Why do/don't you believe in a higher power? (Any HP)

[The Blaatschapen]

I am genuinely happy to see this. I look forward to the post later.

I thought by your reaction earlier that you were going to burst a blood vessel from overwhelming indignation.

I was indeed, deeply concerned.

[Australian rePublic]

Did you think I was joking everytime I said that we should be glad that noone's compared to Hitler?

You're the one who started it.

Where?

[Neutraligon]

1) I mentioned later things like how certain drug laws are based in who was more likely to take which drugs.
5) World War 2 ended in 1945. Civil rights changes started to happen in the mid to late 60s. Which would be the single generation you where talking about. But guess what, many laws lasted well into the 70s and 80s. It was only when getting into the millenials that we where finally starting to move away from racism in the US...and then 9-11 happened
7) The stuff after 9-11 shows you to be wrong it did not help.

1. Noobody forces abyone to drugs. Further, white people are punished receiwve the same punishment az black people. "Woe is me, I can't take drug X"=/=people don't think that I'm black. You've probably got a better argument there, but I haven't reached it. If you link it, I'll read it
5. STARTED- STARTED. Things don't change overnight
7. Islamaphobia=/=racism, and many people don't think that Muslims are subhuman. Evil=/=subhuman. Now, I'm not saying that Muslims are, just that people think they are. Besides, Muslims cause
What about the rest of my points?

1) Correct people choose to do drugs. Why is it though that the drugs that African Americans are perceived to take more have longer jail sentences then the ones whites take (crack and powdered cocaine). This is what I mean, the drugs are practically identical and yet one has more harsh sentencing then the other, why?
2) I never claimed they did.
3) No, but it can be linked to racism since people tend to think of Muslims as people who are Arabic. That is, those who look Arabic but who are not Muslim get the same discrimination. You do realize that racism includes more then just thinking someone is subhuman right? All it has to be is that you think they are lesser than you do to their race.

The rest of the points where you admitting you where wrong or I had a point. I accept that.

[Australian rePublic]

If you want to pick a horrible person who was also an atheist, then Stalin is right there. Hitler, on the other hand, was definitely not an atheist. (It's kind of hard to pin down what exactly he was, but he at least paid lip service to Christianity, and there's also whatever the fuck was going on with Nazi resurrection of Norse paganism.)
But yeah, it's a trash point no matter how you slice it.

Stalin being an atheist is merely a statement of fact, there's not really any getting around that.
Claiming that Hitler is an atheist is a dishonest lie the motivations of which are obvious.

How so?

[Australian rePublic]

But there is because he was educated at an Orthodox Christian Seminar and was going to become a priest.

Can we all agree that Stalin was a douche and him being an Atheist or Christans does not change that or says anything about Christans and Atheist.

Yep. Same applies to Hitler

[Australian rePublic]

Can we all agree that Stalin was a douche and him being an Atheist or Christans does not change that or says anything about Christans and Atheist.

Ditto Hitler.

It would be nice if -- while discussing religion -- we could agree that happening to share a religion/irreligion with a genocidal criminal does not mean that atheists, Christians or the followers of any other religion are genocidal criminals (or remotely predisposed to be genocidal criminals).

Whether or not we agree with the belief system or not.

Thank You

[Australian rePublic]

Stalin being an atheist is merely a statement of fact, there's not really any getting around that.
Claiming that Hitler is an atheist is a dishonest lie the motivations of which are obvious.

Then again, Staling being atheist is irrelevant to other atheists. It's not a kinship of any kind. Even less than both me and him being of the male gender.

After all, I do not have anything in common with fellow atheists. I have something lacking in common with them There are no atheist churches that we regularly frequent, atheist texts that both Stalin and me follow, etc. There is no such thing as atheist dogma

Same applies to Hitler

[Australian rePublic]

Calling someone who disagrees with you uneducated=/=being correct

Calling someone who is clearly bullshitting out, however, is.

Also, what about all the highly educated people who believe in God?

There are very few of them (who mostly remain that way by not thinking about their beliefs), and you clearly are not one of them. Stop trying to avoid the point.

So where dows theology fit into that catagory (i.e. studying your own faith). Theologians are HUGHLY educated, and thinking about their faith is literary their job description

[Australian rePublic]

--EDITED-OUT--

[Australian rePublic]

Okay: Firstly, the NAZIs were a handful of dicks, not an entire nation of them
Secondly, Hitler was a hemroid on the arse of humanity, but he was a necassery evil. Hitler was a total and absolute deadshit who deserves all the hate he gets, but he was a necassery evil. Up until WWII, the concept of inferior/superior races was the norm. If Hitler didn't take things too far, the world will still be believing that garbage.

Okay firstly a few fucking well placed lighting strikes and problem solved. And second how fucking lazy is god? All he needs to do is fucking come down and tell everyone that inferior/superior races is bullshit.

If God had killed all the NAZIs before they had the oppertunity to become NAZIs, then you would be complaining that He killed innocent people who did no real evil

[The New California Republic]

Theologians are HUGHLY educated

Where can I get Hughly educated?

[Free Arabian Nation]

Then again, Staling being atheist is irrelevant to other atheists. It's not a kinship of any kind. Even less than both me and him being of the male gender.

After all, I do not have anything in common with fellow atheists. I have something lacking in common with them There are no atheist churches that we regularly frequent, atheist texts that both Stalin and me follow, etc. There is no such thing as atheist dogma

Same applies to Hitler

Didn't you have this whole speel of "At least nobody has compared anyone to Hitler"?

[Australian rePublic]

Yes, we know. If not Hitler, someone else would have taken over

The Nazis had "God is with us" written on their belt buckles. All it would have taken God to sort this out is one strongly worded letter.

Just because Hutler was an atheist, it doesn't mean that all NAZIs were

[The Blaatschapen]

Then again, Staling being atheist is irrelevant to other atheists. It's not a kinship of any kind. Even less than both me and him being of the male gender.

After all, I do not have anything in common with fellow atheists. I have something lacking in common with them There are no atheist churches that we regularly frequent, atheist texts that both Stalin and me follow, etc. There is no such thing as atheist dogma

Same applies to Hitler

Why did you bring him up?

[Australian rePublic]

Same applies to Hitler

Didn't you have this whole speel of "At least nobody has compared anyone to Hitler"?

Stalin is an exception

[The New California Republic]

The Nazis had "God is with us" written on their belt buckles. All it would have taken God to sort this out is one strongly worded letter.

Just because Hutler was an atheist, it doesn't mean that all NAZIs were

Why do you keep writing that in caps? In fact, why do you keep shouting across the board? Come on man, don't shout at us.

[Australian rePublic]

Just because Hutler was an atheist, it doesn't mean that all NAZIs were

Why do you keep writing that in caps? In fact, why do you keep shouting across the board? Come on man, don't shout at us.

Isn't NAZI an acronym? I thought it was gramatically correct. Every other time I use all caps, it's for emphasis

[Free Arabian Nation]

Why do you keep writing that in caps? In fact, why do you keep shouting across the board? Come on man, don't shout at us.

Isn't NAZI an acronym? I thought it was gramatically correct. Every other time I use all caps, it's for emphasis

It's not

[The New California Republic]

Why do you keep writing that in caps? In fact, why do you keep shouting across the board? Come on man, don't shout at us.

Isn't NAZI an acronym? I thought it was gramatically correct. Every other time I use all caps, it's for emphasis

Please don't, because Nazi is not an acronym, and shouting doesn't make your opinion any more correct.

[Free Arabian Nation]

Isn't NAZI an acronym? I thought it was gramatically correct. Every other time I use all caps, it's for emphasis

Please don't, because Nazi is not an acronym, and shouting doesn't make your opinion any more correct.

*Insert Obvious Joke Here*

[The Blaatschapen]

Nazi is not an acronym.

It's an abbreviation.

It stands for National Socialist. (or National Socialism)

[Australian rePublic]

Nazi is not an acronym.

It's an abbreviation.

It stands for National Socialist. (or National Socialism)

My mistake

[Australian rePublic]

Isn't NAZI an acronym? I thought it was gramatically correct. Every other time I use all caps, it's for emphasis

It's not

My mistake

[Australian rePublic]

What the f%%k? Slander against atheists? Just because ONE dick head was atheist, doesn't mean that all dick heads are atheist. By your own idiotic logic, if you were to call Hitler a Christian, I could call you out for slandering Christians. The vast majority of atheists are NOT dicks, Hitler is the extreme of the extreme fringe of the extreme minority of atheists, but still an atheist. How dare you accuse me of comparing ALL atheists to Hitler. Hitler was ONE of billions of atheists, and for me to compare all of them to Hitler is absolutely ludicrous

1. The only reason one ever sees "Hitler" and "was an atheist" in the same sentence is when somebody, usually fanatically religious, raises it as some kind of perverse trump-card to denigrate all atheists as genocidists and that for morality to exist one needs a 2000-3000 year old book written by Bronze Age tribes as a crutch.
2. Also you are still factually wrong and irrelevant. Hitler professed belief in a deity and even if we accede your factually wrong point the German people as a whole, 3. Catholic and Protestant alike enthusiastically endorsed "der Totaler Krieg", often with thunderous applause.

1. Saying that all atheists are genocodial because Hitler was genocidal is moronic. Comparing all atheists to Hitler is moronic
2. Hitler=/=the German people as a whole. Also, didn't Hitler say that Islam would be a better for the German people? No religious person in the history has ever suggested that anyone convert away from the religion
3. Yea, and?

[Australian rePublic]

What the f%%k? Slander against atheists? Just because ONE dick head was atheist, doesn't mean that all dick heads are atheist. By your own idiotic logic, if you were to call Hitler a Christian, I could call you out for slandering Christians. The vast majority of atheists are NOT dicks, Hitler is the extreme of the extreme fringe of the extreme minority of atheists, but still an atheist. How dare you accuse me of comparing ALL atheists to Hitler. Hitler was ONE of billions of atheists, and for me to compare all of them to Hitler is absolutely ludicrous

Then perhaps you shouldn't lie if you don't want to be called out on it.

How exactly was I lying?