ALL fanatics are dangerous.
But the real question is: do you know what you are fanatical about?
settino
and all religions are dangerous. How many have died in the name of religion?
stanknasty
Atheist Communism esterminated 100 million people in the 20th century... all the religions combined don't even come close by 99 million.
AHHH but Stinky, is then 1,000,000 acceptable then? What cr@p!!!
Well I live in Utah, so I've seen firsthand the kind of ridiculous laws you can get on the books when an overwhelming religious majority decides to legislate their own brand of morality. If installing your ideas on religious doctrine as the law of the land wasn't so clearly on the agenda for so many evangelicals, other people wouldn't feel so threatened by this particular combination of religious beliefs and political power.
I can't believe that some people (small minority) still believe in evolution. Only easily manipulated and impressionable people still believe in evolution... it's like the tooth fairy, santa claus and the easter bunny... people get a brain. Evolution is for the weak minded.
loathstheright
Really? Do you enjoy the lead paint chips you eat?
you mean religion is for the weak. Evolution is scientifically proven. Nothing about relion is real. Only feable minded morons beleive in such nonsendse
jheron
Nothing to believe when it is proven time and time again. The only people I know who don't believe in evolution are those who can not comprehend how it works or who have bought into creationists false claims and arguments against evolution which have all been disproven.
RichardSRussell
Ha ha, how funny — an adherent of the Great Invisible Sadist in the Sky comparing OTHER people's beliefs to Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny.
FYI, difference between Yahweh and evolution, in a nutshell: evidence!
Yeah, I think you got that backward. While it may be a minority of people in America that understand and accept evolution. The rest of the 1st world moved on years ago. All you have to do is compare test scores between countries to see what's happening here. Low intelligence and poor education leads people to believe in fantastic delusions.
Jesus is a historical figure and his apostles creed are available for all to read and most of the western world has been influenced by his teachings in Law and Morality by which no peoples can live. You are enjoying the fruits of the Judeo-Christian belief....however, we are not enjoying anything from evil-ution... Evolution is fort he weak minded people ...it's like the tooth fairy...it's been thrown in the trash bin of human history. Get used to it...no self respecting scientist regards it anymore...most are going the way of intelligent design. Oh Happy Day!!!
hahahahah! Stanky! you're funny! get laid. You need it. I get on knees to.... while you ou get on your knees to beg forgiveness from a fictional figure. hahahha!!! I have much more fun than you do, for sure.
Actually Stank, the law of the land in America is based on those pesky pagans...Our laws are rooted in Roman law...as in Julius Caesar....not Judeo-Christian law.
It's a problem because they are trying to impose their beliefs on others, in a way that restricts personal freedom. If you don't like gay marriage, don't get a gay marriage, don't like abortions, don't get one. It's that simple. You take your wacky beliefs and go live your life, and I'll leave you alone, and I'll take my wacky beliefs, and you can leave me alone- deal?
well said, Jason. The problem is that kooks try to shove their crap down our throats. I don't kneel to anyone, especially to evangelicals.
Isn't that the deal Hitler struck with Neville Chamberlain?
well said, Jason. The problem is that kooks try to shove their crap down our throats. I don't kneel to anyone, especially to humans who portray themselves as righteous @ssholes
What if people want to have slaves? If you don't want a slave that's your problem...leave the slave owners alone..hahaahaha what a crock your argument is.
Stanky! your arguments are lame. religion are for losers, just like yourself
stanky, you brain-dead dolt, people have rights. Those rights include the right to be free and not be enslaved.
Did you miss the part of your American history class where that was discussed?
You must have been having a bowel movement.
I don't want any kooks teaching young impressionable minds that an explosion happened and a monkey came out of it and it formed into a person.... what a load of crap!!! I suppose you can believe in santa claus if you want to but the rest of us will believe in the truth not this monkey business.
You have to be a troll. No one could be that stupid, stanky. Not even a fundie.
I wonder how you explain the fact that it was acceptable to own slaves according the Bible. Go ahead and explain that, why don't you?
Russ, and Stanknasty, you both obviously have a problem with comprehension with your bogus examples. Its called live and let live unless someone is actually causing physical harm to someone else....like Hilter was doing or Slaveowners did.How are you harmed by gay marriage? You may be offended or uncomfortable with the idea, but how are you harmed?
Do I think churches sould perform such marriages? Only if the church ( being a private organization) decides on its own to recognize the marriages...but on a state and federal level...its about equal rights and should be allowed.
I really find is both sad and amazing that people as ignorant as Stank still exist and were somehow not weeded out by evolution....but their demise is coming, slowly but surely.
to Stinky. A monkey came out of your @ss!!! again, you need a life. GET LAID ALREADY!!!
Goober.
did you wet your undies Stinky?
tready
now I understand why this is the last generation, even after I read in the bible scores of people everywhere would stand defiant against god, I had a hard time beliveing it would happen here,.thanks for proving the bible right once again,I will pray for you all...this is sad....
For the past 2000 years, every generation has had people like you who were completely, firmly, utterly convinced that their generation was the final generation. Every one of them could cite signs and prophecies and portents in the heavens, wars and rumors of wars. Wanna take a guess on how many of them were right? (Hint: It's a nice, round number.) But YOU, of course, are SO MUCH smarter than all of them, which is why all of us should believe YOU, right?
not me...the bible, but you only pretend to know anything about that..
Mr Chihuahua
Send me your money, fool! Lol!
Oh, the Bible, eh? Please cite me chapter and verse where it says "2011 is the year it all comes crashing down". If you can't do that, then all I've got is YOUR WORD for it. Put up or shut up, bigmouth.
Tready – you are absolutely right.
What these people fail to understand is that, while the Old Testament is true and valid, the New Testament gave us Jesus – the Saviour.
Whether these unbelievers like it or not, Jesus, the Divine Mercy, gave messages to St Faustina. HE said we are in the end times and there isn't much of them left. He also said that EVERYONE, even the worst sinner still has time to repent.
Mary,the Mother of Jesus has also said the same. She said that soon the earth will be shifted of it's axis. For a few moments people will see their souls as Jesus sees them [ an awakening of conscience]. It will be done so that more souls can be saved.
Ignore the messages if you wish. I don't mind either way – It's your choice. But when it happens – remember you saw it here. You can't explain it away by science because this is an advance warning.
Look up The Divine Mercy'
People have ridiculed the Miracle at Fatima , in Portugal. They said the miracle of the sun was 70,000 brainwashed Catholics undergoing "Mass hypnosis.
Considering most of the 70,000 witnesses were atheists and communists who went that day to prove the appearance of the Blessed Virgin was a hoax. Hardly brainwashed, eh? Look that up too.
What's sad is your delusion. You think this country is a theocracy and that religion is the foundation of our laws. You think people need to have the threat of damnation hanging over them to make them behave according to some moral code. You think you have a right to tell others how they should live and what they should believe.
Oh, look, Credenza the Creep is back. Did you find the source of those statistics DavefromCincy posted? I'm still waiting to see proof that they were anything but a figment of his imagination.
You kooks don't get it. You're welcome to believe whatever you want. You don't have any right to demand that others live their lives according to those convictions. NONE.
withoutgod
Tready, here is a link that shows, in graph form, the contradictions in the Bible.
http://www.project-reason.org/bibleContra_big.pdf
Examine and tell me why I should believe in something that can't even get itself right.
we embrace reality, dummy!
No, actually you don't. You have tunnel vision.
Sarah Faris
The fact that most evangelicals think that the rapture will occur within their lifetimes- armageddon- and the fact that this is something they wish for scares me to my core. This mindset gives you no room to invest in the future, and it is also incredibly divisive.
Are we really foolish enough to elect someone who believes these are the end of day and have their finger on The Button?
martinipaul
One of the greatest lessons of history is the complete, utter political failure of atheism
Well, since atheism is a philosophical position, not a political preference, I can see why you'd think that. I betcha Christianity is also an utter failure as a school of architecture.
This is a remarkable statement for its total lack of qualification. I would argue that out of all the states that claimed atheism, not a single one practiced secular humanism. The Soviet Union, for example, oppressed the church and forced its citizenry to call themselves atheists, just as it suppressed the theories of Einstein until they could no longer compete against the West without them. While they claimed to be atheist, the reality is that they did what was politically expedient. A lack of reform of the Soviets Union's policy of "scientific atheism" along humanistic lines was largely due to a lack of real secularism among the elite.
The argument by many that secularism is political atheism belies complete ignorance to an obvious fact: There need not be a single atheist in a secular society. Turkey, who is 99% Muslim and still assertively secular, is a good example of this. France, while assertively secular, often sees the intent of secularism skewed by the Catholic plurality, who leverage their power against Islam in particular. America, as a passively secular nation, is not immune to the same unfair leveraging of power.
So, tell me, just what example of "political atheism" if such a thing exists, are you referring to?
hippypoet
people can't let other live as they have the right to do, which is the exact ground of reason that the protesters argue from...funny. i personal think we if have the power to and given the right to do something we are completely in the right to do it and there should be no arguement against it no matter how wrong it may be in your opinions... if you truly care, create a movement of likeminded people and make a statement against it to your rep.
or just stay at home with your thumb up your @sses whinning like little babies dieing without a say! 🙂
hugges and kisses from your local hippypoet
Elagabalus hath arisen!!!
@BoBo... why, thank you... i do love vice...
no god
this god problem is only in america
And only with evangelicals. I have friends who are catholic, mormon...everything else...all pretty much believe in evolution. If you actually know anything about science, biology or chemistry, evolution has been proven. Although it is called a theory, it has more proof behind it than any other scientific theory.
Also, Atheists just believe that there should be no religion in government. People are free to practice whatever religion they want. I would also say that it is every persons right to also criticize those religions when and if they find flaws with a religion. Nothing wrong with open discussion.
Despite Perry's whining, he wasn't really under attack about his religious views...he was under attack for what most people think are stupid ideas....the same for Michelle Bachmann...they just attribute their stupidity to their faith. The only people within the last month who have been attacked for their religion were Huntsman and Romney...and that was by Perry's endorser.
No. It's everywhere.
Heather Morrison
I thought I was the only one who knew there is a magical, invisible dragon in the sky watching over me. On my own, I should be thinking about some medicated time in a padded room, but together we can find a presidential candidate to represent us.
In a word...YES they are dangerous. Ignorance and hatred are not a good mixture.
AdventT7
Not all evangelicals are ingnorant or hateful. Honestly those traits can be attributed to any specific group of people if its values a stomped upon by another group to the point of retaliation. We even have personality types that will become rigid and unyielding if their values are stepped on. That can seem ignorant and hateful to an ignorant person who does not understand what is happening. Are they dangerous though? only as dangerous as anybody else is willing to push their buttons in ignorance. There is a mesure of understanding and ingnorance in all of our "kinds". This article, its sources and all of these comments following it are a perfect example of that fact.
If atheism can not compete with evangelicals politically whose fault is that? If there is too much religion in government, what does that say about atheism? The fittest have indeed survived and will continue to do so. Don't like evangelicals but at least they have the courage of their convictions. When it comes to politics, if you can't stand the heat, atheists, get out of the kitchen.
Atheists have been the best, most kind, unjudmental and helpful people I have ever met.
Once again, just because a lot of people believe something doesn't make it true. Not all people, especially evangelicals, subscribe to rational argument– hence the need for faith- defined as belief in something without consideration of evidence. Faith in itself is an inherently dangerous idea.
@loathstheright... we try. 🙂
No, YOU get out of my life and keep your hands off my rights, martinpaul. I don't care what you believe. I do care when you attempt to force your moral beliefs on others and abrogate their rights. Mind your own business.
Luis Jovel
Sarah Faris says:
Once again, just because a lot of people believe something doesn't make it true. Not all people, especially evangelicals, subscribe to rational argument– hence the need for faith- defined as belief in something without consideration of evidence. Faith in itself is an inherently dangerous idea.
You couldn't be more wrong Sarah. Because there is evidence, we have faith, cf. I Corinthians 15. What you are doing, is building a false definition of faith, to tackle it down, misrepresenting it as what Christians believe faith to be. This type of behavior, is truly dangerous, misrepresenting people's views.
tom tom: make me. Pistols at dawn?
Stick it up your fundament.
It says your good loves the simple minded and therefore made way too many of them. It is tough to be intellegent and there are fewer of us.
Mark me down as a proud and "evangelical" secular humanist.
faith(faith)n.:
From the Oxford Dictionary:
strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.
From Mirriam Webster:
a (1) : belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2) : belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion
b (1) : firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2) : complete trust
something that is believed especially with strong conviction; especially : a system of religious beliefs
I see this all the time– evangelicals like to twist the meaning of words to fit their own meanings. You can't do that and expect to have a linear conversation. It is also evidence of prevalent manipulation by your leaders in that so many of you ascribe to the same language distortions.
Ok, so now that we have that definition thing out of the way, what evidence do you have that can be agreed upon by scientists and supported by a rational argument? Keep in mind that the "because the Bible says so" is not an acceptable response. This would be circular reasoning (God exists because the Bible says that God exists because the Bible says...etc.).
October 17, 2011 at 12:00 am |
Look out the world's gonna end October 21st! This time it's for real lol! A man of GOD says so lol!
katy heys
This guy is a salesman for evangelicalism. Evangelicals are extremists. If they want to have their special little views, they should knock themselves out. But leave the rest of us who aren't interested alone.
'polls indicate that a majority of Americans question evolution'
Polls also show:
1 in 4 Americans think we fought the war of Independence against a nation other than Great Britain
Half of Americans think Christianity is older than Judaism
1 in 5 Americans believe that aliens have abducted themselves or someone they know
6% of Americans think Elvis is alive
1 in 5 Americans think the moon landing was faked
Almost 1 in 5 Americans think that the Earth is the center of the universe (and not in a metaphorical way)
1 in 10 Americans think that environmentalists caused the 2008 BP oil spill to frame the oil industry
Just because a large group of people believe something doesn't mean it is true.
W Gamino
I love you right now.
The BP oil spill was in 2010...
James Probis
Ask George Tiller if evangelicals are dangerous. Oh wait, you can't do that because he was murdered.
Yes, by some lunatic that values life.
What a bunch of whack-baskets.
TomTom, he obviously didn't value all life.
Of course he didn't; like all the whack-baskets, he only values the fetus. The person standing in front of him, with a family, a career, friends, a home? No, of course he didn't care about HIM. The FETUS alone gets his allegiance.
A majority of Americans don't question evolution. Where does he get his facts from?
He obviously gets his facts from Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry. And I cannot believe that in this day and age that there are actually two people who do not believe in evolution running for POTUS. Pat Buchannan has written a book about the suicide of a super power. The fact that two people who are that ignorant are actually being taken seriously by some Americans is a symptom of our suicide.
Guys, so sorry I have to keep pointing this out, but polls show that only a small fraction of Americans (about 1 in 6) accept evolution as a purely naturalistic process. Another somewhat larger group thinks evolution is part of God's design, and that he fiddles with it from time to time. A majority thinks human beings in particular were created from scratch and have not evolved since. If we are to face reality like good scientists, we should acknowledge the facts — including the facts about what people believe — as they exist, not as we would have them.
RichardRussell,those findings are largely irrelevant since it is people with an uninformed opinion who do not truly understand evolution or they refuse to. The problem is that people are taught their religion long before they are taught evolution. Religion already has a firm footing on their world view by the time they learn about evolution. People try to reconcile between the two instead of actually questioning their own religion and this is where God comes into the picture with evolution especially of humans.
Their views are not based on fact, but on bias.
If you're struggling to separate State and Religion, why would it matter that Bachmann and Perry don't believe in evolution, or do believe in God? Obama's a Christian and you don't have a problem with him?
Just because you believe in one scrawny single cell slithering out of the first bog, [ presumably with a hell of a headache from the big bang!] which then went on to form millions of different species and humans, each with their own fingerprints and DNA, doesn't make it so.
Considering ONE major change to a species takes 10,000 years to 'evolve' doesn't explain the sheer scope of the changes needed to produce what we have right now – in the given timescale.
Don't quote Dawkins – he has theories, NOT proof.