sleep at night, because his stupid action of self righteousness led to the death of 8 people.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Traditional_Ale

Sorry if this sounds confusing. Religion exists because people participate in it wether God can be proven real or not. Athiests choose not to participate in Religion (which is real) because they do not believe in God (which cannot be proven).

It's not confusing at all.

If you were open to the idea of there being a god, then you might have a point. Since you are firm in your belief that there is no god, you have a belief system. You have in your words "chosen to particpate in whether God can be proven real or not". You say not.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Thor

A baby is an atheist, what is the baby's philosophy?

The baby is agnostic. They haven't yet formed their belief systems about whether or not their is a god.

[Traditional_Ale]

Originally Posted by blankall

It's not confusing at all.

If you were open to the idea of there being a god, then you might have a point. Since you are firm in your belief that there is no god, you have a belief system. You have in your words "chosen to particpate in whether God can be proven real or not". You say not.

Don't see where I wrote that...?

And even if I did write what you said I would reply that not choosing to participate in wether God can be proven or not is not an ideology but a choice. I choose not to participate because I have things to do that are much much much more important to me.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by The Yen Man

What the heck would burning a book prove though? That's basically telling all Muslims to go fata themselves and saying "I spit on your religion". Sure he is free to exercise his free will, and that's exactly what he did. But in the end, his action cost some innocent people their lives. I hope this pastor is able to sleep at night, because his stupid action of self righteousness led to the death of 8 people.

It's interesting who you chose to put the blame on here. The people who committed the murders had no free will? Would a court find the pastor guilty of the murders?

Everytime a muslim burns a Western flag or religious text (happens a lot), do I have the right to murder the closest muslim? Is there different standards for people in different parts of the world when it comes to universal human rights?

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by blankall

It's not confusing at all.

If you were open to the idea of there being a god, then you might have a point. Since you are firm in your belief that there is no god, you have a belief system. You have in your words "chosen to particpate in whether God can be proven real or not". You say not.

Yeah, but you believe in the virgin birth, the divine right of the Pope, the resurrection and the whole nine yards. You don't believe in anything else. You aren't open to anything else.

How is that not a more inflexible belief system than simply not believing in something?

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Traditional_Ale

Don't see where I wrote that...?

And even if I did write what you said I would reply that not choosing to participate in wether God can be proven or not is not an ideology but a choice. I choose not to participate because I have things to do that are much much much more important to me.

You admit you have made the choice. You have chosen a belief system.

Once again, if you were agnostic and had not yet made the choice, you would not have an ideology. You have made the choice, you, therefore, do have an ideology.

[The Yen Man]

Originally Posted by blankall

It's interesting who you chose to put the blame on here. The people who committed the murders had no free will? Would a court find the pastor guilty of the murders?

Everytime a muslim burns a Western flag or religious text (happens a lot), do I have the right to murder the closest muslim? Is there different standards for people in different parts of the world when it comes to universal human rights?

I'm saying they're both to blame. The pastor knew full well what his actions were going to lead to, but he chose to do it anyways. And that's why he also has the blood of those people on his hands.