Yes (hear me out), "all" Muslims BELIEVE IN terrorism.

Hi

Could you explain what 'condemning' looks like? Is it simply saying "I condemn (insert condemned thing here)"?

 

I could, of course make this easy, but I am having too much fun pretending to be Freedomseeker's theist doppelganger right now! I know these are silly feeble arguments, but I see the addiction.

 

I'll get back to you when the daily CNN headlines scream "BREAKING: Modern Secular Humanists behind most recent terror attacks, Muslims have been unfairly blamed!" Until then, faith takes the blame.

 

You're smarter than that, so hopefully you can do better in the future.

In fact, you're smarter than Jesus and Mohammad, because (unless they hate their followers enough to make them look like fools) if you were in their position you'd have taken the mere 15 seconds that it would have taken to tell your followers that the creationist theory in the book(s) about them is a complete lie, and that "evolution by natural selection of species" is actually the correct way. To keep them from looking like fools who believe that creationism is real.
That's because you are smarter than Jesus/Mohammad/Allah/God. I admire you for that. You fail to see how amazing you are, apparently.

 

I admire your proof-reading abilities. Good catch.
Too bad Jesus wasn't as smart as you or he would have somehow (he's all-powerful and cares about his followers so much, right?) seen to it that the main book about him would be proof-read. An eleven-year-old who wrote a book would be smart enough to do that - but not the lord of the universe....hmmmmmm. But with hundreds and hundreds of contradictions**, etc. in that book, he failed to do that. I admire you more than Jesus.

** http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/by_name.html

 

A refusal to condemn indifference is an endorsement of indifference. You are an apologist for the apparent secular humanist and atheist terror sympathizers hiding deep within these organisations. Do you feel nothing when children are blown into bits of burning flesh, or just not enough to demand answers from the secular humanist and rationalist leadership?

 

I would like to compliment you in turn. But I would be lying if I said you were smarter than most secular humanists or atheists that I know. They would do a hell of a lot better than demanding specific replies, and then labeling opponents that won't provide them. Its not just slimy and crappy behavior it is logically about as primitive and embarrassing a debate tactic as we will see. Opponents do not have a duty to say what you want or accept the label you pin, you have a duty not to pin a label you aren't pretty damn sure you can objectively prove!

 

Quiz:
Was it A or B who boasted "I have been made victorious through terror"?
A. Richard Dawkins
OR
B. Mohammad

 

I don't think I caught your answer. Do you feel nothing when children are blown into bits of burning flesh, or just not enough to demand answers from the secular humanist and rationalist leadership?


Edit. These are the 'debate tactics' you use. They are not clever or hard or tricky. They are really pathetic and irritating and secular humanism deserves better representation than you provide. Try to do better. I am done for now.

 

When you muster the moral courage (I know you can do it) to condemn Jesus/Mohammad for the horrific moral atrocities I call them out for (instead of giving them a pass), then you'll have taken a step towards living on a higher moral plane. I believe in you.

 

rightyo then. I'll stay out of it