religion is just brainwashing

[koshergrl]

You absolutely don't know fuck-all about my morals and whether or not they're "modern"

Of course I do. I know that you manage to function in a modern liberal society, and I know this is because your religion was reformed due to secular ideas. That's why you arent some medieval, immoral jackass.

Yes, you and your children should all be at least giving some thanks to scientific enlightenmnt and classical liberalism.

Er..no. You can give thanks, I've no doubt that classical liberalism lifted your family up from the primordial ooze.

But mine were lifted by God, and exist on a much higher plane that the one afforded us by secular crapheads.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You absolutely don't know fuck-all about my morals and whether or not they're "modern"

Of course I do. I know that you manage to function in a modern liberal society, and I know this is because your religion was reformed due to secular ideas. That's why you arent some medieval, immoral jackass.

Yes, you and your children should all be at least giving some thanks to scientific enlightenmnt and classical liberalism.

Er..no. You can give thanks, I've no doubt that classical liberalism lifted your family up from the primordial ooze.

But mine were lifted by God, and exist on a much higher plane that the one afforded us by secular crapheads.

Wrong. If that were the case, then the same would be true of Christians 5p0 years ago, as they carried aroind the same book of bronze age fairy tales. Your morals arise chiefly from when and where you were born. In your case, it was after your religion experienced reformation by the secular ideas of scientific enlightenment amd classical liberalism.

 

[koshergrl]

You absolutely don't know fuck-all about my morals and whether or not they're "modern"

Of course I do. I know that you manage to function in a modern liberal society, and I know this is because your religion was reformed due to secular ideas. That's why you arent some medieval, immoral jackass.

Yes, you and your children should all be at least giving some thanks to scientific enlightenmnt and classical liberalism.

Er..no. You can give thanks, I've no doubt that classical liberalism lifted your family up from the primordial ooze.

But mine were lifted by God, and exist on a much higher plane that the one afforded us by secular crapheads.

Wrong. If that were the case, then the same would be true of Christians 5p0 years ago, as they carried aroind the same book of bronze age fairy tales. Your morals arise chiefly from when and where you were born. In your case, it was after your religion experienced reformation by the secular ideas of scientific enlightenment amd classical liberalism.

It is true of Christians 50 years ago. That's my point.
My morals come directly from the Bible, not from when and where I was born lol. I'm the child of an atheist, came of age in the 80s at the height of the secular rejection of religion. My morals come straight from the bible, and God, and have exactly zero to do with the environment I was raised in.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You absolutely don't know fuck-all about my morals and whether or not they're "modern"

Of course I do. I know that you manage to function in a modern liberal society, and I know this is because your religion was reformed due to secular ideas. That's why you arent some medieval, immoral jackass.

Yes, you and your children should all be at least giving some thanks to scientific enlightenmnt and classical liberalism.

Er..no. You can give thanks, I've no doubt that classical liberalism lifted your family up from the primordial ooze.

But mine were lifted by God, and exist on a much higher plane that the one afforded us by secular crapheads.

Wrong. If that were the case, then the same would be true of Christians 5p0 years ago, as they carried aroind the same book of bronze age fairy tales. Your morals arise chiefly from when and where you were born. In your case, it was after your religion experienced reformation by the secular ideas of scientific enlightenment amd classical liberalism.

It is true of Christians 50 years ago. That's my point.
My morals come directly from the Bible, not from when and where I was born lol. I'm the child of an atheist, came of age in the 80s at the height of the secular rejection of religion. My morals come straight from the bible, and God, and have exactly zero to do with the environment I was raised in.

I meant 500 years ago. And no, it isnt. You would be an absurd person to say otherwise.

 

[koshergrl]

I love how anti-Christian fruits just spout nonsense, and think that just by saying it, it becomes so.

"If I say it like it's a fact, everybody will believe I know what I'm talking about."

There's zero support for the nonsense they are spouting, per usual.

 

[koshergrl]

You absolutely don't know fuck-all about my morals and whether or not they're "modern"

Of course I do. I know that you manage to function in a modern liberal society, and I know this is because your religion was reformed due to secular ideas. That's why you arent some medieval, immoral jackass.

Yes, you and your children should all be at least giving some thanks to scientific enlightenmnt and classical liberalism.

Er..no. You can give thanks, I've no doubt that classical liberalism lifted your family up from the primordial ooze.

But mine were lifted by God, and exist on a much higher plane that the one afforded us by secular crapheads.

Wrong. If that were the case, then the same would be true of Christians 5p0 years ago, as they carried aroind the same book of bronze age fairy tales. Your morals arise chiefly from when and where you were born. In your case, it was after your religion experienced reformation by the secular ideas of scientific enlightenment amd classical liberalism.

It is true of Christians 50 years ago. That's my point.
My morals come directly from the Bible, not from when and where I was born lol. I'm the child of an atheist, came of age in the 80s at the height of the secular rejection of religion. My morals come straight from the bible, and God, and have exactly zero to do with the environment I was raised in.

I meant 500 years ago. And no, it isnt. You would be an absurd person to say otherwise.

It was true of Christians 500 years ago as well.
"Yore dum fer sayin that" isn't actually an argument. I'm sure you know that.

Actually, I'm not sure.

 

[koshergrl]

Like I said, they think that their thoughts just by the nature of being their thoughts trump any other reality.

It's funny..but sad too. Fad.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I love how anti-Christian fruits just spout nonsense, and think that just by saying it, it becomes so.

"If I say it like it's a fact, everybody will believe I know what I'm talking about."

There's zero support for the nonsense they are spouting, per usual.

Then pay attention, because I specifically cited the moral difference between medieval Christians and Christianity from 500 years ago to today. And what caused that difference was a reformation of the religion and of the morality of Western socities due to scientific enlightenment and classical liberalism. It is a strong argument. But I have no delusions that I will sway a magical thinker like you.

 

[koshergrl]

I love how anti-Christian fruits just spout nonsense, and think that just by saying it, it becomes so.

"If I say it like it's a fact, everybody will believe I know what I'm talking about."

There's zero support for the nonsense they are spouting, per usual.

Then pay attention, because I specifically cited the moral difference between medieval Christians and Christianity from 500 years ago to today. And what caused that difference was a reformation of the religion and of the morality of Western socities due to scientific enlightenment and classical liberalism. It is a strong argument. But I have no delusions that I will sway a magical thinker like you.

No, it isn't a strong argument at all. And stating your theory isn't the same thing as proving your theory.

You have a theory that you think sounds super cool...but you don't have any evidence that it's true.
And just saying there's a moral difference between medieval Christians and today's Christians doesn't prove there is a moral difference, btw. I maintain you are quite wrong. The morality of medieval Christians was quite similar to the morality of today's Christians. I imagine you have an incomplete and largely fantastical view of what the morality of medieval Christians looked like...just as you have an incomplete and completely fantastical view of the morality of Christians today.

And saying "if you disagree with it you're just dumb"...as I pointed out already....does not qualify as a supporting argument.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I love how anti-Christian fruits just spout nonsense, and think that just by saying it, it becomes so.

"If I say it like it's a fact, everybody will believe I know what I'm talking about."

There's zero support for the nonsense they are spouting, per usual.

Then pay attention, because I specifically cited the moral difference between medieval Christians and Christianity from 500 years ago to today. And what caused that difference was a reformation of the religion and of the morality of Western socities due to scientific enlightenment and classical liberalism. It is a strong argument. But I have no delusions that I will sway a magical thinker like you.

No, it isn't a strong argument at all. And stating your theory isn't the same thing as proving your theory.

You have a theory that you think sounds super cool...but you don't have any evidence that it's true.
And just saying there's a moral difference between medieval Christians and today's Christians doesn't prove there is a moral difference, btw. I maintain you are quite wrong. The morality of medieval Christians was quite similar to the morality of today's Christians. I imagine you have an incomplete and largely fantastical view of what the morality of medieval Christians looked like...just as you have an incomplete and completely fantastical view of the morality of Christians today.

And saying "if you disagree with it you're just dumb"...as I pointed out already....does not qualify as a supporting argument.

Of course it is a strong argument. Your religious text has not changed. But your religion and the general morality of its adherents has, by leaps and bounds. So clearly it is correct to look beyond the religion itself for these changes. And the cirrect source is scientifoc enligtenment and classical liberalism.

 

[koshergrl]

I love how anti-Christian fruits just spout nonsense, and think that just by saying it, it becomes so.

"If I say it like it's a fact, everybody will believe I know what I'm talking about."

There's zero support for the nonsense they are spouting, per usual.

Then pay attention, because I specifically cited the moral difference between medieval Christians and Christianity from 500 years ago to today. And what caused that difference was a reformation of the religion and of the morality of Western socities due to scientific enlightenment and classical liberalism. It is a strong argument. But I have no delusions that I will sway a magical thinker like you.

No, it isn't a strong argument at all. And stating your theory isn't the same thing as proving your theory.

You have a theory that you think sounds super cool...but you don't have any evidence that it's true.
And just saying there's a moral difference between medieval Christians and today's Christians doesn't prove there is a moral difference, btw. I maintain you are quite wrong. The morality of medieval Christians was quite similar to the morality of today's Christians. I imagine you have an incomplete and largely fantastical view of what the morality of medieval Christians looked like...just as you have an incomplete and completely fantastical view of the morality of Christians today.

And saying "if you disagree with it you're just dumb"...as I pointed out already....does not qualify as a supporting argument.

Of course it is a strong argument. Your religious text has not changed. But your religion and the general morality of its adherents has, by leaps and bounds. So clearly it is correct to look beyond the religion itself for these changes. And the cirrect source is scientifoc enligtenment and classical liberalism.

No, you didn't make an argument.

You posed an opinion, and then didn't explain or defend it.

Sorry, you lose. And you didn't provide any scientific anything. You just used the word "science" and, being an idiot, you thought that was the same thing as providing "scientifoc enlightenment" lol.

You're an idiot. I can't even eviscerate your stupid argument..because you haven't yet made an argument.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I love how anti-Christian fruits just spout nonsense, and think that just by saying it, it becomes so.

"If I say it like it's a fact, everybody will believe I know what I'm talking about."

There's zero support for the nonsense they are spouting, per usual.

Then pay attention, because I specifically cited the moral difference between medieval Christians and Christianity from 500 years ago to today. And what caused that difference was a reformation of the religion and of the morality of Western socities due to scientific enlightenment and classical liberalism. It is a strong argument. But I have no delusions that I will sway a magical thinker like you.

No, it isn't a strong argument at all. And stating your theory isn't the same thing as proving your theory.

You have a theory that you think sounds super cool...but you don't have any evidence that it's true.
And just saying there's a moral difference between medieval Christians and today's Christians doesn't prove there is a moral difference, btw. I maintain you are quite wrong. The morality of medieval Christians was quite similar to the morality of today's Christians. I imagine you have an incomplete and largely fantastical view of what the morality of medieval Christians looked like...just as you have an incomplete and completely fantastical view of the morality of Christians today.

And saying "if you disagree with it you're just dumb"...as I pointed out already....does not qualify as a supporting argument.

Of course it is a strong argument. Your religious text has not changed. But your religion and the general morality of its adherents has, by leaps and bounds. So clearly it is correct to look beyond the religion itself for these changes. And the cirrect source is scientifoc enligtenment and classical liberalism.

No, you didn't make an argument.

You posed an opinion, and then didn't explain or defend it.

Sorry, you lose. And you didn't provide any scientific anything. You just used the word "science" and, being an idiot, you thought that was the same thing as providing "scientifoc enlightenment" lol.

You're an idiot. I can't even eviscerate your stupid argument..because you haven't yet made an argument.

Of course I made an argument. It's there for everyone to see. You may be unwilling or unable to fashion a counterargument, and that's fine. But you aren't making yourself seem smart to mangle the meanings of simple English words to get your tantrum across.

By the way, your behavior in this thread has been immature and embarrassing, for an adult. Is this how you plan to raise your kids? Maybe i should raise them.

 

[koshergrl]

I love how anti-Christian fruits just spout nonsense, and think that just by saying it, it becomes so.

"If I say it like it's a fact, everybody will believe I know what I'm talking about."

There's zero support for the nonsense they are spouting, per usual.

Then pay attention, because I specifically cited the moral difference between medieval Christians and Christianity from 500 years ago to today. And what caused that difference was a reformation of the religion and of the morality of Western socities due to scientific enlightenment and classical liberalism. It is a strong argument. But I have no delusions that I will sway a magical thinker like you.

No, it isn't a strong argument at all. And stating your theory isn't the same thing as proving your theory.

You have a theory that you think sounds super cool...but you don't have any evidence that it's true.
And just saying there's a moral difference between medieval Christians and today's Christians doesn't prove there is a moral difference, btw. I maintain you are quite wrong. The morality of medieval Christians was quite similar to the morality of today's Christians. I imagine you have an incomplete and largely fantastical view of what the morality of medieval Christians looked like...just as you have an incomplete and completely fantastical view of the morality of Christians today.

And saying "if you disagree with it you're just dumb"...as I pointed out already....does not qualify as a supporting argument.

Of course it is a strong argument. Your religious text has not changed. But your religion and the general morality of its adherents has, by leaps and bounds. So clearly it is correct to look beyond the religion itself for these changes. And the cirrect source is scientifoc enligtenment and classical liberalism.

No, you didn't make an argument.

You posed an opinion, and then didn't explain or defend it.

Sorry, you lose. And you didn't provide any scientific anything. You just used the word "science" and, being an idiot, you thought that was the same thing as providing "scientifoc enlightenment" lol.

You're an idiot. I can't even eviscerate your stupid argument..because you haven't yet made an argument.

Of course I made an argument. It's there for everyone to see. You may be unwilling or unable to fashion a counterargument, and that's fine. But you aren't making yourself seem smart to mangle the meanings of simple English words to get your tantrum across.

By the way, your behavior in this thread has been immature and embarrassing, for an adult. Is this how you plan to raise your kids? Maybe i should raise them.

Saying "Christians now are different than Christians then science proves it" isn't an argument.

Again, you're an idiot.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Then pay attention, because I specifically cited the moral difference between medieval Christians and Christianity from 500 years ago to today. And what caused that difference was a reformation of the religion and of the morality of Western socities due to scientific enlightenment and classical liberalism. It is a strong argument. But I have no delusions that I will sway a magical thinker like you.

No, it isn't a strong argument at all. And stating your theory isn't the same thing as proving your theory.

You have a theory that you think sounds super cool...but you don't have any evidence that it's true.
And just saying there's a moral difference between medieval Christians and today's Christians doesn't prove there is a moral difference, btw. I maintain you are quite wrong. The morality of medieval Christians was quite similar to the morality of today's Christians. I imagine you have an incomplete and largely fantastical view of what the morality of medieval Christians looked like...just as you have an incomplete and completely fantastical view of the morality of Christians today.

And saying "if you disagree with it you're just dumb"...as I pointed out already....does not qualify as a supporting argument.

Of course it is a strong argument. Your religious text has not changed. But your religion and the general morality of its adherents has, by leaps and bounds. So clearly it is correct to look beyond the religion itself for these changes. And the cirrect source is scientifoc enligtenment and classical liberalism.

No, you didn't make an argument.

You posed an opinion, and then didn't explain or defend it.

Sorry, you lose. And you didn't provide any scientific anything. You just used the word "science" and, being an idiot, you thought that was the same thing as providing "scientifoc enlightenment" lol.

You're an idiot. I can't even eviscerate your stupid argument..because you haven't yet made an argument.

Of course I made an argument. It's there for everyone to see. You may be unwilling or unable to fashion a counterargument, and that's fine. But you aren't making yourself seem smart to mangle the meanings of simple English words to get your tantrum across.

By the way, your behavior in this thread has been immature and embarrassing, for an adult. Is this how you plan to raise your kids? Maybe i should raise them.

Saying "Christians now are different than Christians then science proves it" isn't an argument.

Again, you're an idiot.

That wasn't my argument. The argument was not complicated. You embarrass yourself to say something so stupid, whether it's by dishonesty or just good ol' honest stupidity. Is an effort to annoy another person really worth making yourself look stupid?

 

[koshergrl]

No, it isn't a strong argument at all. And stating your theory isn't the same thing as proving your theory.

You have a theory that you think sounds super cool...but you don't have any evidence that it's true.
And just saying there's a moral difference between medieval Christians and today's Christians doesn't prove there is a moral difference, btw. I maintain you are quite wrong. The morality of medieval Christians was quite similar to the morality of today's Christians. I imagine you have an incomplete and largely fantastical view of what the morality of medieval Christians looked like...just as you have an incomplete and completely fantastical view of the morality of Christians today.

And saying "if you disagree with it you're just dumb"...as I pointed out already....does not qualify as a supporting argument.

Of course it is a strong argument. Your religious text has not changed. But your religion and the general morality of its adherents has, by leaps and bounds. So clearly it is correct to look beyond the religion itself for these changes. And the cirrect source is scientifoc enligtenment and classical liberalism.

No, you didn't make an argument.

You posed an opinion, and then didn't explain or defend it.

Sorry, you lose. And you didn't provide any scientific anything. You just used the word "science" and, being an idiot, you thought that was the same thing as providing "scientifoc enlightenment" lol.

You're an idiot. I can't even eviscerate your stupid argument..because you haven't yet made an argument.

Of course I made an argument. It's there for everyone to see. You may be unwilling or unable to fashion a counterargument, and that's fine. But you aren't making yourself seem smart to mangle the meanings of simple English words to get your tantrum across.

By the way, your behavior in this thread has been immature and embarrassing, for an adult. Is this how you plan to raise your kids? Maybe i should raise them.

Saying "Christians now are different than Christians then science proves it" isn't an argument.

Again, you're an idiot.

That wasn't my argument. The argument was not complicated. You embarrass yourself to say something so stupid, whether it's by dishonesty or just good ol' honest stupidity. Is an effort to annoy another person really worth making yourself look stupid?

No, you didn't make an argument.
And you haven't once reiterated it, you just keep saying "I made an argument".

No argument. Just an opinion. Please take some night school or something. You aren't up for debate.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Of course it is a strong argument. Your religious text has not changed. But your religion and the general morality of its adherents has, by leaps and bounds. So clearly it is correct to look beyond the religion itself for these changes. And the cirrect source is scientifoc enligtenment and classical liberalism.

No, you didn't make an argument.

You posed an opinion, and then didn't explain or defend it.

Sorry, you lose. And you didn't provide any scientific anything. You just used the word "science" and, being an idiot, you thought that was the same thing as providing "scientifoc enlightenment" lol.

You're an idiot. I can't even eviscerate your stupid argument..because you haven't yet made an argument.

Of course I made an argument. It's there for everyone to see. You may be unwilling or unable to fashion a counterargument, and that's fine. But you aren't making yourself seem smart to mangle the meanings of simple English words to get your tantrum across.

By the way, your behavior in this thread has been immature and embarrassing, for an adult. Is this how you plan to raise your kids? Maybe i should raise them.

Saying "Christians now are different than Christians then science proves it" isn't an argument.

Again, you're an idiot.

That wasn't my argument. The argument was not complicated. You embarrass yourself to say something so stupid, whether it's by dishonesty or just good ol' honest stupidity. Is an effort to annoy another person really worth making yourself look stupid?

No, you didn't make an argument.
And you haven't once reiterated it, you just keep saying "I made an argument".

No argument. Just an opinion. Please take some night school or something. You aren't up for debate.

I dont understand why thin skinned little intellectual sissies like you come to message boards. Yes, I made a simple and clear argument. A person (of the type that would visit a discussion forum) would typically then respond to an argument with an argument of their own. Else, why even come here? You come to a discussion board, then throw little hissies instead of meeting argument with argument. You've spent this entire thread accusing everyone else of the nasty, embarrassing behavior that you display in spades. You seem to have the vocabulary and grasp of logic of an adolescent. I can't imagine what you could possibly gain from this odd exercise of exposing yourself to ideas that cause you to go into a little tailspin. Jesus man, stop sticking the fork in the toaster already, you fucking moron.

 

[koshergrl]

No, you didn't make an argument.

You posed an opinion, and then didn't explain or defend it.

Sorry, you lose. And you didn't provide any scientific anything. You just used the word "science" and, being an idiot, you thought that was the same thing as providing "scientifoc enlightenment" lol.

You're an idiot. I can't even eviscerate your stupid argument..because you haven't yet made an argument.

Of course I made an argument. It's there for everyone to see. You may be unwilling or unable to fashion a counterargument, and that's fine. But you aren't making yourself seem smart to mangle the meanings of simple English words to get your tantrum across.

By the way, your behavior in this thread has been immature and embarrassing, for an adult. Is this how you plan to raise your kids? Maybe i should raise them.

Saying "Christians now are different than Christians then science proves it" isn't an argument.

Again, you're an idiot.

That wasn't my argument. The argument was not complicated. You embarrass yourself to say something so stupid, whether it's by dishonesty or just good ol' honest stupidity. Is an effort to annoy another person really worth making yourself look stupid?

No, you didn't make an argument.
And you haven't once reiterated it, you just keep saying "I made an argument".

No argument. Just an opinion. Please take some night school or something. You aren't up for debate.

I dont understand why thin skinned little intellectual sissies like you come to message boards. Yes, I made a simple and clear argument. A person (of the type that would visit a discussion forum) would typically then respond to an argument with an argument of their own. Else, why even come here? You come to a discussion board, then throw little hissies instead of meeting argument with argument. You've spent this entire thread accusing everyone else of the nasty, embarrassing behavior that you display in spades. You seem to have the vocabulary and grasp of logic of an adolescent. I can't imagine what you could possibly gain from this odd exercise of exposing yourself to ideas that cause you to go into a little tailspin. Jesus man, stop sticking the fork in the toaster already, you fucking moron.

You never made an argument. And you aren't making one now, either.

I'm not thin skinned at all. I've been here for well over a decade.

I come here to educate retards like you. You did not make an argument. You voiced a vague opinion based on nothing..you cited nothing ("science" isn't actually a citation). You provided absolutely no supporting evidence for your silliness. Nothing at all, except just to say that people who don't agree are stupid.

Lame. That's why I come here. To teach rubes like you how to make an argument.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Of course I made an argument. It's there for everyone to see. You may be unwilling or unable to fashion a counterargument, and that's fine. But you aren't making yourself seem smart to mangle the meanings of simple English words to get your tantrum across.

By the way, your behavior in this thread has been immature and embarrassing, for an adult. Is this how you plan to raise your kids? Maybe i should raise them.

Saying "Christians now are different than Christians then science proves it" isn't an argument.

Again, you're an idiot.

That wasn't my argument. The argument was not complicated. You embarrass yourself to say something so stupid, whether it's by dishonesty or just good ol' honest stupidity. Is an effort to annoy another person really worth making yourself look stupid?

No, you didn't make an argument.
And you haven't once reiterated it, you just keep saying "I made an argument".

No argument. Just an opinion. Please take some night school or something. You aren't up for debate.

I dont understand why thin skinned little intellectual sissies like you come to message boards. Yes, I made a simple and clear argument. A person (of the type that would visit a discussion forum) would typically then respond to an argument with an argument of their own. Else, why even come here? You come to a discussion board, then throw little hissies instead of meeting argument with argument. You've spent this entire thread accusing everyone else of the nasty, embarrassing behavior that you display in spades. You seem to have the vocabulary and grasp of logic of an adolescent. I can't imagine what you could possibly gain from this odd exercise of exposing yourself to ideas that cause you to go into a little tailspin. Jesus man, stop sticking the fork in the toaster already, you fucking moron.

You never made an argument. And you aren't making one now, either.

I'm not thin skinned at all. I've been here for well over a decade.

I come here to educate retards like you. You did not make an argument. You voiced a vague opinion based on nothing..you cited nothing ("science" isn't actually a citation). You provided absolutely no supporting evidence for your silliness. Nothing at all, except just to say that people who don't agree are stupid.

Lame. That's why I come here. To teach rubes like you how to make an argument.

You clearly are a thin skinned, intellectual sissy. Maybe someone else will come along with the intellectual capacity and will to tackle my simple, clear argument.

By the way, dickheads like you make Baby Jesus cry. He told me so when I saw him in my waffle this morning.

 

[koshergrl]

You absolutely don't know fuck-all about my morals and whether or not they're "modern"

Of course I do. I know that you manage to function in a modern liberal society, and I know this is because your religion was reformed due to secular ideas. That's why you arent some medieval, immoral jackass.

Yes, you and your children should all be at least giving some thanks to scientific enlightenmnt and classical liberalism.

Er..no. You can give thanks, I've no doubt that classical liberalism lifted your family up from the primordial ooze.

But mine were lifted by God, and exist on a much higher plane that the one afforded us by secular crapheads.

Wrong. If that were the case, then the same would be true of Christians 5p0 years ago, as they carried aroind the same book of bronze age fairy tales. Your morals arise chiefly from when and where you were born. In your case, it was after your religion experienced reformation by the secular ideas of scientific enlightenment amd classical liberalism.

This isn't an argument. It's an opinion.

Sorry.

The argument is where you post EVIDENCE. Get it?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You absolutely don't know fuck-all about my morals and whether or not they're "modern"

Of course I do. I know that you manage to function in a modern liberal society, and I know this is because your religion was reformed due to secular ideas. That's why you arent some medieval, immoral jackass.

Yes, you and your children should all be at least giving some thanks to scientific enlightenmnt and classical liberalism.

Er..no. You can give thanks, I've no doubt that classical liberalism lifted your family up from the primordial ooze.

But mine were lifted by God, and exist on a much higher plane that the one afforded us by secular crapheads.

Wrong. If that were the case, then the same would be true of Christians 5p0 years ago, as they carried aroind the same book of bronze age fairy tales. Your morals arise chiefly from when and where you were born. In your case, it was after your religion experienced reformation by the secular ideas of scientific enlightenment amd classical liberalism.

This isn't an argument. It's an opinion.

Sorry.

The argument is where you post EVIDENCE. Get it?

That's not what an argument is, though one may support his premises with evidence. I dont think you understand the word, "argument". In fact, after that last statement, I know you don't. How odd, for such a seasoned veteran of discussion....heh heh