Anti-Neocons

Well, I was just being nice when I made the above comments. If you are experiencing anything after death, that is supernatural. I agree we can explain the transfer of energy in terms of science, but in reincarnation they assume a collective transfer of self to learn more lessons on Earth also supernatural.

I thought this was a cute pix:

There is a lot of presumptions and flaws in that paper.

Here read this:

http://www.survivalafterdeath.org/artic ... ummary.htm

I like the idea's though.

Dying and coming back to life as another animal is supernatural and it is explained by natural laws as retarded and stupid and impossible. AKA it is a religious belief. For one more animals are alive now than before so either new "souls jumped in with the sperm to make new ghost or whatever they think or when one soul from a dead thing is recycled it multiplies and goes into several animals. It is just dumb period that is all there is to it.

"Morality and religion have become so intertwined that many people cannot conceive of ethics divorced from god, even in principle - which leads to the assumption and misconception that the atheist is out to destroy values. Atheism, however, is not the destruction of morality; it is the destruction of supernatural morality. Likewise, atheism is not the destruction of happiness and love; it is the destruction of the idea that happiness and love can be achieved only in another world. "

"If you see the word "moral" as meaning "obeying god's laws" then, yes, atheists are amoral. However, if you see it as meaning a distinction between what's right and what's wrong, between what is acceptable and unacceptable in society, then atheists are as moral as anyone else. Similarly, compassion, love, the urge to care, etc, are not the preserve of the religious: they are innate human characteristics..."

Religious people have a disastrous way of thinking that pits a world view where without religion everything is cultural relativism, which is further twisted to mean that there is no such thing as right and wrong. They believe that only through religious teachings can societies have a clear cut basis for right and wrong (never mind basing it on reason).

First of all even if things were just cultural relativism that would not mean that right and wrong did not exist, it would mean that some rights and wrongs would be different in different cultures. And even within these there would be truths with in a paradigm.* Kant, Hume, Mills, and others found ways and systems around cultural relativism, each in a unique way but never mind that for now.

It is a terrible mistake to equate religion with morality. For one, religion has the worst track record for organizing human beings into committing atrocities. The Bible, for example, supports the divine right of kings, an authoritarian form a government prone to war and corruption. In Christianity's peek of political power, people lived under kings where 90% of the population were serfs. Slavery is supported and advocated in the bible so is animal sacrifice, as well as the second rate status of women and a slew of other ills.

Now apologists (rationalization makers) will claim that the Christians of the past, who pretty much had nonstop war, inquisitions, genocide of American Indians under manifest destiny, burned young women believing them to be witches and threw scientist in jail for saying things we now believe to be true, were not REAL Christians. This is just not true. The entire concept of witches, divine kings, and killing heretics can not exist without the religion.

There are also more minor sexual and dietary taboos invented by religion. The few good concepts like don't steal and don't kill people can be understood by a four year old and hardly warrants a belief in a god or a religious text to understand them. But even these simple moral values that a toddler can understand are broken by religious people with flimsy excuses. Murder is OK if it is a war, and war is OK if it's for your religion. Who has stolen and murdered more people than Christians?

More Jews have been killed by Christians than by Muslims or any other people. More Muslims have been killed by Christians than by anyone else. More Native Americans have been killed by Christians namely Catholics, than by anyone else. More Africans have been killed by Christians than by anyone else. More Christians have been killed by other Christians than by anyone else. More land has been stolen by Christians than by anyone else. In fact the Pope once arrogantly divided all of the new world between Portugal and Spain.

There are some forms of Christianity, that take the good principles more seriously, like the Quakers who believe in non violence, yet according to Ben Franklin, did not have trouble provoking violence from Native Americans by swindling them in business deals and then allowing others to defend them.

What makes someone moral is integrity, compassion, and intelligence (all innate human characteristics). Authoritative systems do not foster these attributes, they cater to fear and place virtue and love in obedience not knowledge.

Our founding fathers many of them atheist and desist broke away from religion and the systems set up by such belief systems. The whole concept of a Republic as opposed the divine rule was a step away from religious absolutism. Freedom and democracy are not Biblical principles. The Bible has King David, King Solomon, and King Saul. There is no voting in the Bible.

Religion serves as authoritative sources to justify crimes against humanity. You don't need a god to believe killing stealing and lying are wrong. Two of the Ten Commandments mention slavery and nowhere does it mention slavery is immoral and wrong. The fourth commandment mentions that even slaves don't have to work on the Sabbath day. And the Tenth commandment says for men not to covet their neighbor's oxen, wife, or slaves. Some revisionist Bibles now says maidservants in place of the word slaves. They can change the words but we have close to two thousand years of recorded history showing they damn well meant and placticed slavery.

It is simply insane to say that religious philosophy is a good ground work for moral values. It creates clear an rigid prejudices. Members of the faith can not even allow themselves to THINK differently under the threat of force, actually under the threat of eternal punishment.

Who currently has such a problem with homosexuals? Religious people. Who is it that blindly supports a war based on lies and has thus supported killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqis? Religious people. Who has an on going conflict between Zionist Jews and Palestinians (or really any non-Zionist)? Religious people. Northern Ireland... Religious people. Muslims and Hindu fighting in Kashmir, religious people again. Who has a fit about stem cell research and abortions?-Religious people. Actually all of these are a mixture of Religion an politics. This is why it is crucial to keep religion out of politics. Be a stupid hate filled bigot on your own time but keep it out of the government!

read the rest if you want, I think it's good. come back here to comment on it.

http://www.rys2sense.com/rpd247/whyathiesimismoral.html
see the rest of this here.

plus look at the history of christianity. divine rule based on blood lines not amazing individuals, was horrid.

religion is as religion does. People will say well that's not true such and such. And I say well those multi billion dollar institutions currently and historically supported all the crazy stuff from slavery, monarchy and holy war to medical and scientific taboos and inquisitions. And to those who profess that their religion makes that religion what it is. No, the majority and actual practises make that religion what it really is.

When Christian churches give away billions of dollars to zionist who use it on an illegal occupation that is what the religion is because those things could not exist with out it.

I judge the religion on its majority and it's history. You can't kill millions of indinas and go oh well we don't bvelieve in that now, yet it has been spun around on to arabs. You can't base the religion on what one person and personalized it to be either. The religion is what it does on a macro level.

I mean the idea of Jesus is silly to me. I mean the man or character was not so bad. However the concept of a god having a kid just so he could kill it or allow it to be killed as a sacrifice to himself to prevent his own wrath from being unleashed on all the people he made for being the way he made them is insane. Oh but you're cool as long as you believe in the killing of his kid. It's like some sick masicistic tantrum.

When did Jesus speak out against slavery? When did he talk about saving mother earth? when did he talk about ending religious wars or to stop treating women like property or that kings were just ordinary men? He didn't. He spoke out against adultry and sex before marraige but not against owning other human beings or selling children etc.

He is over rated.

a rich man with many slaves came to jesus and asked him how he can become one of jesus disiples , jesus told him to give up his richs to the poor , free all his slaves and then wear a simple garmet ,then follow him and learn from him . the rich man turned and walked away

No the story is he does not have slaves and he is not told to give money to the the poor but to give his money to the Church.

you might say that religions and their teachings are bad to humanity , but to me seeing you ( none beliver of god ) still breathin . shows me gods endless mercy for us ( humans )

or how compassionate that an egotistical god spares me from its own wrath because one temporary human being in the universe doesn't worship him.