Religious Debate

[Janke]

why have you not done the same

I see someone already published the link...

Here's a nice quote: "Muslim activists are finding out why getting into a negative-publicity fight is as inadvisable as wrestling with a pig: You get dirty and the pig enjoys it."

That saying also pretty well fits some of the verbal exchanges on this forum.

I believe in Christ and I know that Islam is a false religion, because if Islam were true, that would render all that I know about Christ a lie.

You know? How do you know?

Turn your sentence 180 degrees around, and it becomes:

"I believe in Allah and I know that Christianity is a false religion, because if Christianity were true, that would render all that I know about Mohammed a lie."

Can you imagine how many people on earth really do accept this?

Both statements cannot be true, thus, per Occam's razor, neither is.


BTW, Christianity is actually a minority, when you compare it to the entire world population of 7 billion:

Adherents.com estimates

[Halsu]

For those of you who already posted images and made some over-the-top nasty remarks about Christianity ..... why have you not done the same regarding Islam? Are you afraid? If so...afraid of what? Or is it because you know Christianity preaches on turning the other cheek? Yeah Halsu...I saw your answer regarding this question... It's a bit watered down (like everyone ele's) IMO.

Maybe it sounds watered down, but it's the truth.

[HueyNRolf]

At the same time, Bob has been insulting God, the Virgin Mary, and any other sacred thing (except anything, of course, he can get in genuine trouble for.)

Maybe he has. So? It shouldn't be considered any different from ridiculing any other beliefs.
This is an excellent example why religious beliefs shouldn't have any more protection than any other beliefs.

This is bigoted and discriminatory. Here's why:

Example belief (1) Religious belief. A religious person is as much entitled to respect as any one. TRUE. Showing disrespect to religious people simply because they are religious is wrong. TRUE. If insulting peoples beliefs is unnecessary, and if insulting them will bring them discomfort, then it is wrong to insult their beliefs. TRUE. Therefore, this belief should have protection.

Example belief (2) The belief in white supremacy. This belief should have no protection. TRUE

Your disregard for people is personified in this, "Maybe he has. So?".

Also, noted you finally ran from having to stand behind your words sir
http://www.hv20.com/showthread.php?1...l=1#post439410

[Halsu]

If insulting peoples beliefs is unnecessary, and if insulting them will bring them discomfort, then it is wrong to insult their beliefs. TRUE.

This applies equally to all beliefs, religious beliefs are in no way special in this regard. The key point here us unnecessary.

When the very subject of the discussion is the validity of said beliefs, ridiculing them is often necessary in order to get through the point that they indeed are ridiculous from a non-believer's perspective.

Also, noted you finally ran from having to stand behind your words sir
http://www.hv20.com/showthread.php?1...l=1#post439410

Still wrong.

[HueyNRolf]

ridiculing them is often necessary

Lame strawman, yawn.

'Showing logical inconsistencies' is different from 'insulting'. I'll fix it for you.

Halsu says - "Insulting Mal is often necessary."

There.

A religious belief is a set of many beliefs. The subsets of Mal's beliefs that Bob was insulting were (1) God, (2) Virgin Mary and (3) Other sacred things. These subsets are what you referred to in supporting Bob's insults which are indirectly but most certainly callous insults.

Bob has been insulting God, the Virgin Mary, and any other sacred thing

Still wrong.#10079

And you chose (3) again, congrats twitty.!!

[Halsu]

Halsu says - "Insulting Mal is often necessary."

That is patently false. Ridiculing a belief is not in any way the same as insulting a person.

And you chose (3) again, congrats twitty.!!

Wrong, i chose (1). Your failure to follow my instructions is your problem, not mine.

[Halsu]

The subsets of Mal's beliefs that Bob was insulting were (1) God, (2) Virgin Mary and (3) Other sacred things.

I thought your opinion was that those are not defined well enough to be discussed? Why do you bring them to a discussion then? Could it be that you actually DO know what the words mean, despite your denial to recognize them?

[HueyNRolf]

That is patently false. Ridiculing a belief is not in any way the same as insulting a person.

Then don't use the word! You're losing track buddy. The reason it's a strawman is because you tried to soften the term 'insult' by changing it to ridicule which doesn't necessarily = insult! Klutz.

At the same time, Bob has been insulting God, the Virgin Mary,

= insulting Mal for no good reason. Unless you can define what it is you're insulting and henceforth produce a necessary condition!!

Wrong, i chose (1). Your failure to follow my instructions is your problem, not mine.

Your secondary claim here is that you chose (1). Here were your choices:

1) support your claim ( show the claims and relevant rebuttals to which you are referring)
2) go away
3) be a twit

To which you replied:

"Still wrong.#10079"

This = (3) as ( show the claims and relevant rebuttals to which you are referring) has not been shown.
Twit!

[HueyNRolf]

I thought your opinion was that those are not defined well enough to be discussed? Why do you bring them to a discussion then?

It depends on what extensional definition you are giving to the term 'discussed' and how it applies to your point, whatever it is. If it means simply that one uses the term God/s in a discussion, then no, that's not my position. False.

In fact, I don't have a position, I'm simply asking you lot to explain yours on a logical basis.

[Halsu]

Then don't use the word! You're losing track buddy. The reason it's a strawman is because you tried to soften the term 'insult' by changing it to ridicule which doesn't necessarily = insult! Klutz.

If you re-read the discussion, you will find I haven't used the word "insult" when it comes to beliefs. I have constantly used the word "ridicule". It's you who tries to replace "ridicule" with "insult" when talking about beliefs. Unsuccessfully, as they are not the same.

Unless you can define what it is you're insulting and henceforth produce a necessary condition!!

That's the point: ridiculing a belief is NOT the same as insulting anyone or anything, and it definitely is not a personal insult.

Your secondary claim here is that you chose (1). Here were your choices:

The claims and relevant rebuttals are all in this thread, good place to start is at page 250. Please do. If, after reading a few dozen pages from there on, you feel there's any specific claim by you that has not already been successfully refuted (by me or others), you are welcome to bring that to discussion again, with your explanation why you think the refutal was not sufficient.

If that explanation is worthy of a response, you will probably get one.

[Halsu]

In fact, I don't have a position, I'm simply asking you lot to explain yours on a logical basis.

So, you've given up Theological noncognitivism / Ignosticism? Good for you.

As for my position, it's that Theological noncognitivism / Ignosticism is nonsense.

[HueyNRolf]

That's the point: ridiculing a belief is NOT the same as insulting anyone or anything.

Direct, indirect, it's still an insult if it is intended as such, right?.

with your explanation why you think the refutal was not sufficient.

Impossible until you present your evidence, it's your claim. (3).

[HueyNRolf]

So, you've given up Theological noncognitivism / Ignosticism? Good for you.

Wrong again TNC is an argument, not a position on God/s. Slap!

[Halsu]

Direct, indirect, it's still an insult if it is intended as such, right?.

Pretty much anything can be used as a tool to attempt to insult your opponent, if so desired. That does not mean we should categorically restrain from ridiculing silly beliefs, or that such ridicule is actually used as a tool to insult rather than what it is on the face value: just a ridicule of a silly belief, with no further agenda.

Impossible until you present your evidence, it's your claim. (3).

Already have. You just refuse to examine the evidence. (1).

[HueyNRolf]

As for my position, it's that Theological noncognitivism / Ignosticism is nonsense.

That's the spirit!
Now explain why?

[Halsu]

That's the spirit!
Now explain why?

http://www.hv20.com/showthread.php?1...Debate/page250

[HueyNRolf]

http://www.hv20.com/showthread.php?1...Debate/page250

(3)

[jet]

Wow,post #10065,can that be from the hands ? of a christian believer,
The same fate will await me now no doubt
No i dont lick arses! i prefer ice cream.

[Jim E]

Jet, you assured "Bob Sanders" that you weren't frightened of anyone. Yet here you are, addressing me from a "safe" distance by referring to a post number instead of my user name...

Don't be afraid to address me by my user name, Jet. I told you I'm not going to pick on you any more, and I'm not. I don't tell lies - it doesn't pay.

I'm not a Christian, by the way. Fncked if I know how you got that idea!

I simply admire sincerity and courage, (MalHuman/Ian-T), and despise belligerence and cowardice, (Sanders/Haslu), that's all.

But no, I'm not a Christian.

And my user name is Krute. You can call me Krute.

[jet]

[QUOTE=Krute;439491]Jet, you assured "Bob Sanders" that you weren't frightened of anyone. Yet here you are, addressing me from a "safe" distance by referring to a post number instead of my user name...

Don't be afraid to address me by my user name, Jet. I told you I'm not going to pick on you any more, and I'm not. I don't tell lies - it doesn't pay.

I'm not a Christian, by the way. Fncked if I know how you got that idea!

I simply admire sincerity and courage, (MalHuman/Ian-T), and despise belligerence and cowardice, (Sanders/Haslu), that's all.

But no, I'm not a Christian.

And my user name is Krute. You can call me Krute.[/Q

Sorry if i misunderstood your beliefs.
What i dont get! is you state[i am not licking there arses here]despise there belligerance and cowardice for putting accross views no harder than others,yourself including.
Clearly there is and always has been! hatred in this thread above what is needed on any site,sadly i cant see it ending though.
And my user name is jet but as when i speak with many including MalHuman i use Chris.

[HueyNRolf]

Hello Chris.

[jet]

Hello

[Bob Sanders]

I simply admire sincerity and courage, (MalHuman/Ian-T), and despise belligerence and cowardice, (Sanders/Haslu), that's all.

That's absolutely hilarious. Here's a guy who throws insults left , right and center towards people who he has on the ignore list, and he calls THEM cowards. I don't know who's more dangerous... a smart guy... or Krut who for some strange reason THINKS he's smart.

[Halsu]

Hello

Hello Chris, from my neck of woods too. My real name is Erkki, some shorten it to Eki, but i'm actually called Halsu by a lot of my friends in real life too, so that's more than just an online nick...

[Bob Sanders]

For those of you who already posted images and made some over-the-top nasty remarks about Christianity ..... why have you not done the same regarding Islam? Are you afraid? If so...afraid of what?

There are no Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus... etc cramming their beliefs down others throats in this thread... Only Christians (as usual).