History's Greatest Holocaust Via Atheistic Ideology

Check your reading comprehension, Buz.......

.................But did you notice the usual Holmes spin? Had it been, "Where ever there's no affliction and persecution, atheism goes" I'd had no problem, for then the responsive comment would have been fair and balanced.

Check your reading comprehension. Look at the stuff before and after the sentence in question. It is hilarious; pointing out that you had presented an argument, which when taken at face value, appeared to be arguing that atheism was not to be found in places where there is afflication and persecution. It was bizarre. Holmes was not making the argument; he was pointing out that your argument carried that suggestion. Here it is for you again to admire: taken from Message 218. The unintentional humour of the claim is hilarious. Think about the implications of what Runner18 was saying. Holmes was bringing out those implications for us; not presenting his own estimation.Cheers -- Sylas [This message has been edited by Sylas, 02-21-2004]

Just to be nice to buz, I'll point out it was Runner's argument and not buz's I was responding to.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

quote:

---

But did you notice the usual Holmes spin?

---

I thank you for pointing out that the usual "Holmes spin" is nothing more than your misreading of my posts. Sylas did a good job of pointing out how wrong you were but I would like to add something...I would never make a claim that atheism is the panacea for the ills of the world. Faith or lack of faith is NOT a CAUSE of anything.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Argh. You are right; and I belong with buzsaw in the remedial reading class. I have fixed up my post in edit to acknowledge the error and apologize to buzsaw.Thanks -- Sylas

quote:

---

Argh. You are right; and I belong with buzsaw in the remedial reading class.

---

Don't feel too bad. I started a thread punking on something Bush said, and ended up putting in my own error. Percy delivered karma in short order.At least you simply missed who I was talking about. Buz had to miss a whole lot more words, a whole lot more important words, to make his mistake.Frankly, all your posts have been really well done as far as I can tell. Better than mine.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Silas, you're digging the ditch of your wrongful criticism deeper by the apology followed by a retraction via correction of names.Thoughtfully consider:1. Runner 18 states that there are these oppressed and unblessed places where few athiests are to be found.2. Holmes's statement implies that Runner is lending athiesm supportive advertizement. Not true. Why? Because Holmes's statement is neither accurate nor is it a clear assessment of Runner's statement. Holmes is spinning Runner to say "Wherever atheism goes there is no affliction."3. I was correct in stating this is a spin job and that Holmes needs to go back to page one where this is addressed, my point there being that history's greatest holocaust was in an atheist/secularist driven culture and government. Thus, [i]the statement that "where atheism goes there is no affliction or persecution" has been historically proven to be false, nor was it the point of Runner's statement which implies that athiesm flourishes where freedom abounds and where they aren't afflicted.My additional comment is that atheism, like all ideologies enjoys the blessings of Biblical Christianity, all the while it feverishly labors to undermine the source of the blessings it is enjoying, not too unlike the culturististic welfare recipients who have lots of time on their hands to loudly protest the establishment that feeds them while refusing to assume the responsibilities of that establishment, except with atheism we're talking ideology rather than establishment.Comprende?

quote:

---

My additional comment is that atheism, like all ideologies enjoys the blessings of Biblical Christianity,

---

Actually, atheists and Christains and many others all enjoy the blessings of our secular, non-religious government.

Scuse me, Schraf, but about those early days of church in Congress, instructions by Gen Washington to Christianize the pagans, opening sessions with prayer to the Biblical god, Jehovah, etc? Government by religion is not the same as free exercise of religion in government as has been practiced in the land of the free for two centuries. Which religion or whether a religion is exercised in government depends on what about everything in a republic goes by -- the ballot box. If you're Islamic and want prayer 5 times daily in Congress to the Islamic god, Allah, you get a majority to implement it into law. LOL, unless via the sword, as in so many other nations. If you want no prayer in Congress, rather than running to the ACLU or the unelected judges, you lobby, you preach and you vote until you have a majority to implement your desire. If you want a Buddah at the entrance of the White House, you do the same and it stays until enough lobby, preach and vote to have it removed. If you don't like the Christmas tree celebration at the White House, same and so forth. Get it? This's what the Constitution calls for in the land of the free where the minority is not suppose to coerce judges for what they want, but where minority become the majority via the old fashioned way. They work for it.

---

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buz

quote:

---

Silas, you're digging the ditch of your wrongful criticism deeper by the apology

---

Buz my boy, if he said what I my argument was, and then I agree that that was my argument... not to mention going over the details of my criticism in another post... how can you possibly tell me that YOU KNOW BETTER what I WAS TRYING TO SAY?How does that make any sense to you?Thoughtfully consider...

quote:

---

1. Runner 18 states that there are these oppressed and unblessed places where few athiests are to be found.

---

Okay, I did. And you can see that I understood this when I broke down his argument premise by premise. If you have a problem with my breakdown, why don't you address my post which did so?

quote:

---

2. Holmes's statement implies that Runner is lending athiesm supportive advertizement. Not true. Why? Because Holmes's statement is neither accurate nor is it a clear assessment of Runner's statement. Holmes is spinning Runner to say "Wherever atheism goes there is no affliction."

---

It's called a reductio ad absurdum. In a slightly later post I showed the specific premises he used, which ones I attacked, and then what that left him with if we were to continue using his logic.My immediate point was that he could not hold on to his position, nor would he want to credit the nature of his argument (should it fall into his opposition's hands.What I can't figure out is even if you missed that specific point, how you could have missed my overall point which was to support NosyNed's position.

quote:

---

3. I was correct in stating this is a spin job... the statement that "where atheism goes there is no affliction or persecution" has been historically proven to be false, nor was it the point of Runner's statement which implies that athiesm flourishes where freedom abounds and where they aren't afflicted.

---

First of all you haven't proven jack, unless you count asserting something first as overwhelming evidence. But I will come to your defense... in fact I ALREADY DID, when I said that atheism is NOT A PANACEA. It would be BULLSHIT to claim that where atheism is there are no social ills of any kind.I realize what Runner was saying and I documented his premises quite clearly. If youu have a problem with my breakdown of them, by all means address that post.He certainly did not mean to say what I said. I am just pointing out someone could play the same game as him... and using his own words as ammo.My additional comment is that atheism, like all ideologies enjoys the blessings of Biblical Christianity, all the while it feverishly labors to undermine the source of the blessings it is enjoying, not too unlike the culturististic welfare recipients who have lots of time on their hands to loudly protest the establishment that feeds them while refusing to assume the responsibilities of that establishment

quote:

---

My additional comment is that atheism, like all ideologies enjoys the blessings of Biblical Christianity, all the while it feverishly labors to undermine the source of the blessings it is enjoying, not too unlike the culturististic welfare recipients who have lots of time on their hands to loudly protest the establishment that feeds them while refusing to assume the responsibilities of that establishment

---

And this ridiculous assertion was dealt with by me as a separate point in the very post you were mistakenly ridiculing... did you not see it? It was also addressed by NosyNed, and I see Schraf has as well.In my post I point out that Xianity used the same benefits that pagans gave to them, and then abandoned paganism. So if we are to view Atheism as bad because it blossoms on the freedom and security that Xian nations planted, does this not make Xianity equally bad? Should we now carry this back to the original founding ideologies where freedom and security began?Or conversely, do we view it that since Xianity was a better system, born in the freedom and security that pagan nations allowed, Atheism must be a better system, born in the still greater freedom and security that Xian nations allowed? Thus are we to view it as a progression, or evolution, to better belief?Your form of argument forces us to the above two questions because it makes conclusions of good/bad based on where and how an ideology has taken root.As NosyNed, and Schraf have already stated... and I was supporting... perhaps the better view, which does not reduce us two the above questions, are that Atheism tends to flourish where government and education are secular, thus freeing people to pursue belief or lack of belief.As evidence for this position I pointed out that under the "blessings" of centuries of Xian government, atheism and the diversity of Xianity were equally strangled. There was neither security nor freedom, except for the ruling dictatorial class.It was only once the people rebelled against theocratic controls, that government and education became secular, and MANY BELIEFS OR LACK THEREOF flourished. All of us benefit by secular systems and good education.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Say what??

Shruggs. Holmes, condense down to a few specific no spin durect responsive statements and I'll respond. I'm getting weary of your rhetorical spin again.

quote:

---

but about those early days of church in Congress, instructions by Gen Washington to Christianize the pagans, opening sessions with prayer to the Biblical god, Jehovah, etc?

---

I love how you keep ducking the 1797 treaty with Tripoli. It states quite clearly that the government is not Xian. It makes no difference what individuals practiced, or groups of individuals practiced. It is what the GOVERNMENT DOES.That is why (if you want to reference acts by the early government) subsidized faith based aid and education was shot down by our founding fathers shortly after the government was created. It was stated that the government should never administer programs through religious groups and vice versa.I am also surprised to see you citing a purge of Native Americans and their culture as some indicator of:1) what they felt was necessary to be done to their own citizens?
2) some good Xian "blessings"?
3) your original assertion that the US has always been a benevolent and charitable force in the world due to its Xian background.

quote:

---

Government by religion is not the same as free exercise of religion in government as has been practiced in the land of the free for two centuries.

---

Agreed. Though it was not quite as much as you make out. You will note the treaty of 1797, and the actions to prevent faith based programs from receiving federal money. Many in the government may have prayed together, but they did not agree that everyone should pay together (to religious organizations).

quote:

---

Which religion or whether a religion is exercised in government depends on what about everything in a republic goes by -- the ballot box. If you're Islamic and want prayer 5 times daily in Congress to the Islamic god, Allah, you get a majority to implement it into law.

---

This is bullshit. The US public did not vote the regulations regarding congressional prayer or clergy into law... hell they aren't even backed by laws that the congress voted for. These are simply budgetary items of interest, and customs agreed upon.Frankly, I could care less if all the congress carried bibles and prayed between sessions if that is what they wanted to do. The bigger question to me is how much tax money and time they waste on these frivolous things, and if they are going to legislate that everyone else in congress or in schools must do the same thing.My guess is if we suddenly had an Islamic majority in this country, you'd start asking questions why the public had to shell out for gold and diamond encrusted prayer rugs for each congressman, as well as renovating that capitol dome so it looks more like a minaret, and why they have to waste time before each major vote with a prayer.

quote:

---

If you don't like the Christmas tree celebration at the White House, same and so forth.

---

You know I have no problem with religious celebratory iconography for any of the diverse beliefs which make up our nation. My only concern is that it be in public areas outside of these buildings (or in the main vestibule areas), and be of temporary nature. That big hunk of stone promoting the ten commandments at a courthouse was tacky and offensive, and its permanent nature made it's removal necessary.

quote:

---

Get it? This's what the Constitution calls for in the land of the free where the minority is not suppose to coerce judges for what they want, but where minority become the majority via the old fashioned way.

---

Read history buz... or how about the constitution? The whole point is that the majorities are not supposed to dictate everything. Juries and judges are the way minorities may preserve their freedoms from the ever excessive and increasing demands of the majority in power.Your stance, which is held by many conservatives, is incredibly hypocritical on its face. There is a movement to pack courts with "advocate judges", basing their decisions not on interpreting law through the constitution but by their bibles.That is why you see Bush moving to back an amendment to remove the possibility of gay marriage, because as he states it judges are making the laws up themselves. yet what he does not do is create an amendment stopping judges from doing this very thing because he wants to keep that option open for abortion, free speech, religion, and civil rights.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Post #236 is too long for you to read? What the???None of my statements were spun. They explained what I had said. But if you want simple...1) I use reductio ad absurdum against runner. double plus good.2) I no say atheism cause anything. Agree bad thing happen even if no believe god.3) Xianity come from security Pagans provided. That make Xianity ungrateful welfare recipient like no believers? reductio applies. double plus good.4) Or is no believer like Xian, better than group which set condition for growth? also reductio. double plus good.5) Me think all belief or none grow well together: secular government, education. See this when Xian theocracy fall... secular state rise... that when all do better. Read History: dark age, middle age, enlightenment, modern nations. double plus good.All double plus good.I am getting tired of your spin buz, your spin like you don't understand what I am saying and that ALL my posts are too long so you don't have to answer.You are making yourself look really dumb trying to escape the grave you dug earlier, by digging in the same direction. You are smarter than this. At least I hope you are.[This message has been edited by holmes, 02-21-2004]

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)