Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Standard member shavixmir
    Guppy poo
    17 Sep '10 12:10
    Well, according to the pope that is.

    He says, during a visit to Britain, that atheism is the root of all evil and that Hitler was a good example of an atheist.

    I's gotta find me a religion!
    I wonder if the baptists will have me?
  2. 17 Sep '10 12:19
    Originally posted by shavixmir
    Well, according to the pope that is.

    He says, during a visit to Britain, that atheism is the root of all evil and that Hitler was a good example of an atheist.

    I's gotta find me a religion!
    I wonder if the baptists will have me?
    please don't use benny as a shiny and representative example of christianity. makes you as ignorant as he is.
  3. Standard member Palynka
    Upward Spiral
    17 Sep '10 12:20
    Originally posted by shavixmir
    He says, during a visit to Britain, that atheism is the root of all evil and that Hitler was a good example of an atheist.
    ...according to the headlines.
  4. 17 Sep '10 12:23
    http://onegoodmove.org/1gm/2007-06-02_bousquet_atheist.jpg
  5. 17 Sep '10 13:07
    The pope's comment seems as reasonable as pointing to the a clergy child molester or a fundimentalist terrorrist and saying that is a good example of what religion will do to you.
  6. 17 Sep '10 13:11
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    please don't use benny as a shiny and representative example of christianity. makes you as ignorant as he is.
    Thanks, God.
  7. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    17 Sep '10 13:14
    Originally posted by quackquack
    The pope's comment seems as reasonable as pointing to the a clergy child molester or a fundimentalist terrorrist and saying that is a good example of what religion will do to you.
    You are correct that neither is inherently less reasonable than the other.

    The question, however, is which one of them is true.
  8. 17 Sep '10 13:24
    Originally posted by sh76
    You are correct that neither is inherently less reasonable than the other.

    The question, however, is which one of them is true.
    Neither is true because neither is really the basis of their actions. I think most people can agree that whether or not you believe in religion or basic civil rights you are wrong when you commit attrocities.
  9. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    17 Sep '10 13:26
    Originally posted by quackquack
    Neither is true because neither is really the basis of their actions. I think most people can agree that whether or not you believe in religion or basic civil rights you are wrong when you commit attrocities.
    That doesn't mean there's no causal relationship between the two quantities.

    I'm sure we can all agree, for example, that statistically, Muslims are more likely to engage in suicide bombing than non-Muslims and Catholic Priests are more likely to engage in pedophilia than non-Catholic Priests.

    Can it be said that Athiests are more likely to engage in evil behavior than non-Athiests? Gee, I dunno.
  10. Subscriber Proper Knob
    Cornovii
    17 Sep '10 13:36
    Originally posted by sh76
    That doesn't mean there's no causal relationship between the two quantities.

    I'm sure we can all agree, for example, that statistically, Muslims are more likely to engage in suicide bombing than non-Muslims and Catholic Priests are more likely to engage in pedophilia than non-Catholic Priests.

    Can it be said that Athiests are more likely to engage in evil behavior than non-Athiests? Gee, I dunno.
    Catholic Priests are more likely to engage in pedophilia than non-Catholic Priests.

    That's actually not true. When compared to other denominations the percentage of Catholic priests who commit sex crimes is the same.
  11. 17 Sep '10 13:41
    Originally posted by sh76
    That doesn't mean there's no causal relationship between the two quantities.

    I'm sure we can all agree, for example, that statistically, Muslims are more likely to engage in suicide bombing than non-Muslims and Catholic Priests are more likely to engage in pedophilia than non-Catholic Priests.

    Can it be said that Athiests are more likely to engage in evil behavior than non-Athiests? Gee, I dunno.
    It is an interesting issue. Is it the fault of the Islamic religion that people are more likely to use it as a pretext for suicide bombing or the fault of Catholic priests that they are more likely toengage in pedophalia?
  12. 17 Sep '10 13:46
    Originally posted by sh76
    That doesn't mean there's no causal relationship between the two quantities.

    I'm sure we can all agree, for example, that statistically, Muslims are more likely to engage in suicide bombing than non-Muslims and Catholic Priests are more likely to engage in pedophilia than non-Catholic Priests.

    Can it be said that Athiests are more likely to engage in evil behavior than non-Athiests? Gee, I dunno.
    thats as useless statement as saying blacks are more likely to eat chikin and watermelon.

    what other awesome steretypes do you have? bonus points if we haven't heard them before
  13. 17 Sep '10 13:52 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    thats as useless statement as saying blacks are more likely to eat chikin and watermelon.

    what other awesome steretypes do you have? bonus points if we haven't heard them before
    It is not a stereotype if it is statistically true. It is not useless either if their is a causal relationship and we can explore its effects. Furthermore, if you want to blast anyone you should blast the pope for making what appears to be the most ridiculous steretype in the conversation.
  14. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    17 Sep '10 13:56
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    thats as useless statement as saying blacks are more likely to eat chikin and watermelon.

    what other awesome steretypes do you have? bonus points if we haven't heard them before
    Yes, yes. Political correctness to the rescue. You know perfectly well both are true."Useless"? In what respect? For behavioral purposes? Perhaps. For the purpose of this particular academic debate in determining the merits of quackquack's comparison to what the Pope said, it's quite useful.
  15. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    17 Sep '10 14:00
    Originally posted by quackquack
    It is an interesting issue. Is it the fault of the Islamic religion that people are more likely to use it as a pretext for suicide bombing or the fault of Catholic priests that they are more likely toengage in pedophalia?
    I would say at least partially yes in both cases.

    Whether the suicide bombers are being influenced by legitimate Muslims or people who have perverted the religion, the fact is that people are encouraged, in the name of Islam, to blow themselves up along with hordes of other people. It may not be the "fault" of legitimate Islam, But it's at least partially the fault of what is being passed for Islam by some.

    As for Catholic Priests, when you put grown men who have voluntarily chosen forced celibacy in a position of power and influence over hordes of young boys, yes, you put yourself in a position that child molestation will occur more frequently than otherwise.