You can't live without religion.

And forgotten again the day he realized he could curry favor with the local chieftain by bashing Moog's head in.

 

You're wrong, of course, but since when has that ever stopped you?

Share with us that lesson, oh wise one.

A world in which the victors are allowed to slay innocents and then keep young girls for their own pleasure is a world not guided by a loving and benign Creator. But, you already knew that, didn't you?

 

1) Well, my point still stands, because (a) you haven't found a survey that separates theists from non-theists. (b) you haven't fully refuted my statement.

2) You can't just combine surveys like that. That's not how surveys work. You have to compare the pool of data, and that pool of data may not be the same. If one pool comes from a group of African Americans and another from Saudis, then you're going to get different results.

 

You've just made the best point of the thread. If it's "truth" it never becomes obsolete.

If not - it was never real to begin with.

 

Uhh... Because atheists don't agree on everything... Wouldn't that be unfortunate when you're making a statement on the side of atheists? I mean, if he said that all atheists believe morality is objective, some other atheists would disagree. So, no single atheist can argue with an atheist clearly about that subject.

And not all atheists agree that atheism is a belief.

Precisely. However, there are problems when you have children out of wedlock. You get child fragmentation (one child feeling different than his siblings). My GF, for example, was born from a different biological father than the one who raised her. Although she calls her non-biological father "dad", she feels as though, since she never got to have a relationship with her non-biological father, that perhaps she was just a mistake. Having children out of wedlock causes serious dysfunction among families. Heck, just look at the typical African American family. African Americans are so fragmented, that its difficult for an African American child to grow up out of poverty.

 

By empathy and reason.

Does not compute. Why would it need to be the voice of a higher intelligence for me to listen to it. If a car is about to explode, my instinct to run does me just fine -- no reason to believe that the urge to run comes from a higher, outside intelligence. Why would conscience be different?

 

Ah, you started responding before I corrected my numbers. You can find the corrected version above. My initial numbers were waaaaay too low.

1) Don't need it. 78% percent of the country is Christian, but only 38% of the country says that premarital sex is categorically wrong. At best, that means 40% of the population in the U.S. is Christian but they do not see premarital sex is categorically wrong.

2) Sorry, but Gallup does a pretty good job of getting good samples. It is kinda what they are known for. About 78% of Americans are Christians, but only around 38% of Americans say that premarital sex is categorically wrong. But you and I both know that it isn't hard to find a Christian that's okay with premarital sex, no matter what numbers we use.

If you want other numbers, here's a source saying 60% of Christian say they would have premarital sex: http://www.christianpost.com/news/c...e-of-marriage-says-dating-site-survey-113373/

 

There are problems in all walks of childhood - whether the child is of a single-parent or not. I agree that there are some poverty issues, but that all goes back to not being able to afford a child. There are two-parent families that struggle, and single-parent families that are financially secure. Nothing in religion addresses the fiscal problems, but that's where the real problems lie.

And, being raised by a single parent can also make a child try harder and strive. Look at the President of the United States. His mother raised him alone until he had a non-biological father, much like your GF. It doesn't seem to have harmed his chances at success.

The truth is - religion gives us nothing beneficial that we cannot achieve by ourselves, but it does give us some limiting beliefs that harm us.

 

1) I read this other survey you linked me to. It doesn't review whether or not people think sex before marriage is wrong, however, even so, I'll give this one to you. However, what about children out of wedlock? You haven't addressed this. Because you haven't refuted that, my point still stands.

2) Not all samples are the same. Period. Your 2nd survey was a much better source. Thanks for that.

 

There's a ton of true things out there that were relevant for their time, but are now obsolete (Like the Nintendo Gameboy).

 

You say that an atheist who buys clothes is okay with child labor, but a Christian that has premarital sex isn't okay with premarital sex?

 

never said it was, I said "thiests and athiests both can have religions or none at all"

some can attach a belief system to it, just like some theists do, but not required

 

You can hardly compare a child's handheld video gamer to the words of a supposed Creator. When you do so, you reduce the status of the Creator to the child's toy.

But, more importantly, if you assert that something true, said by a Creator, can fall into "untruth," you thereby cast aspersions on everything said by that Creator.

This is how we can show that evolved society trumps cult-thought.

 

So, what you're saying is that since black people in the United States are too poor to afford children, to not have any? Is this what you're saying?

 

1) This is your opinion. It's not factual.
2) This is also your opinion. Also not factual.
3) Once again, this is your opinion. It is not a fact.

Ah, ok. I apologize then.

 

Why would you say the black people can't afford to have children? That's a pretty freaky statement on your part considering that the person you were replying to in no way mentioned black people.

Your post seems to indicate that you have a negative association with black people.

 

They're rhetorical questions. Questions meant to make you think.

I can see where I erred

 

What's the argument here? I gave you the premarital sex point.

 

I am African American, so when I say "black people", I'm talking about my own race.
Black people are the poorest minority in the country, and they have a high number of children born out of wedlock.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_in_the_United_States#Poverty_and_race.2Fethnicity

Source (Black children born out of wedlock at a rate of 72% of all blacks): http://www.nbcnews.com/id/39993685/...t/blacks-struggle-percent-unwed-mothers-rate/

 

How did you get that out of what I wrote? You brought up black people. I simply said people who cannot afford children should not have them. People. People of all colors.

- - - Updated - - -

Granted - just as it it your opinion that a higher entity exists. Both just opinions.

 

No doubt it seems that way to the historically illiterate.

No need for that just now. For the moment it's sufficient to note that you don't get it.

Alas, the relevance of this to anything I said is a complete mystery.

Not nearly good enough, as empathizing with the egotistically inclined and acting accordingly is to their detriment, and the output of the reasoning process can be utter insanity.

Maybe so; but the child who is closer to the car and unaware of the danger, not so much.

 

Then you have to have known that black people have the highest poverty rate of any race in America, right? They are also the largest minority. This means there's a large number of people in poverty. You're saying these people should not have children because they cannot afford them. I mean, the high number of children born out of wedlock in African American families is staggering. Would you say its because they cannot afford children, and therefore, should not have them?

This is a true statement, however, my belief is based on facts. It's factual that Jesus Christ did rise from the dead, and although there's absolutely no proof that God does exist, the fact that Jesus professed that he was the son of God and that he also rose from the dead to prove it makes his words pretty compelling.

 

Perhaps you don't understand that there are more whites in poverty than there are blacks, number wise. Way to play the race card when you're losing the debate. Good job.I draw the line at ALL who cannot afford to procreate. You're the one trying to make blacks look bad. For shame.

There is no outside, contemporary, factual evidence that Jesus even existed, much less rose from the dead. The only stories are those of a religious nature. And seeing as they had this person walk on water and turn water into wine, I'd say there's a darned good chance the rest of the story is bogus, too.

Hopefully, you know that the Jesus story copied earlier pagan stories of godmen who died for their people, descended into hell and then ascended, triumphing over evil? Did you know that? You do realize that Easter is actually a pagan fertility holiday? Do you realize that the doctrine of transubstantiation (or communion for you non-ecclesiastics), is based on the pagan idea that in order to "recieve" the graces of the dead godman - one had to eat his brain and body? What do you think communion is but the ritualistic expression of that cannibalism....? "Take this bread - a symbol of my body. Take this wine - a symbol of my blood."

You've got a cult there, dude. A pagan cult. If you study Zoroastrianism, you'll find the Essences copied that pagan story for their new messiah.

There is nothing recorded in history - by any of the prominent historians of the time - that mentions Jesus. He didn't exist. You can believe He did - but that's nothing more than magical thinking. Only the religious texts mention Him.

 

No need for that just now. For the moment it's sufficient to note that you don't get it.[/quote]

And it's telling that you "do get it," because "getting it" is indicative of magical thinking.

Yes, to the cretinous and uncultured, I'm sure this would seem a mystery.

 

Again. Religion need play no part it actual survival.
Now if the OP had said that it is man's nature to create and/or believe in the stories surrounding religion, or to create mystical gods, the OP would have an argument.