The religion of atheists is socialism

[ding]

according the right; Jesus the Christ was "just a Troll" asking for trouble.

Yes, some people do say and believe that.

Only because He was poor.

No. Only because they are idiots.

 

[RWS]

Understand this... ding is of the belief that you have to have a religion in order to have morals. So you must sacrifice freedom, and money and children, in order to have morals.

He doesn't understand that morals are a part of natural selection. He thinks they are intrinsically tied to his religion. And he also doesn't understand that the morals they preach are not necessarily what is good for humanity. Just what's good for his religion.

So, if you have no religion, then you can have no morals... And thus, you have no meaning in ding's world. We are less than the devil, in his view...

You have to understand the psychosis...

No. You have morals. They are just relative. They can change. Maybe you need social morals for free!

My morals will never change. They're pretty basic and simple. Nothing can change them. Yours however, are subject to the religion of the time. If the Pope changes his mind about something, it changes your morals.

Your morals are relative to the changes made in your religion. Which means you are an unstable person, morally. And subject to the whims of another human being that tells you what's right and wrong.

We had a big long discussion on this already, you sure seemed like believed that morals were relative. So now you claim your won't change. Which is it?

Nope, the religion is fixed. Popes aren't like presidents. They don't write executive orders to change dogma or the CCC. But nice try. Besides, I don't worry about that or secular laws, I follow the dictate of my conscience.

If I'm an unstable person that would mean you were less than an unstable person. So, I can't be an unstable person.

Post that discussion. My morals don't change. Otherwise, I'm calling you out for being a forum liar on top of everything else.

You can't post fake stuff against me. When are you going to learn that? I've been calling you out on your fake stuff over and over. So now I'm going to hold you to it this time...

Post that discussion? WTF does that mean? Did you have a change of heart?

Dude... first of all, what you claim as "morals" needs to be questioned.

Because you keep using that word, and I don't think it means what you think it means...

Morals means a love of life, and doing your part in the best interest of the world's interest, and not your own. It means being "good". On the small and large scale, that means helping everyone around you, regardless of differences of opinion, in order to promote peace and understanding and the well-being of our species and the world.

However, there are people like you, that want to destroy peace and understanding by insisting their religion is true, and that everyone else is an asshole and has no morals or corrupt morals, and deserve to eat dog poo...

And as much as I want to understand and empathize, I also have to realize when it's time to cut out a cancer. You give me no reason why you think like you do, you just put everyone down who thinks differently and dismiss their ideas. I've been trying with you, to get you to some sort of mutual understanding about the rest of the world.

But I failed.

Everything I have said in various threads has flown past your head, and you continue to reflexively post links that you think substantiate your argument, but in fact completely reject your argument. You seem like a smart enough person, you just don't seem to check or read the links "they" gave you. Maybe you should read your links first, before you pass them along as truth. Like I said, you seem like a smart enough person, you just have to start thinking by yourself using your own brain, and step outside the box for a bit...

 

[RWS]

When you have to revert to propaganda and lies to justify things, it's probably a good time to step outside the box and re-examine the situation you're in.

Because you're in the same boat as the Nazi soldiers were otherwise at first. If they could have thought about things a little bit without it being forced down their throats, maybe they would have left and not participated, and maybe fought against it... But no, most had to follow, instead of thinking clearly, and that was due to their brainwashing.

It's something to consider, because it's the same scenario with the major religions today, and in the past.

You're brainwashed to the point where you have to post propaganda and lies to substantiate your agenda.

Instead of trying to learn other ideas about goodness...

 

[ding]

No. You have morals. They are just relative. They can change. Maybe you need social morals for free!

My morals will never change. They're pretty basic and simple. Nothing can change them. Yours however, are subject to the religion of the time. If the Pope changes his mind about something, it changes your morals.

Your morals are relative to the changes made in your religion. Which means you are an unstable person, morally. And subject to the whims of another human being that tells you what's right and wrong.

We had a big long discussion on this already, you sure seemed like believed that morals were relative. So now you claim your won't change. Which is it?

Nope, the religion is fixed. Popes aren't like presidents. They don't write executive orders to change dogma or the CCC. But nice try. Besides, I don't worry about that or secular laws, I follow the dictate of my conscience.

If I'm an unstable person that would mean you were less than an unstable person. So, I can't be an unstable person.

Post that discussion. My morals don't change. Otherwise, I'm calling you out for being a forum liar on top of everything else.

You can't post fake stuff against me. When are you going to learn that? I've been calling you out on your fake stuff over and over. So now I'm going to hold you to it this time...

Post that discussion? WTF does that mean? Did you have a change of heart?

Dude... first of all, what you claim as "morals" needs to be questioned.

Because you keep using that word, and I don't think it means what you think it means...

Morals means a love of life, and doing your part in the best interest of the world's interest, and not your own. It means being "good". On the small and large scale, that means helping everyone around you, regardless of differences of opinion, in order to promote peace and understanding and the well-being of our species and the world.

However, there are people like you, that want to destroy peace and understanding by insisting their religion is true, and that everyone else is an asshole and has no morals or corrupt morals, and deserve to eat dog poo...

And as much as I want to understand and empathize, I also have to realize when it's time to cut out a cancer. You give me no reason why you think like you do, you just put everyone down who thinks differently and dismiss their ideas. I've been trying with you, to get you to some sort of mutual understanding about the rest of the world.

But I failed.

Everything I have said in various threads has flown past your head, and you continue to reflexively post links that you think substantiate your argument, but in fact completely reject your argument. You seem like a smart enough person, you just don't seem to check or read the links "they" gave you. Maybe you should read your links first, before you pass them along as truth. Like I said, you seem like a smart enough person, you just have to start thinking by yourself using your own brain, and step outside the box for a bit...

So if only everyone in the world would think like you. Then we would all be uniform and homogenized. That's a dangerous position if you ask me.

 

[ding]

When you have to revert to propaganda and lies to justify things, it's probably a good time to step outside the box and re-examine the situation you're in.

Because you're in the same boat as the Nazi soldiers were otherwise at first. If they could have thought about things a little bit without it being forced down their throats, maybe they would have left and not participated, and maybe fought against it... But no, most had to follow, instead of thinking clearly, and that was due to their brainwashing.

It's something to consider, because it's the same scenario with the major religions today, and in the past.

You're brainwashed to the point where you have to post propaganda and lies to substantiate your agenda.

Instead of trying to learn other ideas about goodness...

No, my friend. You are. I want diversity of thought. You want uniformity. You want conformity.

 

[danielpalos]

according the right; Jesus the Christ was "just a Troll" asking for trouble.

Yes, some people do say and believe that.

Only because He was poor.

No. Only because they are idiots.

only diversion instead of a good argument?

it is about capitalism and economics, as a form of metrics and the study, thereof.

 

[ding]

according the right; Jesus the Christ was "just a Troll" asking for trouble.

Yes, some people do say and believe that.

Only because He was poor.

No. Only because they are idiots.

only diversion instead of a good argument?

it is about capitalism and economics, as a form of metrics and the study, thereof.

I thought that was an excellent argument.

It is about fanatical behaviors and uniformity.

 

[danielpalos]

according the right; Jesus the Christ was "just a Troll" asking for trouble.

Yes, some people do say and believe that.

Only because He was poor.

No. Only because they are idiots.

only diversion instead of a good argument?

it is about capitalism and economics, as a form of metrics and the study, thereof.

I thought that was an excellent argument.

It is about fanatical behaviors and uniformity.

You mean like the "group think" required to get into Heaven?

 

[ding]

Yes, some people do say and believe that.

Only because He was poor.

No. Only because they are idiots.

only diversion instead of a good argument?

it is about capitalism and economics, as a form of metrics and the study, thereof.

I thought that was an excellent argument.

It is about fanatical behaviors and uniformity.

You mean like the "group think" required to get into Heaven?

No. That would be required to get into hell.

 

[danielpalos]

Only because He was poor.

No. Only because they are idiots.

only diversion instead of a good argument?

it is about capitalism and economics, as a form of metrics and the study, thereof.

I thought that was an excellent argument.

It is about fanatical behaviors and uniformity.

You mean like the "group think" required to get into Heaven?

No. That would be required to get into hell.

You need a mandamus from Jesus the Christ, to get into Heaven.

 

[ding]

No. Only because they are idiots.

only diversion instead of a good argument?

it is about capitalism and economics, as a form of metrics and the study, thereof.

I thought that was an excellent argument.

It is about fanatical behaviors and uniformity.

You mean like the "group think" required to get into Heaven?

No. That would be required to get into hell.

You need a mandamus from Jesus the Christ, to get into Heaven.

Maybe you just need to throw yourself on His mercy.

 

[danielpalos]

only diversion instead of a good argument?

it is about capitalism and economics, as a form of metrics and the study, thereof.

I thought that was an excellent argument.

It is about fanatical behaviors and uniformity.

You mean like the "group think" required to get into Heaven?

No. That would be required to get into hell.

You need a mandamus from Jesus the Christ, to get into Heaven.

Maybe you just need to throw yourself on His mercy.

same Thing.

 

[ding]

I thought that was an excellent argument.

It is about fanatical behaviors and uniformity.

You mean like the "group think" required to get into Heaven?

No. That would be required to get into hell.

You need a mandamus from Jesus the Christ, to get into Heaven.

Maybe you just need to throw yourself on His mercy.

same Thing.

You have a funny way of talking.

 

[danielpalos]

You mean like the "group think" required to get into Heaven?

No. That would be required to get into hell.

You need a mandamus from Jesus the Christ, to get into Heaven.

Maybe you just need to throw yourself on His mercy.

same Thing.

You have a funny way of talking.

You have a funny way of listening.

 

[ding]

No. That would be required to get into hell.

You need a mandamus from Jesus the Christ, to get into Heaven.

Maybe you just need to throw yourself on His mercy.

same Thing.

You have a funny way of talking.

You have a funny way of listening.

No. I'm pretty sure it's you.

 

[danielpalos]

You need a mandamus from Jesus the Christ, to get into Heaven.

Maybe you just need to throw yourself on His mercy.

same Thing.

You have a funny way of talking.

You have a funny way of listening.

No. I'm pretty sure it's you.

not me; i have valid arguments.

 

[ding]

Maybe you just need to throw yourself on His mercy.

same Thing.

You have a funny way of talking.

You have a funny way of listening.

No. I'm pretty sure it's you.

not me; i have valid arguments.

If that were the case you would have social morals for free.

 

[RWS]

Understand this... ding is of the belief that you have to have a religion in order to have morals. So you must sacrifice freedom, and money and children, in order to have morals.

He doesn't understand that morals are a part of natural selection. He thinks they are intrinsically tied to his religion. And he also doesn't understand that the morals they preach are not necessarily what is good for humanity. Just what's good for his religion.

So, if you have no religion, then you can have no morals... And thus, you have no meaning in ding's world. We are less than the devil, in his view...

You have to understand the psychosis...

No. You have morals. They are just relative. They can change. Maybe you need social morals for free!

"Just relative"???

Yes.

We do not accept the morals of the old testament.

In fact, the NT made improvements.

And, we have improved from there.

Their religion is socialism which worships big government and social policy. It is based on atheism and deification of man. It proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and communality or equality. The religious nature of socialism explains the extraordinary attraction to socialist doctrines and its capacity to inflame individuals and inspire popular movements and condemn respect for any who believe in Christianity. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. Their hostility towards traditional religions is that of an animosity between a rival religion. They can be identified by an external locus of control. They worship science but are the first to reject it.

No, socialism is the ownership of means of production by the state or otherwise by the population as a whole. So, socialism has nothing to do with this discussion, because we don't have that. Not even our military has its own means of production!

And, moral relativism is in contrast to moral absolutism and is about whether the context of an act matters. It pertains to questions such as whether you would shoot someone if it IS certain that doing so would save innocent lives - or would you abide by the absolute that taking a life is wrong. This is only one example of course. It could also address issues such as what should be our response if a civilian drives in a reckless manner while transporting a critically injured person to a hospital, or what our statutes of limitation should be, etc.

Multiculturalism has to do with whether we accept other cultures. You should explain what you mean by decrying multiculturalism in a discussion of religion. Remember that the acceptance of multiple religions was explicitly stated in our constitution.

Well done, I have been trying, but you said it the best!

Be wary of the links he reflexively posts...

 

[RWS]

My morals will never change. They're pretty basic and simple. Nothing can change them. Yours however, are subject to the religion of the time. If the Pope changes his mind about something, it changes your morals.

Your morals are relative to the changes made in your religion. Which means you are an unstable person, morally. And subject to the whims of another human being that tells you what's right and wrong.

We had a big long discussion on this already, you sure seemed like believed that morals were relative. So now you claim your won't change. Which is it?

Nope, the religion is fixed. Popes aren't like presidents. They don't write executive orders to change dogma or the CCC. But nice try. Besides, I don't worry about that or secular laws, I follow the dictate of my conscience.

If I'm an unstable person that would mean you were less than an unstable person. So, I can't be an unstable person.

Post that discussion. My morals don't change. Otherwise, I'm calling you out for being a forum liar on top of everything else.

You can't post fake stuff against me. When are you going to learn that? I've been calling you out on your fake stuff over and over. So now I'm going to hold you to it this time...

Post that discussion? WTF does that mean? Did you have a change of heart?

Dude... first of all, what you claim as "morals" needs to be questioned.

Because you keep using that word, and I don't think it means what you think it means...

Morals means a love of life, and doing your part in the best interest of the world's interest, and not your own. It means being "good". On the small and large scale, that means helping everyone around you, regardless of differences of opinion, in order to promote peace and understanding and the well-being of our species and the world.

However, there are people like you, that want to destroy peace and understanding by insisting their religion is true, and that everyone else is an asshole and has no morals or corrupt morals, and deserve to eat dog poo...

And as much as I want to understand and empathize, I also have to realize when it's time to cut out a cancer. You give me no reason why you think like you do, you just put everyone down who thinks differently and dismiss their ideas. I've been trying with you, to get you to some sort of mutual understanding about the rest of the world.

But I failed.

Everything I have said in various threads has flown past your head, and you continue to reflexively post links that you think substantiate your argument, but in fact completely reject your argument. You seem like a smart enough person, you just don't seem to check or read the links "they" gave you. Maybe you should read your links first, before you pass them along as truth. Like I said, you seem like a smart enough person, you just have to start thinking by yourself using your own brain, and step outside the box for a bit...

So if only everyone in the world would think like you. Then we would all be uniform and homogenized. That's a dangerous position if you ask me.

It's the people that think like you who want to force everyone else to think like you, and yes, they want to be uniform and homo'd... At the expense of everyone else.

Me? I think people should think for themselves, and live to their fullest, as long as it isn't hurting others in doing so. Do your best, in your real life, and help others get through it. And then... if there's a heaven, you should be good for induction regardless of your religion...

 

[ding]

We had a big long discussion on this already, you sure seemed like believed that morals were relative. So now you claim your won't change. Which is it?

Nope, the religion is fixed. Popes aren't like presidents. They don't write executive orders to change dogma or the CCC. But nice try. Besides, I don't worry about that or secular laws, I follow the dictate of my conscience.

If I'm an unstable person that would mean you were less than an unstable person. So, I can't be an unstable person.

Post that discussion. My morals don't change. Otherwise, I'm calling you out for being a forum liar on top of everything else.

You can't post fake stuff against me. When are you going to learn that? I've been calling you out on your fake stuff over and over. So now I'm going to hold you to it this time...

Post that discussion? WTF does that mean? Did you have a change of heart?

Dude... first of all, what you claim as "morals" needs to be questioned.

Because you keep using that word, and I don't think it means what you think it means...

Morals means a love of life, and doing your part in the best interest of the world's interest, and not your own. It means being "good". On the small and large scale, that means helping everyone around you, regardless of differences of opinion, in order to promote peace and understanding and the well-being of our species and the world.

However, there are people like you, that want to destroy peace and understanding by insisting their religion is true, and that everyone else is an asshole and has no morals or corrupt morals, and deserve to eat dog poo...

And as much as I want to understand and empathize, I also have to realize when it's time to cut out a cancer. You give me no reason why you think like you do, you just put everyone down who thinks differently and dismiss their ideas. I've been trying with you, to get you to some sort of mutual understanding about the rest of the world.

But I failed.

Everything I have said in various threads has flown past your head, and you continue to reflexively post links that you think substantiate your argument, but in fact completely reject your argument. You seem like a smart enough person, you just don't seem to check or read the links "they" gave you. Maybe you should read your links first, before you pass them along as truth. Like I said, you seem like a smart enough person, you just have to start thinking by yourself using your own brain, and step outside the box for a bit...

So if only everyone in the world would think like you. Then we would all be uniform and homogenized. That's a dangerous position if you ask me.

It's the people that think like you who want to force everyone else to think like you, and yes, they want to be uniform and homo'd... At the expense of everyone else.

Me? I think people should think for themselves, and live to their fullest, as long as it isn't hurting others in doing so. Do your best, in your real life, and help others get through it. And then... if there's a heaven, you should be good for induction regardless of your religion...

But you have that backwards, you are the one who wants to abolish religion and force people to believe as you do.