"Neil Kelsey" <neil_kelsey@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1161968418.869747.210670@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...

Pastor Frank wrote:

Quite the opposite is true. Religion forbids all these actions you
list
a bove.

I'm trying to be polite, but I don't know how you can arrive at that
conclusion. Behind every one of those actions you will find people
justifying those actions on the basis of their religion. Religion does
not forbid those actions.

But then atheist anarchists always have advocated the abolishment of
laws,

Maybe you should just say anarchists. Atheists aren't necessarily
anarchists; I don't know any that are. In fact, I'm an atheist and I'm
all for having laws, because apparently the only reason a lot of
religious people aren't running around stealing and murdering is
because their god tells them not to. They come right out and say that
all the time on alt.atheism.

At least Christians know what ideals they are to live up to and know,
that without those ideals they would be like atheists, always needing to
check whether their actions conform to the latest popular fashion or
opinion.

for they cause criminals,

Huh. The BTK KIller was a devout Christian. That didn't stop him from
being a serial killer. Neither atheism not theism causes criminals.

and without laws there would be no
criminals,

Finally, you said something I agree with.

much like that without schools there would be no failures, and
without sports there would be no losers etc. etc.

I agree with that, too. Not that I think we shouldn't have schools,
laws, or sports, but I agree with what you said. You forgot to add that
without religion we wouldn't have religious delusions.

Hence your argument is merely the result of your feverish speculation
caused
by atheist cynicism and paranoia.

No, my argument is backed up with evidence. And religious groups remain
in denial, just as you are. They always blame it on someone else even
though they're the source.

Bring on the "evidence" that shows that religion causes criminality.

It doesn't prevent criminality either. And I never said religion causes
criminality (although I did reference the BTK Killer; my point with him
was that religion is no guarantee of good behaviour). My point was that
religion causes conflict, and that conflict can be in the form of
violence and war. I already gave examples.

Religion deals with qualities, mostly of character and to be able
to
see
good, where there reasons to see nothing but evil. See below

Religion may deal with character qualities, but those qualities can be
as bad as they are good. See above. The rest of your sentence is
ungrammatical, and I can't decipher it.

Religion basically tells you to be a good boy.

So if the Koran is telling a Muslim to order a jihad on infidels,
religion is telling him to be a good boy?

To say that your mom
telling you that and you ignoring it, makes her guilty of making a bad
boy
out of you?

This is interesting. The book I'm reading postulates that the origins
of religion might be in the parent-child relationship, and that it is
obviously good for the child's survival to obey their parents, and obey
those authorities that the parents approve of. Religion is a by-product
of this process. Just because someone is a parent or an authority
doesn't mean they are giving you good advice.

So, to get back to your point, if the mother is giving you bad advice
and gives you no choice, because she's an unyielding authoritarian and
you're just a little kid, then she is guilty of making a "bad boy" out
of you. Or guilty of indoctrination, if she's forcing you to follow her
religion.

But then you seem unable to distinguish between good and bad or
evil, for that is "ungrammatical" to you. LOL

Oh please. Your sentence makes no sense so you accuse me of being
stupid? You could have just as easily shown a little civility and
explained what you meant.

Is that what you told the judge, that his laws are too difficult for you
to to understand, and that's why you are in such a pickle?

I remain unconvinced by the Bible (and puzzled at how weird it actually
is, such as the passage you quote here), and yet somehow remain
positive, happy, social, and atheist. I even think you're OK with me.

The Bible is ancient poetic Semitic philosophical symbolism and
metaphor
and not easy to understand.

I can read it and understand exactly what it says. It's not that
difficult. I wouldn't call it poetry, either.

Much of the original Hebrew Bible is poetic narrative.

On the whole, it doesn't
claim to be symbolic of anything or a metaphor for anything, it comes
right out and says it: god exists, god made us, god had a kid, and god
and his kid want us to do as they say.

Do your have any evidence for the contrary? If you don't, your certainty
amounts to a belief held in faith, much like us religionists have.

However believing that will not save you nor get you to heaven. In fact
it's quite irrelevant and is only the stage upon which values are presented
which WILL get you to heaven.

To get the meaning and significance to your
life, takes a lot of thinking and desire to know.

That doesn't take religion.

Another belief held in faith? Or is that another disbelief of the
atheist gospel?

The main problem of living without the Bible is that to know
yourself,
your need to lie to yourself about your virtues and make yourself believe
those lies.

Nah. Being good isn't that hard. Most of us manage. Too bad you have
such a bad impression of people. Most of the world lives without the
Bible, so you think most of the world are liars. That's sad.

Most people in the world are theists, followers of some scripture. Do
you as an atheist consider "most people of the world" liars. That's sad!!

Also, you see people starving all around you, yet don't object to food
corn being processed into alcohol to drive your car?

What about torture
being acceptable?

Most atheists will follow the current popular opinion, regardless of
what that is. If you have standards, or ideals of standards, tell us who
represents them for you in real life, like Christ represent our ideals, and
us aiming to represent His.

It's like the circular reasoning of: I am a good boy,
....because I say so.

I'm glad you learned what circular reasoning is now, because you didn't
seem to get it on another recent post. It's not like that at all,
though. We can tell we're "good boys" because the society that we live
in has certain laws, and as long as we obey those laws we're good
people.

LOL Abstaining from evil is being good? That's joke, surely!

There are some exceptions (e.g. when the laws are unjust), but
that is the rule of thumb. Just because someone isn't living to your
ideals doesn't mean they aren't good, it could easily mean your ideals
are bad.

We would rather say: I must be good enough to be
loved, for Christ thinks I am worth dying for.

I'm not sure why you'd need that kind of reassurance unless you had
severe separation anxiety. I don't need people to kill themselves to
show me they love me. Personally, I'd rather they were alive.

Told that to a soldier fighting the wars, you pay for with your taxes
lately? Make sure you wear your bullet-proof vest when you do.