Gunman's father: "It's up to God to punish the homosexuals"

[kabirartfling 9,063]

What kind of a monster! How cleverly he turned the topic to state that his son indeed did a good thing by killing those innocent souls because homosexuals will end up in hell no matter what? Bitch i want to slap him so bad, giving us muslims a bad name.

[thatfoxyfeeling 13,401]

Wtf he sounds just as ****ed in the head 

[Chic 20,830]

I don't trust any religion, because the people who follow it tend to hypocritically ignore certain aspects in favor of others that fit their own personal biases. Any organization with such a large number of people believing in it that are uneducated enough to see that such a thing is wrong is most likely false, therefore I see it as idiotic.

Also, most religious people I see are much less literate than atheists. That should tell you something about education, critical thinking and overall comprehension.

[LePetitGAGABLover 21,234]

He can suck my hairy cock for all I care. Oh, one more thing. People like this should not exist. 

[Didymus 34,380]

11 minutes ago, Chic said:

I don't trust any religion, because the people who follow it tend to hypocritically ignore certain aspects in favor of others that fit their own personal biases. Any organization with such a large number of people believing in it that are uneducated enough to see that such a thing is wrong is most likely false, therefore I see it as idiotic.

Also, most religious people I see are much less literate than atheists. That should tell you something about education, critical thinking and overall comprehension.

Except atheists still slavishly hang on to prefabricated models of morality, even though their belief (or "conviction" if you don't fancy that word) actually negates the idea of any attribution of value whatsoever to moral ideas

I don't disagree with you, but I think that the idea of atheists being critical thinkers who find their own way in life is a very overrated idea. Most of them are stuck in other ideologies, self-inflicted or not. People are people, they'll always try to find systems of meaning that suit them in their social environment, whether that's atheism or monotheism. Unless they come to their conclusions outside of a class room (cue everyone believing in evolution theory without having investigated the evidence, or even feeling a need to do so), atheists are just as likely to seek their happiness in an illusion.

I mean, "people who follow [religion] tend to hypocritically ignore certain aspects in favor of others that fit their own personal biases", that's literally how the human brain works It works the exact same way the other way around: atheists will hypocritically ignore certain aspects in favor of a belief in the existence of the theories they despise (not based on experience, but on their bias). Doesn't mean they're bad people, it just means that our brains don't like it when our meaning systems start shaking on their foundations, whatever they are.

[LePetitGAGABLover 21,234]

6 minutes ago, Didymus said:

Except atheists still slavishly hang on to prefabricated models of morality, even though their belief (or "conviction" if you don't fancy that word) actually negates any attribution of value whatsoever to moral ideas

I don't disagree with you, but I think that the idea of atheists being critical thinkers who find their own way in life is a very overrated idea. Most of them are stuck in other ideologies, self-inflicted or not. People are people, they'll always try to find systems of meaning that suit them in their social environment, whether that's atheism or monotheism. Unless they come to their conclusions outside of a class room (cue everyone believing in evolution theory without having investigated the evidence, or even feeling a need to do so), atheists are just as likely to seek their happiness in an illusion.

Brilliant post as always. As a side note, i'm catholic and "believe" in God, but i'm too smart to be fooled. I know that God doesn't exist, but I love the illusion of it, and the possibility of a life after death. Say what you want about religion, but its the only way I can cope with death. 

[GagaMyBlood95 9,915]

But how can he just avoid the fact that 49 people are DEAD because of his son? I can't, I can't...

[Chic 20,830]

14 minutes ago, Didymus said:

Except atheists still slavishly hang on to prefabricated models of morality, even though their belief (or "conviction" if you don't fancy that word) actually negates the idea of any attribution of value whatsoever to moral ideas

I don't disagree with you, but I think that the idea of atheists being critical thinkers who find their own way in life is a very overrated idea. Most of them are stuck in other ideologies, self-inflicted or not. People are people, they'll always try to find systems of meaning that suit them in their social environment, whether that's atheism or monotheism. Unless they come to their conclusions outside of a class room (cue everyone believing in evolution theory without having investigated the evidence, or even feeling a need to do so), atheists are just as likely to seek their happiness in an illusion.

I mean, "people who follow [religion] tend to hypocritically ignore certain aspects in favor of others that fit their own personal biases", that's literally how the human brain works It works the exact same way the other way around: atheists will hypocritically ignore certain aspects in favor of a belief in the existence of the theories they despise (not based on experience, but on their bias).

The difference is that atheists don't abide by a book or a set law of morality. You'd probably be more likely to find a greater ratio of deviations in belief in a group of atheists than a group of religious people, if both groups had an equal number of people. It's true that there are many atheists that don't practice significantly higher levels of critical thinking than religious people, but in a world where religion reigns over atheism, pulling away from the norm is expected to have qualities of critical thinking in it, more so than believing in something that is more likely, statistically, to be indoctrinated from childhood than not. That example being religion.

The reason I differentiate religion and atheism in that sense, is that the religious are meant to abide by rules, and defy sin; all sins are equal in their eyes, correct? Well, in theory. But in practice, their personal prejudices come into play and give them certain priorities. It's much easier, at least, to see it "morally convenient" and "obvious" when a religious person displays hypocritical behavior simply because there is a book telling them what to believe in.

[Didymus 34,380]

Just now, LePetitMonstr said:

Brilliant post as always. As a side note, i'm catholic and believe in God, but i'm too smart to be fooled. I know that God doesn't exist, but I love the illusion of it, and the possibility of a life after death. Say what you want about religion, but its the only way I can cope with death. 

Well, that's very honest I respect that.

I for sure don't believe in a personal god, but I keep my options open. I've sure experienced enough to at least maintain that there are things (as in: personal experiences) that can't (as of yet) be explained away by empirical science, simple as that.

But I definitely follow your logic about other things. I'm too smart to be fooled by the idea that working yourself to death for a little bit of free time (in which you're just consuming products, so in a way you're still working to keep the capitalist system running) is a smart way to go through life (especially if there's quite possibly no afterlife, 'cause then what the **** are you doing with your time lmao), but peer pressure is driving me onwards. I'm too scared to look for other alternatives, even though I know I could probably be a lot happier doing something society tells me not to.

The very fact that we think it's normal to live that kind of lifestyle tells me that we're not necessarily better off than some "barbaric" nations. Look at the suicide rates, the percentage of people taking antidepressants. I'm sure there'd be enough bushmen looking at us like we were ****ing idiots chasing the rainbow, so I'm not gonna judge anyone tbh.

[Slayer 9,227]

Yeah well what do you think your "God" is going to do to your devil child, you piece of sh!t father?

[LePetitGAGABLover 21,234]

8 minutes ago, Didymus said:

Well, that's very honest I respect that.

I for sure don't believe in a personal god, but I keep my options open. I've sure experienced enough to at least maintain that there are things (as in: personal experiences) that can't (as of yet) be explained away by empirical science, simple as that.

But I definitely follow your logic about other things. I'm too smart to be fooled by the idea that working yourself to death for a little bit of free time (in which you're just consuming products, so in a way you're still working to keep the capitalist system running) is a smart way to go through life (especially if there's quite possibly no afterlife, 'cause then what the **** are you doing with your time lmao), but peer pressure is driving me onwards. I'm too scared to look for other alternatives, even though I know I could probably be a lot happier doing something society tells me not to.

The very fact that we think it's normal to live that kind of lifestyle tells me that we're not necessarily better off than some "barbaric" nations. Look at the suicide rates, the percentage of people taking antidepressants. I'm sure there'd be enough bushmen looking at us like we were ****ing idiots chasing the rainbow, so I'm not gonna judge anyone tbh.

Your posts are always spot on. It's quite rather refreshing to have a normal and intellectual conversation in this forum

[Didymus 34,380]

19 minutes ago, Chic said:

The difference is that atheists don't abide by a book or a set law of morality.

But they do subscribe to the law of their countries. And not by volition, because they're just born in that kind of captivity. An atheist true to his belief would at least realize that all those laws were pragmatic and not in any way valuable on their own, yet how many self-proclaimed atheists would agree that robbing a bank is wrong? Why? Isn't that actually a smart decision based on the belief that there's no afterlife to work for? To be good for?

A lot of those things don't make sense. For all that critical thinking atheists are supposed to have, there's very little thinking going in the direction of how they themselves are defined by their nature and their particular environment. That's sad, especially when they then ironically go and judge religious people when they should, in theory, be smart enough to realize that those people are just working with the material they have, just like they themselves were able to work with atheism as a viable option that guaranteed them certain comforts.

19 minutes ago, Chic said:

in a world where religion reigns over atheism, pulling away from the norm is expected to have qualities of critical thinking in it, more so than believing in something that is more likely, statistically, to be indoctrinated from childhood than not. That example being religion.

See, I don't buy that. Sure, you can always question the status quo, but then it doesn't matter what that status quo is. You can find examples for that on any scale possible. And, trust me, empirical science has had more than enough embarrassing episodes where that dynamic of indoctrination becomes clear.

One obvious one being that the now world famous prehistoric cave art was studied by the most distinguished scientists who all dismissed the drawings as scribblings of a few years old maximum. The man who actually found the drawings and defended their (as it turned out, correct) dating had his entire career systematically destroyed by the scientific establishment, only because the theories of that establishment didn't make room for his findings. It was only after the man died that scientists, after repeated studies, had to face the undeniable fact that he had been right.

One of hundreds of possible examples. Another fruitful one is that people living in supposedly modern Western societies today still maintain their belief in a stereotypical "free will" which they then apply to criminal contexts. A murderer is not someone who was led to his actions by the combination of nature/nurture, no, he's a disgusting waste of space that should be killed or at least tortured for the rest of his life by being held in captivity as a punishment. A more religiously inspired idea can't be found in Western culture today, even though science has long discarded the notion that criminals engage in criminal behavior because they're bad people who choose "the wrong thing" intentionally.

People will always favor illusions over facts if those facts attack some of their cherished biased values, even in a society that claims it's superior to others because science is its supposed guide to life. As if. How many people still believe in love? In their mission as a parent? In their destiny as a successful businessman? In the idea that they "deserve" the good things in their lives? In the idea that they are a certain identity that isn't immediately blotted out when certain brain segments shut off or organized just a tiny bit differently? In the idea that it actually does matter what they do in life even though they believe there will be no reward other than annihilation? The grand majority. So no, I really can't agree. I think that Western society builds its identity against "religion" as its opposite, but on no grounds other than a hideous, self-defeating hypocrisy.

[Didymus 34,380]

5 minutes ago, LePetitMonstr said:

Your posts are always spot on. It's quite rather refreshing to have a normal and intellectual conversation in this forum

& agreed!

[Chic 20,830]

12 minutes ago, Didymus said:

But they do subscribe to the law of their countries. And not by volition, because they're just born in that kind of captivity. An atheist true to his belief would at least realize that all those laws were pragmatic and not in any way valuable on their own, yet how many self-proclaimed atheists would agree that robbing a bank is wrong? Why? Isn't that actually a smart decision based on the belief that there's no afterlife to work for? To be good for?

A lot of those things don't make sense. For all that critical thinking atheists are supposed to have, there's very little thinking going in the direction of how they themselves are defined by their nature and their particular environment. That's sad, especially when they then ironically go and judge religious people when they should, in theory, be smart enough to realize that those people are just working with the material they have, just like they themselves were able to work with atheism as a viable option that guaranteed them certain comforts.

See, I don't buy that. Sure, you can always question the status quo, but then it doesn't matter what that status quo is. You can find examples for that on any scale possible. And, trust me, empirical science has had more than enough embarrassing episodes where that dynamic of indoctrination becomes clear.

One obvious one being that the now world famous prehistoric cave art was studied by the most distinguished scientists who all dismissed the drawings as scribblings of a few years old maximum. The man who actually found the drawings and defended their (as it turned out, correct) dating had his entire career systematically destroyed by the scientific establishment, only because the theories of that establishment didn't make room for his findings. It was only after the man died that scientists, after repeated studies, had to face the undeniable fact that he had been right.

One of hundreds of possible examples. Another fruitful one is that people living in supposedly modern Western societies today still maintain their belief in a stereotypical "free will" which they then apply to criminal contexts. A murderer is not someone who was led to his actions by the combination of nature/nurture, no, he's a disgusting waste of space that should be killed or at least tortured for the rest of his life by being held in captivity as a punishment. A more religiously inspired idea can't be found in Western culture today, even though science has long discarded the notion that criminals engage in criminal behavior because they're bad people who choose "the wrong thing" intentionally.

People will always favor illusions over facts if those facts attack some of their cherished biased values, even in a society that claims it's superior to others because science is its supposed guide to life. As if. How many people still believe in love? In their mission as a parent? In their destiny as a successful businessman? In the idea that they "deserve" the good things in their lives? In the idea that they are a certain identity that isn't immediately blotted out when certain brain segments shut off or organized just a tiny bit differently? In the idea that it actually does matter what they do in life even though they believe there will be no reward other than annihilation? The grand majority. So no, I really can't agree. I think that Western society builds its identity against "religion" as its opposite, but on no grounds other than a hideous, self-defeating hypocrisy.

I find your points impressive and thought provoking. I don't have an argument to dispute this right now, but I will mull it over and see how I feel about it. I'm tired as it is.

[Shadowcrest 2,487]

Religion is so awful