Silian Rail said:

---

aggievaulter07 said:

---

BAP Enthusiast said:

---

I am of the opinion that adultery should be punishable by a minimum of 1 year in prison for every violation and it should be the only valid reason for divorce. I also think that you should not be allowed to marry at all unless you get a religious marriage. This would ensure all marriages are religious in nature and eliminate those who just want to get married for tax purposes.

if you don't have a religious marriage, why do you even care about faithfulness? You just have a civil union for tax purposes so who cares what your spouse does? Your marriage isn't valid in the eyes of the lord anyway.

In a marriage this is effectively as bad emotionally as milking someone and people grieve in the same way as an actual death. This topic has even been glorified in modern media and Hollywood and our politicians do it all of the time. It's an absolutely corruptive force that has no business in a civilized society.

---

EL OH EL! OP, your hero Trump would have spent many stints in jail for this... You know that...

...right???

---

good gracious man, we've discussed this about 50 times. do any of you go through and read the thread before commenting?

---

BAP never answered if Trump should be in jail. He passed it off saying well Trump was the only choice he had. If he was truly principled he would never be able to support Trump given Trumps history. Support a 3rd party candidate of whatever party yall belong to. Maybe the Pope should be the supreme world leader?

You cant take the stand that BAP has and still think Trump should be President if you are to be consistant.

Silian Rail said:

---

aggievaulter07 said:

---

There are infinite different flavors of 'Christianity' in the US. Which flavor are we choosing?

---

Why do we have to choose a flavor other than the one that has been present since the beginning? Your statement was why Christianity, and I answered because the country has had a uniquely Christian culture from the beginning, now you're trying to ask which Christian flavor we should choose at this point? That doesn't make sense.

---

Because, also like liberals, you have divided yourselves up into groups and proclaim your own group as the one true group to rule them all.

The Banned said:

---

This may be as crazy as the OP wanting jail time for adultery. Bored billionaires advocating for traditional marriage and morals? I would love to see who's doing that. I've got traditional values and would happily quit my career to be bankrolled as a podcaster.

---

follow the money. who's bankrolling the senate campaigns for masters and vance, the darlings of the new right?

and don't make the mistake of believing billionaires care about things like traditional values and morals. they really only care about one-upping each other in their elite power broker competitions.

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

93MarineHorn said:

---

Quote:

---

All of Western Civilization was founded on the back of my church. Like it or not, the values that you hold dear are heavily influenced by Roman and Greek legal and moral philosophy perfected by the Catholic Church.

---

No doubt there is heavy Christian influence in the law, the Constitution and so forth. But those laws and norms don't need to be backed up by a belief in a supreme being for them to be persuasive. I'm getting a chuckle at you piggy-backing on the Catholic church like you and the church are a successful football franchise

---

They do need to backed up by a belief in a supreme being to be persuasive, otherwise there's no reason to adhere to them if it's just some 18th century politico's opinion other than "i like this" and people like all sorts of different things.

---

They need to be backed by belief in a supreme being to be persuasive to you, but there's a whole helluva lot of people who don't need that.

The reason to adhere to them is that such laws and norms are an aggregate of societal opinions on acceptable and expected behavior, and violation of them comes with the threat of societal consequences. No one needs God to tell them killing someone is wrong and you shouldn't do it when no one wants to be killed so everyone agrees that anyone who kills someone else will be punished by everyone else.

Plenty of atheists don't break the law, and, newsflash, it's not because they believe they'll be punished by God.

---

We're not talking about the reasons why they don't break the law; we're talking about the idea of whether or not breaking the law is bad, and where that comes from. They're likely not breaking the law because they fear temporal punishment, but even if there is no stick, where is the carrot?

Why is it wrong to steal? What if someone doesn't have empathy? Unless objective truth exists, then it isn't wrong to steal, it's merely distasteful and not something you would do.

aggievaulter07 said:

---

Adverse Event said:

---

Many religions encourage multiple wives, is thus accounted for, OP?

---

Of course not. He wants the religious beliefs he was randomly born into to control everyone's lives.

OP, you do realize that whatever religion you subscribe to is merely a product of where and when you were born, and who you were born to, right? Like... there's no way you personally, thoroughly evaluated the 999 other religions and came away with the conclusion that THIS is the one true one.

98% Chance you practice whatever religion your parents practiced. Same for them. Same for their parents.

So, you were just randomly born into the "right" religion? And you want that one to control everyone? GTFOH.

---

There are reasons why polygamous marriage was declared illegal and it has nothing to do with religion. It almost always went hand in hand with child abuse and spousal abuse.

Old McDonald said:

---

The Banned said:

---

This may be as crazy as the OP wanting jail time for adultery. Bored billionaires advocating for traditional marriage and morals? I would love to see who's doing that. I've got traditional values and would happily quit my career to be bankrolled as a podcaster.

---

follow the money. who's bankrolling the senate campaigns for masters and vance, the darlings of the new right?

and don't make the mistake of believing billionaires care about things like traditional values and morals. they really only care about one-upping each other in their elite power broker competitions.

---

Oh sure, Peter Thiel has become the boogey man for throwing some money at some social conservatives. Soros has destabilized countries for profit and is a darling of the left. Spare me your ire.

Well Catholicism is the only real form of Christianity, everything else is a false prophecy

Silian Rail said:

---

93MarineHorn said:

---

Quote:

---

They do need to backed up by a belief in a supreme being to be persuasive, otherwise there's no reason to adhere to them if it's just some 18th century politico's opinion other than "i like this" and people like all sorts of different things.

---

No. I don't need to believe in God to know that murder is a horrible act. I don't need to believe in God to adhere to a 25 mph speed limit in a school zone.

---

Explain it; what if someone doesn't believe that murder is a horrible act. What then?

---

What then? Absolutely nothing.

sharpshot said:

---

Well Catholicism is the only real form of Christianity, everything else is a false prophecy

---

I'm Catholic, and a fairly traditional one, and even I wouldn't call it a false prophesy. Heresy yes, prophesy? No

javajaws said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

93MarineHorn said:

---

Quote:

---

They do need to backed up by a belief in a supreme being to be persuasive, otherwise there's no reason to adhere to them if it's just some 18th century politico's opinion other than "i like this" and people like all sorts of different things.

---

No. I don't need to believe in God to know that murder is a horrible act. I don't need to believe in God to adhere to a 25 mph speed limit in a school zone.

---

Explain it; what if someone doesn't believe that murder is a horrible act. What then?

---

What then? Absolutely nothing.

---

Excellent, now we've got a society where it's okay to murder. Sounds like a great place

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

93MarineHorn said:
When logic and reason fail to persuade, yes.

---

Okay, so if my Christofascist Theocracy kills enough people, we've done nothing wrong.

---

Of course not, I give up.

You do need a podcast sir

93MarineHorn said:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

93MarineHorn said:
When logic and reason fail to persuade, yes.

---

Okay, so if my Christofascist Theocracy kills enough people, we've done nothing wrong.

---

Of course not, I give up.

---

Well just tell me what gives you the right to make claims on people's behavior if there are no moral absolutes

Silian Rail said:

---

aggievaulter07 said:

---

There are infinite different flavors of 'Christianity' in the US. Which flavor are we choosing?

---

Why do we have to choose a flavor other than the one that has been present since the beginning? Your statement was why Christianity, and I answered because the country has had a uniquely Christian culture from the beginning, now you're trying to ask which Christian flavor we should choose at this point? That doesn't make sense.

---

Both Protestants and Catholics have been in the US since the beginning, no reason to choose one over the other. The Founding Fathers were composed of both groups. Yeah there have been some conflicts but clearly disparate denominations can come to the same conclusions about moral behavior. You as a Catholic and me as a Baptist for example.

Silian Rail said:

---

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

93MarineHorn said:

---

Quote:

---

All of Western Civilization was founded on the back of my church. Like it or not, the values that you hold dear are heavily influenced by Roman and Greek legal and moral philosophy perfected by the Catholic Church.

---

No doubt there is heavy Christian influence in the law, the Constitution and so forth. But those laws and norms don't need to be backed up by a belief in a supreme being for them to be persuasive. I'm getting a chuckle at you piggy-backing on the Catholic church like you and the church are a successful football franchise

---

They do need to backed up by a belief in a supreme being to be persuasive, otherwise there's no reason to adhere to them if it's just some 18th century politico's opinion other than "i like this" and people like all sorts of different things.

---

They need to be backed by belief in a supreme being to be persuasive to you, but there's a whole helluva lot of people who don't need that.

The reason to adhere to them is that such laws and norms are an aggregate of societal opinions on acceptable and expected behavior, and violation of them comes with the threat of societal consequences. No one needs God to tell them killing someone is wrong and you shouldn't do it when no one wants to be killed so everyone agrees that anyone who kills someone else will be punished by everyone else.

Plenty of atheists don't break the law, and, newsflash, it's not because they believe they'll be punished by God.

---

We're not talking about the reasons why they don't break the law; we're talking about the idea of whether or not breaking the law is bad, and where that comes from. They're likely not breaking the law because they fear temporal punishment, but even if there is no stick, where is the carrot?

Why is it wrong to steal? What if someone doesn't have empathy? Unless objective truth exists, then it isn't wrong to steal, it's merely distasteful and not something you would do.

---

There is no objective truth. Plenty of people have no problem stealing or doing what others consider as, "bad." If there was universal objective truth, we wouldn't have disagreement on good vs bad because, by definition, that truth would be universal and objective. There would be no room for disagreement. What you call objective truth is really just a subjective opinion you're labeling as objective because it comes from religious dogma that you view as unquestionable and therefore objective.

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

93MarineHorn said:

---

Quote:

---

All of Western Civilization was founded on the back of my church. Like it or not, the values that you hold dear are heavily influenced by Roman and Greek legal and moral philosophy perfected by the Catholic Church.

---

No doubt there is heavy Christian influence in the law, the Constitution and so forth. But those laws and norms don't need to be backed up by a belief in a supreme being for them to be persuasive. I'm getting a chuckle at you piggy-backing on the Catholic church like you and the church are a successful football franchise

---

They do need to backed up by a belief in a supreme being to be persuasive, otherwise there's no reason to adhere to them if it's just some 18th century politico's opinion other than "i like this" and people like all sorts of different things.

---

They need to be backed by belief in a supreme being to be persuasive to you, but there's a whole helluva lot of people who don't need that.

The reason to adhere to them is that such laws and norms are an aggregate of societal opinions on acceptable and expected behavior, and violation of them comes with the threat of societal consequences. No one needs God to tell them killing someone is wrong and you shouldn't do it when no one wants to be killed so everyone agrees that anyone who kills someone else will be punished by everyone else.

Plenty of atheists don't break the law, and, newsflash, it's not because they believe they'll be punished by God.

---

We're not talking about the reasons why they don't break the law; we're talking about the idea of whether or not breaking the law is bad, and where that comes from. They're likely not breaking the law because they fear temporal punishment, but even if there is no stick, where is the carrot?

Why is it wrong to steal? What if someone doesn't have empathy? Unless objective truth exists, then it isn't wrong to steal, it's merely distasteful and not something you would do.

---

There is no objective truth. Plenty of people have no problem stealing or doing what others consider as, "bad." If there was universal objective truth, we wouldn't have disagreement on good vs bad because, by definition, that truth would be universal and objective. There would be no room for disagreement. What you call objective truth is really just a subjective opinion you're labeling as objective because it comes from religious dogma that you view as unquestionable and therefore objective.

---

If there is no objective truth then you are saying that child moleststion can be justified because someone somewhere said it okay.

This religion sacrificed kids for their God, clearly this means we cannot say with certainty that it's bad!

Quote:

---

Plenty of atheists don't break the law, and, newsflash, it's not because they believe they'll be punished by God.

---

100%

It doesn't require religion for a society to come to the conclusion that murder doesn't benefit the society. Harming each other doesn't benefit the society. Theft doesn't benefit the society. Lying doesn't benefit the society. Parents raising children together DOES benefit the society. Treating others like you would want to be treated DOES benefit the society. Respecting other people's space/property/person DOES benefit the society.

These understandings are so obvious to an intelligent social society that religion is not required.

Ironically, my realization that religion is absolutely whacko has made me MORE empathetic towards people less lucky than me. It has also made me value my one shot at life, and others' one shot at life on earth more, too.

Silian Rail said:

---

javajaws said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

93MarineHorn said:

---

Quote:

---

They do need to backed up by a belief in a supreme being to be persuasive, otherwise there's no reason to adhere to them if it's just some 18th century politico's opinion other than "i like this" and people like all sorts of different things.

---

No. I don't need to believe in God to know that murder is a horrible act. I don't need to believe in God to adhere to a 25 mph speed limit in a school zone.

---

Explain it; what if someone doesn't believe that murder is a horrible act. What then?

---

What then? Absolutely nothing.

---

Excellent, now we've got a society where it's okay to murder. Sounds like a great place

---

See - you try to argue just like a liberal. It's pretty funny actually.

I don't believe it's wrong to own an SBR (short barreled rifle) without paying $200 to the government. Yet I don't. Why?


Hint: It's the same reason someone might not murder someone even if they morally think murder is ok.

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

93MarineHorn said:

---

Quote:

---

All of Western Civilization was founded on the back of my church. Like it or not, the values that you hold dear are heavily influenced by Roman and Greek legal and moral philosophy perfected by the Catholic Church.

---

No doubt there is heavy Christian influence in the law, the Constitution and so forth. But those laws and norms don't need to be backed up by a belief in a supreme being for them to be persuasive. I'm getting a chuckle at you piggy-backing on the Catholic church like you and the church are a successful football franchise

---

They do need to backed up by a belief in a supreme being to be persuasive, otherwise there's no reason to adhere to them if it's just some 18th century politico's opinion other than "i like this" and people like all sorts of different things.

---

They need to be backed by belief in a supreme being to be persuasive to you, but there's a whole helluva lot of people who don't need that.

The reason to adhere to them is that such laws and norms are an aggregate of societal opinions on acceptable and expected behavior, and violation of them comes with the threat of societal consequences. No one needs God to tell them killing someone is wrong and you shouldn't do it when no one wants to be killed so everyone agrees that anyone who kills someone else will be punished by everyone else.

Plenty of atheists don't break the law, and, newsflash, it's not because they believe they'll be punished by God.

---

We're not talking about the reasons why they don't break the law; we're talking about the idea of whether or not breaking the law is bad, and where that comes from. They're likely not breaking the law because they fear temporal punishment, but even if there is no stick, where is the carrot?

Why is it wrong to steal? What if someone doesn't have empathy? Unless objective truth exists, then it isn't wrong to steal, it's merely distasteful and not something you would do.

---

There is no objective truth. Plenty of people have no problem stealing or doing what others consider as, "bad." If there was universal objective truth, we wouldn't have disagreement on good vs bad because, by definition, that truth would be universal and objective. There would be no room for disagreement. What you call objective truth is really just a subjective opinion you're labeling as objective because it comes from religious dogma that you view as unquestionable and therefore objective.

---

Again, you're missing the point. Why should people have a problem stealing if it's not inherently wrong? That's the entire point; without objective morality (it doesn't even have to be 'correct' it just has to have justification over and above itself) you can't say anything is wrong, which means at best, you have to use coercive force against people to bend them to your personal preferences.

Even a person who believes in a Flying Spaghetti monster can use that belief as a claim against someone, which is the entire basis of law.

BAP Enthusiast said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

aggievaulter07 said:

---

There are infinite different flavors of 'Christianity' in the US. Which flavor are we choosing?

---

Why do we have to choose a flavor other than the one that has been present since the beginning? Your statement was why Christianity, and I answered because the country has had a uniquely Christian culture from the beginning, now you're trying to ask which Christian flavor we should choose at this point? That doesn't make sense.

---

Both Protestants and Catholics have been in the US since the beginning, no reason to choose one over the other. The Founding Fathers were composed of both groups. Yeah there have been some conflicts but clearly disparate denominations can come to the same conclusions about moral behavior. You as a Catholic and me as a Baptist for example.

---

So I guess anyone who is Jewish, Hindu, Muslim, Mormon (obviously), agnostic or atheist isn't a Real American and just a second-class citizen?

sharpshot said:

---

Well Catholicism is the only real form of Christianity, everything else is a false prophecy

---

javajaws said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

javajaws said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

93MarineHorn said:

---

Quote:

---

They do need to backed up by a belief in a supreme being to be persuasive, otherwise there's no reason to adhere to them if it's just some 18th century politico's opinion other than "i like this" and people like all sorts of different things.

---

No. I don't need to believe in God to know that murder is a horrible act. I don't need to believe in God to adhere to a 25 mph speed limit in a school zone.

---

Explain it; what if someone doesn't believe that murder is a horrible act. What then?

---

What then? Absolutely nothing.

---

Excellent, now we've got a society where it's okay to murder. Sounds like a great place

---

See - you try to argue just like a liberal. It's pretty funny actually.

I don't believe it's wrong to own an SBR (short barreled rifle) without paying $200 to the government. Yet I don't. Why?


Hint: It's the same reason someone might not murder someone even if they morally think murder is ok.

---

Yes, that's the 'temporal punishment' I referenced earlier. What is scary is that the scenario changes if you don't have any risk associated with the behavior. For a person who only behaves a certain way out of fear of getting caught, they would see no problem with murdering someone in a situation where they felt comfortable that they wouldn't get caught.

torrid said:

---

BAP Enthusiast said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

aggievaulter07 said:

---

There are infinite different flavors of 'Christianity' in the US. Which flavor are we choosing?

---

Why do we have to choose a flavor other than the one that has been present since the beginning? Your statement was why Christianity, and I answered because the country has had a uniquely Christian culture from the beginning, now you're trying to ask which Christian flavor we should choose at this point? That doesn't make sense.

---

Both Protestants and Catholics have been in the US since the beginning, no reason to choose one over the other. The Founding Fathers were composed of both groups. Yeah there have been some conflicts but clearly disparate denominations can come to the same conclusions about moral behavior. You as a Catholic and me as a Baptist for example.

---

So I guess anyone who is Jewish, Hindu, Muslim, Mormon (obviously), agnostic or atheist isn't a Real American and just a second-class citizen?

---

I already addressed this earlier in the thread. This is why I said religious marriage. The only one that I don't think should be allowed is polygamous marriage because of the other issues it brings.

aggievaulter07 said:

---

Quote:

---

Plenty of atheists don't break the law, and, newsflash, it's not because they believe they'll be punished by God.

---

100%

It doesn't require religion for a society to come to the conclusion that murder doesn't benefit the society. Harming each other doesn't benefit the society. Theft doesn't benefit the society. Lying doesn't benefit the society. Parents raising children together DOES benefit the society. Treating others like you would want to be treated DOES benefit the society. Respecting other people's space/property/person DOES benefit the society.

These understandings are so obvious to an intelligent social society that religion is not required.

Ironically, my realization that religion is absolutely whacko has made me MORE empathetic towards people less lucky than me. It has also made me value my one shot at life, and others' one shot at life on earth more, too.

---

All you're getting to is might makes right again. What if society determines that murder does benefit society, like a program of eugenics, euthanasia or post-birth abortion? What if society determines that those pesky XYZ are actually subhuman and need to be ethnic cleansed? You agree?

Seems like a good place for this song.

Silian Rail said:

---

javajaws said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

javajaws said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

93MarineHorn said:

---

Quote:

---

They do need to backed up by a belief in a supreme being to be persuasive, otherwise there's no reason to adhere to them if it's just some 18th century politico's opinion other than "i like this" and people like all sorts of different things.

---

No. I don't need to believe in God to know that murder is a horrible act. I don't need to believe in God to adhere to a 25 mph speed limit in a school zone.

---

Explain it; what if someone doesn't believe that murder is a horrible act. What then?

---

What then? Absolutely nothing.

---

Excellent, now we've got a society where it's okay to murder. Sounds like a great place

---

See - you try to argue just like a liberal. It's pretty funny actually.

I don't believe it's wrong to own an SBR (short barreled rifle) without paying $200 to the government. Yet I don't. Why?


Hint: It's the same reason someone might not murder someone even if they morally think murder is ok.

---

Yes, that's the 'temporal punishment' I referenced earlier. What is scary is that the scenario changes if you don't have any risk associated with the behavior. For a person who only behaves a certain way out of fear of getting caught, they would see no problem with murdering someone in a situation where they felt comfortable that they wouldn't get caught.

---

Congrats, I think you have just realized you are beholden to the beliefs of your religion as well as the laws of the government you live under. Did you really have a point or did you just like making nonsense arguments?

javajaws said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

javajaws said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

javajaws said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

93MarineHorn said:

---

Quote:

---

They do need to backed up by a belief in a supreme being to be persuasive, otherwise there's no reason to adhere to them if it's just some 18th century politico's opinion other than "i like this" and people like all sorts of different things.

---

No. I don't need to believe in God to know that murder is a horrible act. I don't need to believe in God to adhere to a 25 mph speed limit in a school zone.

---

Explain it; what if someone doesn't believe that murder is a horrible act. What then?

---

What then? Absolutely nothing.

---

Excellent, now we've got a society where it's okay to murder. Sounds like a great place

---

See - you try to argue just like a liberal. It's pretty funny actually.

I don't believe it's wrong to own an SBR (short barreled rifle) without paying $200 to the government. Yet I don't. Why?


Hint: It's the same reason someone might not murder someone even if they morally think murder is ok.

---

Yes, that's the 'temporal punishment' I referenced earlier. What is scary is that the scenario changes if you don't have any risk associated with the behavior. For a person who only behaves a certain way out of fear of getting caught, they would see no problem with murdering someone in a situation where they felt comfortable that they wouldn't get caught.

---

Congrats, I think you have just realized you are beholden to the beliefs of your religion as well as the laws of the government you live under. Did you really have a point or did you just like making nonsense arguments?

---

And if you have no religion, you're just beholden to the laws of the government you're under and can do whatever you want to as long as you might not get caught.

Quote:

---

So I guess anyone who is Jewish, Hindu, Muslim, Mormon (obviously), agnostic or atheist isn't a Real American and just a second-class citizen?

---

ALL of these religions (including christianity) are whack, btw. And the vast VAST majority of people that believe in them only believe in them because they were born into them, and know nothing different.

Religions are regional, and to some degree, time period specific, and most of them think they are the exclusive set of beliefs that, if followed, will reward you in the afterlife, and everyone else will suffer in the afterlife. That understanding alone should tell you they're all BS.

At some point, all of humanity will eventually, correctly, reject these 'gods' just like we all currently reject Zeus and Achilles, Poseidon, Helios, etc, etc, etc,.

All religions were created in an attempt to understand the world around us while we were too scientifically ignorant, and all were eventually seized upon as opportunities to control people, and extract resources from people.

Hopefully, eventually, the human race will grow out of this phase.

Silian Rail said:

---

javajaws said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

javajaws said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

javajaws said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

93MarineHorn said:

---

Quote:

---

They do need to backed up by a belief in a supreme being to be persuasive, otherwise there's no reason to adhere to them if it's just some 18th century politico's opinion other than "i like this" and people like all sorts of different things.

---

No. I don't need to believe in God to know that murder is a horrible act. I don't need to believe in God to adhere to a 25 mph speed limit in a school zone.

---

Explain it; what if someone doesn't believe that murder is a horrible act. What then?

---

What then? Absolutely nothing.

---

Excellent, now we've got a society where it's okay to murder. Sounds like a great place

---

See - you try to argue just like a liberal. It's pretty funny actually.

I don't believe it's wrong to own an SBR (short barreled rifle) without paying $200 to the government. Yet I don't. Why?


Hint: It's the same reason someone might not murder someone even if they morally think murder is ok.

---

Yes, that's the 'temporal punishment' I referenced earlier. What is scary is that the scenario changes if you don't have any risk associated with the behavior. For a person who only behaves a certain way out of fear of getting caught, they would see no problem with murdering someone in a situation where they felt comfortable that they wouldn't get caught.

---

Congrats, I think you have just realized you are beholden to the beliefs of your religion as well as the laws of the government you live under. Did you really have a point or did you just like making nonsense arguments?

---

And if you have no religion, you're just beholden to the laws of the government you're under and can do whatever you want to as long as you might not get caught.

---

Sorry, I should have said "religion or your own moral compass" in addition to the laws...

Because really - YOU assume somebody that isn't religious has NO moral compass whatsoever. And that just isn't true. There are plenty of people (despite whatever government laws may or may not exist) that don't believe in god that believe murder is wrong (and adultery is wrong, etc). Some of those people may even believe gay marriage is fine - even some Christians believe that lol.

aggievaulter07 said:

---

Quote:

---

So I guess anyone who is Jewish, Hindu, Muslim, Mormon (obviously), agnostic or atheist isn't a Real American and just a second-class citizen?

---

ALL of these religions (including christianity) are whack, btw. And the vast VAST majority of people that believe in them only believe in them because they were born into them, and know nothing different.

Religions are regional, and to some degree, time period specific, and most of them think they are the exclusive set of beliefs that, if followed, will reward you in the afterlife, and everyone else will suffer in the afterlife. That understanding alone should tell you they're all BS.

At some point, all of humanity will eventually, correctly, reject these 'gods' just like we all currently reject Zeus and Achilles, Poseidon, Helios, etc, etc, etc,.

All religions were created in an attempt to understand the world around us while we were too ignorant scientifically, and all were eventually seized upon as opportunities to control people, and extract resources from people.

Hopefully, eventually, the human race will grow out of this phase.

---

Amen brother!

javajaws said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

javajaws said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

javajaws said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

javajaws said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

93MarineHorn said:

---

Quote:

---

They do need to backed up by a belief in a supreme being to be persuasive, otherwise there's no reason to adhere to them if it's just some 18th century politico's opinion other than "i like this" and people like all sorts of different things.

---

No. I don't need to believe in God to know that murder is a horrible act. I don't need to believe in God to adhere to a 25 mph speed limit in a school zone.

---

Explain it; what if someone doesn't believe that murder is a horrible act. What then?

---

What then? Absolutely nothing.

---

Excellent, now we've got a society where it's okay to murder. Sounds like a great place

---

See - you try to argue just like a liberal. It's pretty funny actually.

I don't believe it's wrong to own an SBR (short barreled rifle) without paying $200 to the government. Yet I don't. Why?


Hint: It's the same reason someone might not murder someone even if they morally think murder is ok.

---

Yes, that's the 'temporal punishment' I referenced earlier. What is scary is that the scenario changes if you don't have any risk associated with the behavior. For a person who only behaves a certain way out of fear of getting caught, they would see no problem with murdering someone in a situation where they felt comfortable that they wouldn't get caught.

---

Congrats, I think you have just realized you are beholden to the beliefs of your religion as well as the laws of the government you live under. Did you really have a point or did you just like making nonsense arguments?

---

And if you have no religion, you're just beholden to the laws of the government you're under and can do whatever you want to as long as you might not get caught.

---

Sorry, I should have said "religion or your own moral compass" in addition to the laws...

Because really - YOU assume somebody that isn't religious has NO moral compass whatsoever. And that just isn't true. There are plenty of people (despite whatever government laws may or may not exist) that don't believe in god that believe murder is wrong (and adultery is wrong, etc). Some of those people may even believe gay marriage is fine - even some Christians believe that lol.

---

When is the last time someone committed a crime, any crime, publicly in the name of Atheism? Or even at least where their atheism was an obvious driving factor in the commission of the crime? Any atheistic mass shooters? Any atheistic terrorists? Any atheistic bombers? Any atheistic insurrectionists? Any of them that any of you guys might be able to dig deep and come up with will be the exception, not the rule.

I'll hang up and listen.

javajaws said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

javajaws said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

javajaws said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

javajaws said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

93MarineHorn said:

---

Quote:

---

They do need to backed up by a belief in a supreme being to be persuasive, otherwise there's no reason to adhere to them if it's just some 18th century politico's opinion other than "i like this" and people like all sorts of different things.

---

No. I don't need to believe in God to know that murder is a horrible act. I don't need to believe in God to adhere to a 25 mph speed limit in a school zone.

---

Explain it; what if someone doesn't believe that murder is a horrible act. What then?

---

What then? Absolutely nothing.

---

Excellent, now we've got a society where it's okay to murder. Sounds like a great place

---

See - you try to argue just like a liberal. It's pretty funny actually.

I don't believe it's wrong to own an SBR (short barreled rifle) without paying $200 to the government. Yet I don't. Why?


Hint: It's the same reason someone might not murder someone even if they morally think murder is ok.

---

Yes, that's the 'temporal punishment' I referenced earlier. What is scary is that the scenario changes if you don't have any risk associated with the behavior. For a person who only behaves a certain way out of fear of getting caught, they would see no problem with murdering someone in a situation where they felt comfortable that they wouldn't get caught.

---

Congrats, I think you have just realized you are beholden to the beliefs of your religion as well as the laws of the government you live under. Did you really have a point or did you just like making nonsense arguments?

---

And if you have no religion, you're just beholden to the laws of the government you're under and can do whatever you want to as long as you might not get caught.

---

Sorry, I should have said "religion or your own moral compass" in addition to the laws...

Because really - YOU assume somebody that isn't religious has NO moral compass whatsoever. And that just isn't true. There are plenty of people (despite whatever government laws may or may not exist) that don't believe in god that believe murder is wrong (and adultery is wrong, etc). Some of those people may even believe gay marriage is fine - even some Christians believe that lol.

---

I don't assume that, but to play with the compass analogy, what is their compass pegged to? The only reason a compass works is because of the magnetism of the poles. What is their magnetism?

aggievaulter07 said:

---

javajaws said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

javajaws said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

javajaws said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

javajaws said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

93MarineHorn said:

---

Quote:

---

They do need to backed up by a belief in a supreme being to be persuasive, otherwise there's no reason to adhere to them if it's just some 18th century politico's opinion other than "i like this" and people like all sorts of different things.

---

No. I don't need to believe in God to know that murder is a horrible act. I don't need to believe in God to adhere to a 25 mph speed limit in a school zone.

---

Explain it; what if someone doesn't believe that murder is a horrible act. What then?

---

What then? Absolutely nothing.

---

Excellent, now we've got a society where it's okay to murder. Sounds like a great place

---

See - you try to argue just like a liberal. It's pretty funny actually.

I don't believe it's wrong to own an SBR (short barreled rifle) without paying $200 to the government. Yet I don't. Why?


Hint: It's the same reason someone might not murder someone even if they morally think murder is ok.

---

Yes, that's the 'temporal punishment' I referenced earlier. What is scary is that the scenario changes if you don't have any risk associated with the behavior. For a person who only behaves a certain way out of fear of getting caught, they would see no problem with murdering someone in a situation where they felt comfortable that they wouldn't get caught.

---

Congrats, I think you have just realized you are beholden to the beliefs of your religion as well as the laws of the government you live under. Did you really have a point or did you just like making nonsense arguments?

---

And if you have no religion, you're just beholden to the laws of the government you're under and can do whatever you want to as long as you might not get caught.

---

Sorry, I should have said "religion or your own moral compass" in addition to the laws...

Because really - YOU assume somebody that isn't religious has NO moral compass whatsoever. And that just isn't true. There are plenty of people (despite whatever government laws may or may not exist) that don't believe in god that believe murder is wrong (and adultery is wrong, etc). Some of those people may even believe gay marriage is fine - even some Christians believe that lol.

---

When is the last time someone committed a crime, any crime, publicly in the name of Atheism? Or even at least where their atheism was an obvious driving factor in the commission of the crime? Any atheistic mass shooters? Any atheistic terrorists? Any atheistic bombers? Any atheistic insurrectionists? Any of them that any of you guys might be able to dig deep and come up with will be the exception, not the rule.

I'll hang up and listen.

---

Uh yes, I'll introduce you to the communist party who disavowed God, killed millions of people and destroyed churches. You also might have noticed the recent attacks against Catholic Churches and day care centers by Antifa who in light of the Roe V Wade rule, are blaming Catholics for women not being able to kill their kids in some states.

It was officially called "Marx-Leninist Atheism" and it was the official ideology of the Soviet Union.

Silian Rail said:

---

aggievaulter07 said:

---

javajaws said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

javajaws said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

javajaws said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

javajaws said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

93MarineHorn said:

---

Quote:

---

They do need to backed up by a belief in a supreme being to be persuasive, otherwise there's no reason to adhere to them if it's just some 18th century politico's opinion other than "i like this" and people like all sorts of different things.

---

No. I don't need to believe in God to know that murder is a horrible act. I don't need to believe in God to adhere to a 25 mph speed limit in a school zone.

---

Explain it; what if someone doesn't believe that murder is a horrible act. What then?

---

What then? Absolutely nothing.

---

Excellent, now we've got a society where it's okay to murder. Sounds like a great place

---

See - you try to argue just like a liberal. It's pretty funny actually.

I don't believe it's wrong to own an SBR (short barreled rifle) without paying $200 to the government. Yet I don't. Why?


Hint: It's the same reason someone might not murder someone even if they morally think murder is ok.

---

Yes, that's the 'temporal punishment' I referenced earlier. What is scary is that the scenario changes if you don't have any risk associated with the behavior. For a person who only behaves a certain way out of fear of getting caught, they would see no problem with murdering someone in a situation where they felt comfortable that they wouldn't get caught.

---

Congrats, I think you have just realized you are beholden to the beliefs of your religion as well as the laws of the government you live under. Did you really have a point or did you just like making nonsense arguments?

---

And if you have no religion, you're just beholden to the laws of the government you're under and can do whatever you want to as long as you might not get caught.

---

Sorry, I should have said "religion or your own moral compass" in addition to the laws...

Because really - YOU assume somebody that isn't religious has NO moral compass whatsoever. And that just isn't true. There are plenty of people (despite whatever government laws may or may not exist) that don't believe in god that believe murder is wrong (and adultery is wrong, etc). Some of those people may even believe gay marriage is fine - even some Christians believe that lol.

---

When is the last time someone committed a crime, any crime, publicly in the name of Atheism? Or even at least where their atheism was an obvious driving factor in the commission of the crime? Any atheistic mass shooters? Any atheistic terrorists? Any atheistic bombers? Any atheistic insurrectionists? Any of them that any of you guys might be able to dig deep and come up with will be the exception, not the rule.

I'll hang up and listen.

---

Uh yes, I'll introduce you to the communist party who disavowed God, killed millions of people and destroyed churches. You also might have noticed the recent attacks against Catholic Churches and day care centers by Antifa who in light of the Roe V Wade rule, are blaming Catholics for women not being able to kill their kids in some states.

---

That wasn't in the name of atheism… Putin is essentially doing the same thing now with the blessing of the Russian Orthodox Church.

Manhattan said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

aggievaulter07 said:

---

javajaws said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

javajaws said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

javajaws said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

javajaws said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

93MarineHorn said:

---

Quote:

---

They do need to backed up by a belief in a supreme being to be persuasive, otherwise there's no reason to adhere to them if it's just some 18th century politico's opinion other than "i like this" and people like all sorts of different things.

---

No. I don't need to believe in God to know that murder is a horrible act. I don't need to believe in God to adhere to a 25 mph speed limit in a school zone.

---

Explain it; what if someone doesn't believe that murder is a horrible act. What then?

---

What then? Absolutely nothing.

---

Excellent, now we've got a society where it's okay to murder. Sounds like a great place

---

See - you try to argue just like a liberal. It's pretty funny actually.

I don't believe it's wrong to own an SBR (short barreled rifle) without paying $200 to the government. Yet I don't. Why?


Hint: It's the same reason someone might not murder someone even if they morally think murder is ok.

---

Yes, that's the 'temporal punishment' I referenced earlier. What is scary is that the scenario changes if you don't have any risk associated with the behavior. For a person who only behaves a certain way out of fear of getting caught, they would see no problem with murdering someone in a situation where they felt comfortable that they wouldn't get caught.

---

Congrats, I think you have just realized you are beholden to the beliefs of your religion as well as the laws of the government you live under. Did you really have a point or did you just like making nonsense arguments?

---

And if you have no religion, you're just beholden to the laws of the government you're under and can do whatever you want to as long as you might not get caught.

---

Sorry, I should have said "religion or your own moral compass" in addition to the laws...

Because really - YOU assume somebody that isn't religious has NO moral compass whatsoever. And that just isn't true. There are plenty of people (despite whatever government laws may or may not exist) that don't believe in god that believe murder is wrong (and adultery is wrong, etc). Some of those people may even believe gay marriage is fine - even some Christians believe that lol.

---

When is the last time someone committed a crime, any crime, publicly in the name of Atheism? Or even at least where their atheism was an obvious driving factor in the commission of the crime? Any atheistic mass shooters? Any atheistic terrorists? Any atheistic bombers? Any atheistic insurrectionists? Any of them that any of you guys might be able to dig deep and come up with will be the exception, not the rule.

I'll hang up and listen.

---

Uh yes, I'll introduce you to the communist party who disavowed God, killed millions of people and destroyed churches. You also might have noticed the recent attacks against Catholic Churches and day care centers by Antifa who in light of the Roe V Wade rule, are blaming Catholics for women not being able to kill their kids in some states.

---

That wasn't in the name of atheism… Putin is essentially doing the same thing now with the blessing of the Russian Orthodox Church.

---

Yes it was, it was a critical component of Soviet ideology, anti-clericalism, belief the religion is the opiate of the masses and needs to be eradicated.