Topic: How Thiests and Athiests think (generalized) (Read 2195 times)

DevilsAdvocate · « **on:** December 02, 2004, 10:36:15 PM »

this was moving off topic(not that the thread HAD much of a specific topic) so i decided to place the responce in a new thread.

to be bold, and simple.

religion = passive submissive humans

atheism = free thought, open opinions

this is GENERALIZED and meant to be taken ONLY for the following arguement(i'm not gonna argue those statements with anyone, as there are exceptions to every "rule")

in as much, religion creates "peaceful" people that want "peace", as long as the people living in the next country dont want to move to their neighborhood, otherwise, it's all out WAR.

in as much, atheism creates "questioning" people that want "debate and controversy". these people (like theists) wish to spread this "freethought" idea unto others, and rather than stay at home, they leave, and move in next to Joe T Heist, thus pushing the "peaceful" people to throw up their arms, grab their guns and it's on to WAR.

nojc4me · « **Reply #1 on:** December 03, 2004, 07:53:19 AM »

Religion = submision of thought.
Sounds like (who was it? Marx?) "Religion is the opiate of the masses."
He was right if he was talking about christianity, but Judaism is not only free-thought, it encourages questions.

Anthony Horvath · « **Reply #2 on:** December 03, 2004, 08:02:05 AM »

lol, yes of course, he was right when talking about Christianity- never mind the fact that in the same breath that religion is termed the 'opiate of the masss' religion (and Christianity in particular) is condemned for its Crusades, inquisitions, etc. HMMMMMMMM.

If religion is an opiate, how does that explain the 'fundamentalist menace' that I've heard so many talk about?

Talk about having your cake and eating it too.

Interestingly, Islam is specifically about submission, but few Muslims show signs of being under the influence of an opiate.

I think what's going on is no one has ever asked, "Just what effects do opiates have on people?" To do so would be to reveal the incoherency of the accusation.

nojc4me · « **Reply #3 on:** December 03, 2004, 10:09:17 AM »

Um, good points:
Affects of opiates on people.
Islam = "submission."

Talk about having your cake and eating it too.

I believe I heard Dudley Moore, Hugh Grant, or some other British actor say, "The expression is, 'Eat your cake and have it.' It's easy to have a cake and eat it. It's not so easy to eat one and still have it to look at."

DevilsAdvocate · « **Reply #4 on:** December 05, 2004, 02:02:49 AM »

sorry i didnt specify, yes, i was mainly talking in terms of christianty(havent studied many of the other religions other than basics)

next

Quote from: sntjohnny

If religion is an opiate, how does that explain the 'fundamentalist menace' that I've heard so many talk about?

religion on the masses would be like a mind control type passification drug. the leaders of the masses can wield the power whichever way they so choose. as too whether the masses is a small right wing militant group in arkansas, or a large, established religious sect that sees over the religious upbringing of millions, the ppl who lead have the ability to lead where they want.
atop that, you can twist and bend almost any statement, or idea to your own likeing with some work.

Quote from: sntjohnny

I think what's going on is no one has ever asked, "Just what effects do opiates have on people?" To do so would be to reveal the incoherency of the accusation.

depends on the opiate in question, different forms and potency would yeild different results.

i'm interested in how (your choice of form and potency) it would reveal the incoherency of the accusation, mind elaborating?

DevilsAdvocate · « **Reply #5 on:** December 05, 2004, 02:02:50 AM »

sorry i didnt specify, yes, i was mainly talking in terms of christianty(havent studied many of the other religions other than basics)

next

Quote from: sntjohnny

If religion is an opiate, how does that explain the 'fundamentalist menace' that I've heard so many talk about?

religion on the masses would be like a mind control type passification drug. the leaders of the masses can wield the power whichever way they so choose. as too whether the masses is a small right wing militant group in arkansas, or a large, established religious sect that sees over the religious upbringing of millions, the ppl who lead have the ability to lead where they want.
atop that, you can twist and bend almost any statement, or idea to your own likeing with some work.

Quote from: sntjohnny

I think what's going on is no one has ever asked, "Just what effects do opiates have on people?" To do so would be to reveal the incoherency of the accusation.

depends on the opiate in question, different forms and potency would yeild different results.

i'm interested in how (your choice of form and potency) it would reveal the incoherency of the accusation, mind elaborating?

nojc4me · « **Reply #6 on:** December 05, 2004, 07:53:44 AM »

Redundant often?

DevilsAdvocate · « **Reply #7 on:** December 06, 2004, 01:24:03 AM »

that can happen when i post so late at night.

nojc4me · « **Reply #8 on:** December 07, 2004, 06:29:51 AM »

Redundant often?

<just kidding!>

MagnumRain · « **Reply #9 on:** December 16, 2004, 12:20:59 PM »

Quote

Sounds like (who was it? Marx?) "Religion is the opiate of the masses."

Ummmm...what does opiate mean?

Sir Somebody Something · « **Reply #10 on:** December 16, 2004, 12:57:06 PM »

Quote from: MagnumRain

Quote
Sounds like (who was it? Marx?) "Religion is the opiate of the masses."

Ummmm...what does opiate mean?

Opiate \O"pi*ate\, n. [From Opium: cf. F. opiat.]
1. Originally, a medicine of a thicker consistency than
sirup, prepared with opium. --Parr.
[1913 Webster]

2. Any medicine that contains opium, and has the quality of
inducing sleep or repose; a narcotic.
[1913 Webster]

3. Anything which induces rest or inaction; that which quiets
uneasiness.
[1913 Webster]

EDIT: BETTER?!

DevilsAdvocate · « **Reply #11 on:** December 16, 2004, 01:04:43 PM »

Quote from: Sir Somebody Something

They chose atheism as an opiate. --Bentley.
[1913 Webster]

hmm, three diff webster dictionaries in my house, and three different online dictionaries, and i cannot find THAT quote in any of them.

Sir Somebody Something · « **Reply #12 on:** December 16, 2004, 01:19:20 PM »

Do you have the 1913 one?

I got this off the Internet, anyway--FanFiction.Net's dictionary engine. It's reliable enough. It gives about four or five different dictionary definition sets.

DevilsAdvocate · « **Reply #13 on:** December 16, 2004, 02:55:33 PM »

ahh i see. personally, i would rather have oh, www.webster.com or www.dictionary.com as links to definitions.

anywho, the bolded statement is not actually part of the definition, it's given as a sample use of the word in a sentence.

to include it as "part" of the definition would be *cringes to use this* a red herring.
one could have just as easily used the quote "Religion is the opiate of the masses" and quoted Karl Marx for it.

Sir Somebody Something · « **Reply #14 on:** December 16, 2004, 03:01:19 PM »

Quote from: DevilsAdvocate

ahh i see. personally, i would rather have oh, www.webster.com or www.dictionary.com as links to definitions.

FanFiction.Net was the closest at hand. All I have to do is click the "homepage" button at the top of my browser and I'm there. I didn't want to waste time looking elsewhere for the definition. It was a case of sloth, not reason.

Quote from: DevilsAdvocate

anywho, the bolded statement is not actually part of the definition, it's given as a sample use of the word in a sentence.

Uh... you think?

Quote from: DevilsAdvocate

to include it as "part" of the definition would be *cringes to use this* a red herring.
one could have just as easily used the quote "Religion is the opiate of the masses" and quoted Karl Marx for it.

I just copied and pasted it from the FanFiction.Net dictionary engine... it really wasn't my choice.

DevilsAdvocate · « **Reply #15 on:** December 16, 2004, 03:04:15 PM »

Quote from: Sir Somebody Something

I just copied and pated it from the FanFiction.Net dictionary engine... it really wasn't my choice.

did the voices in your head make you do it?
is there someone standing behind you with a gun, saying copy and paste it ALL or i'll shoot you?

if not, it was your choice, the last line(which you have BOLDED to stand out) is just a sample of the word, not part of the definition, but you included it as such. to give a definition, stick to just the part that IS the definition.

Sir Somebody Something · « **Reply #16 on:** December 16, 2004, 03:11:58 PM »

Is that better, Advocate? (check the definition again)

Author Topic: How Thiests and Athiests think (generalized) (Read 2195 times)

DevilsAdvocate

DevilsAdvocate

DevilsAdvocate

DevilsAdvocate

DevilsAdvocate

DevilsAdvocate

DevilsAdvocate