[deleted]
[deleted]
Yes, unfortunately both sides of the political spectrum are seeped in illogical thought.
share
MovieChat Forums > Ben Shapiro Discussion > [deleted]
So does Diaper Joe, Barack Obama and the vast majority of the DemoKKKrat cult.
shareI'm certain there are some secret atheists in there who only claim to be religious, but atheism doesn't mean much anymore when it comes to being a rational human being.
I used to watch various atheists on Youtube back in the day, and it's always interesting to me how most of them have become fully indoctrinated by modern leftism and its varying degrees of insanity. Against organized religion but fully ready and willing to be melded into a different cult-like group with illogical beliefs. Very ironic indeed.
All atheism means is you don’t accept theistic claims, it’s not the belief that theistic claims are wrong. It’s actually quite rational, you shouldn’t accept a position unless there’s a reason to.
shareI'm not disputing that atheism is a rational position, and that's part of my point.
shareOK, my only point was that it was stupid to attack Conservatives for being Christian when the vast majority of DemoKKKrats are as well.
shareBoth parties have religious people and are illogical in various ways, definitely not disagreeing there.
It's just interesting how someone like Walsh for instance is so ready to be rigidly logical and scientific when it comes to sex/gender, but in other areas clearly defers to the bible and religion for his beliefs, while also saying his main goal is to "get to heaven" first and foremost.
He has the blinders on when it comes to his own irrational beliefs, and the same can be said about the people I mentioned in my other post. But yeah, I'm not disagreeing with you.
Not here to defend Walsh or anyone on the right. Both the Republicans and the DemoKKKrats are scientifically illiterate, just the DemoKKKrats are far far worse.
shareAll people are irrational. That is the science. Pointing to one group, or groups, taht you happen to not belong to and seeing how they are irrational, is an irrational act.
Religion, especially Christianity, has an imporant and constructive purpose in building working civilizations, such as our own.
The modern world was and is, built on Christian beliefs and structures.
There's nothing irrational about pointing out something irrational, unless what you're pointing out isn't irrational. Which isn't the case here.
Civilization was born out of utility, not some religious concept. You can achieve more, more easily with more people, and through the act of trade, gain more than you ever would by yourself.
The bible, in all its ridiculousness, was created by humans... and the things which do make sense in there from a moral perspective were constructed from man's experiences. There are many things which no longer make sense at all, because they were a product of the time the writers were living in.
But fundamentally, you don't bash your neighbor's brains in because there's going to be consequences, and we do in fact have the ability to empathize with our fellow human beings. The golden rule of treating others how you wish to be treated is a simple logical concept that dates back thousands of years.
We can go into the reasons why religion exists - as a way for our limited brains to make sense of the world, to fill in the gaps of so many "why" questions that humans feel uncomfortable not knowing, to convey moral concepts we've learned, as a tool of control, etc... but there's zero doubt that it has caused many bloody conflicts in history, led to irrational/magical thinking on a grand scale, allowed barbaric societies to form and perpetuate with things like Sharia law, brutally divided people for inherently illogical reasons, limited scientific progress, and more.
People inherently have the ability to be logical and empathetic, and most don't need some scripture to tell them how to be a decent human being. Or some threat of eternal punishment. In fact, this type of "just apologize to god and you'll be forgiven" concept can lead to worse behavior, because it gives you a kind of get-out-of-jail-free card for wrongdoings, and the pressure isn't solely on you to make things right, here and now... with no afterlife or inevitable biblical apocalypse to fantasize about.
1. Civilization was evolved with religion as a major pillar. That you want to ignore that, is you being irrationally.... bigoted against religon and religious people.
2. Human nature has not changed since "biblical times" and some of our worst periods in history came when we though they had or we actively tried to change them. See WWI, and The communists genocides.
3. Fundementally, we often DO bash our neighbors heads in. On many levels.
4. Your take on history is confirmation bias.
5. People are inherently ILLOGICAL AND SELFISH. Reason and empathy have to be taugh/learned.
6. "Make things right, here and now"? But what defines "right"? That sounds like a moral argument...
1. Christianity (which is obviously what you're mainly referring to) didn't exist 10,000 years ago, yet societies were being created and consistently evolving into more advanced forms nonetheless. Or are you a proponent of Young Earth creationism?
2. Humans' primitive urges remain, but what's acceptable in society has changed. The development of modern morality has been an evolution of thought over thousands of years, and you can see this even with what's in the old testament - blood sacrifice, death penalty for working on the sabbath, death penalty for adulterers, stoning unruly children, slavery is acceptable, etc. etc... things which we'd never accept today as moral.
3. I never said humans are perfect. However, if all humans did was bash their neighbor's heads in and not cooperate with each other then there would be no civilization as we know it.
4. Okay?
5. I never said they didn't need to be taught/learned, I said people inherently have the ability to be logical and empathic without religion. Again, these are concepts that humans have developed over thousands of years by cooperating with each other and building societies.
6. I've already explained this. Do you think morality just poofed into existence when the bible was written? Again, are you a Young Earth creationist?
1. No, I said what I meant. Civilization evolved with religion as a pillar. Wanting to ignore that is irrational and bigoted.
2. What is socially acceptable is not human nature. Confusing the two, is a good way to become lost. The people of... The aztec culture that engaged in mass human sacrfice as part of their normal life, were identical to us, in human nature. There is nothing about us INHERENTLY different between US and them. Do you understand that?
3. I dont understand what you are tyring to say here.
4. Are you aware of the role that the Church played in teh evolution of Universities?
5. Cooperation and societies suffused with religion. Impossible to seperate.
6. I've seen nothing in this thread that explains it. What are you talking about when you say "right" and where does it come from?
This conversation is getting absolutely nowhere. You either ignored or didn't understand most of my previous post, and won't answer whether you believe morality poofed into existence when the bible was written, or whether you're a Young Earth creationist (which would basically be necessitated by your apparent beliefs).
I never said that what is socially acceptable inherently equates to "human nature". I also literally said that humans' primitive urges remain, so you pointing out that the Aztecs also had primitive urges is entirely irrelevant. What is relevant though is that they developed a religion based on human sacrifice to "please the gods", to try to gain control over a chaotic world where weather was a mystery and crops could die from forces out of their control.
This is ironically a direct example of what I already stated: religion enabling bloody conflicts, irrational/magical thinking, and barbaric societies to form... and religion being created as a way for our limited brains to make sense of the world, and to attempt to answer unexplainable things.
Anyway, if you're not going to do me the courtesy of actually responding to my points or answering basic questions, we have nothing more to discuss.
My point was NOT that aztec's had "primitive urges", but that they were the same as us, that human nature is the same so old stories and ideas are just as relevant as every.
My morality is mostly from my parents. Who were standard working class Christian Americans of their time.
You are not very clear about your points, other than blaming "religion".
Most if not all are CINOs. Christian in name only.
shareI used to think this way, too, and I’m still secretly an atheist for intellectual reasons.
Here’s the thing, though. Women aren’t and shouldn’t be. Their reliance on dogma pacifies them, makes them emotional and malleable, and is basically an aphrodisiac!
Outspoken atheists are committing social suicide and only attracting crazy feminists and unfaithful nymphos. When you’re a young idealist man, it’s easy to get caught in the trap of shitting on fairy tales in the name rationality and integrity. At a certain point, most wise up and pay a little lip service to the beauty of religion, spirituality and the history of human civilization.
Also, if you’re sick of hearing about gay culture, it’s much easier to be “homophobic” if you, at least, “love Jesus.” lmao
By the way, despite what you may think about these guys (Shapiro, Walsh, etc) there is little doubt they are getting so much tail.
I'd say more delusional. At least we know the trans person is real. And the trans person more than likely doesn't have millions of people around the world committing violent atrocities in their name. Personally I'm cisgender, so I don't really "get" it either. But I'm also big on personal choice, live and let live, you do you. They're not hurting anyone, except arguably themselves as those surgeries have to be painful, so it's gotta be something they really want. But unlike God, the trans person is provably alive, here, real, and for that I'll always take their side
shareWe know the trans person is real in that they are a human being, we also know the trans person has a real delusion as there's no such thing as being born into the wrong body. A man cannot become a woman and vice versa.
shareWe'll have to agree to disagree. There are plenty of experts, smarter than me, and likely smarter than you, who would say it is. And again, their life, not hurting anyone. And again, a real person gets priority over a deity that I don't know is real. And plenty of cultures through history have acknowledged more than one gender, we're just in sort of a Puritanical place right now. Lastly, humanity has invented plenty of constraints that we choose to live within, such as time by a clock, ie "Gotta be at the office at 8am," and currency, and thus poverty. We can adapt to letting people do what they want with their own damn bodies. And while you might not agree with their "delusion," it also hurts/costs you nothing to call them what they prefer. I'd bet you've referred to a singular person as "they." You probably have someone in your life who is cishet, but prefers their middle name, or a nickname, for whatever reason, and you abide by that for them. It's really no different. Even if you don't agree with it, everyone's just better off to go with it, because again, they're not hurting you.
shareYou can disagree with biology all you want to but biology does not care about your disagreement. There are plenty of experts who claim lots of things but I've yet to see any proof. Prove to me now that gender exists as the concept you say it does. I can prove biological sex exists, you cannot do the same for gender. It's unfalsifiable and real science considers anything unfalsifiable to be junk.
You keep talking about not hurting anyone which just means you are ignorant to reality. Putting males in female spaces puts females at risk.
https://reduxx.info/ireland-extremely-dangerous-transgender-inmate-moved-out-of-womens-prison-after-threatening-to-rape-female-staff/
There's also plenty of harm being done to the people who are having these unnecessary surgeries done to them.
https://www.jamesesses.com/p/the-butcher-of-louth
Everything else you said is unfortunately just ideological cope to the reality of the situation. Convincing impressionable minors to have irreversible surgery is in no way comparable to calling someone a different name (which is something absolutely no one has an issue with. I just wont call a man a woman or vice versa)
I don't use your cult slurs like cishet either, the word you are looking for is normal.
I believe in God too. Kind of stupid to think that we appeared out of nowhere. Even if God is an ancient astronaut there is plenty of evidence all around us of advanced civilizations.
shareSo you can't understand how "we" came to be, so you just move that question onto some mythical entity creator... you haven't solved anything. Where did that mythical entity come from? That's even more unexplainable. This type of mentality solves nothing.
shareThere’s always a source that has been here and always is. The “big bang” doesn’t explain things either.
shareSo why don't you just believe that "the universe has always been here and always is"? Why do you need to conjure up some intelligent creator, especially when there's zero evidence of such an entity? That requires a much larger leap in logic, and you can't explain what created the creator.
Also, the big bang isn't meant to explain why the universe exists, it's a backwards extrapolation from our observations - a necessity based on the expansion of the universe.
Everything has a creator except the main creator.
The 'whole of creation' is proof that there is a creator.
99% of all creations have a creator/producer; from the universe down to a cell.
Even atheists intuitively understand that concept regardless that they refuse to assign the main creator the title/label of any specific deity.
If there is a creation, there has to be a creator behind it.
The universe did not just pop into existence from nothing.
This^^^
shareSo the universe did not just pop into existence from nothing, but a "creator" did...
Like I said before, you've just moved the unexplainable from one point to another point, and have explained nothing.
You cannot claim it's illogical to have something come from nothing, but in the same breath say it's logical to have some kind of intelligent creator which apparently sprang from nothing. Or again, you'll just say "well it's always been there" - and the exact same thing could be said about the universe, with many less leaps in logic.
"99% of all creations have a creator/producer"
You're preassuming the universe is a creation. There is no evidence of this. In fact every piece of evidence we find is based on causal interactions, and natural evolutions over billions of years. No ghosts in the machine.
"If there is a creation, there has to be a creator behind it."
So just a blind assertion with extremely faulty logic, based on the unproven assumption that the universe is a creation.
I have known atheists and agnostics that didn’t put half as much effort in convincing themselves or others that “everything” was/is created by mere coincidence, randomness, chaos, or chance.
You are trying too hard to convince yourself of such irrational and illogical fallacy, lol.
If only saying it would make it so. Your assertions are not a counterargument, and nearly everything you've said has been fallacious in nature. Cheers
sharelol, it is called: using “common sense” and “deductive reasoning.”
shareOh, I see.
M: "Why are you assuming there is a creator, when there is no evidence of one, and it doesn't solve the issue of something coming from nothing?"
"Well, because the universe is a creation, so it must have a creator."
"But there is no evidence that the universe is a creation, which is a fundamental part of the problem we're discussing..."
"You're being illogical!!"
Such sense, so common.
Since everything has a creator/producer, “common sense” and “deductive reasoning” tells us that all creations started from somewhere or has a starting point of origin (main creator).
shareOkay, you either aren't reading my posts or aren't understanding them. I've specifically responded to this nonsense multiple times now - would repeating myself be of any use? Obviously not.
shareBecause there is always something more intelligent than us. Explain the pyramids, Stonehenge, the nazca lines, the great flood and people living not as long after it.
shareSeriously? "Explain the pyramids"? I should have known better than to get into this type of discussion again.
shareIt proves my point though.
shareWhat point? The platitude that "there is always something more intelligent than us"? There literally isn't a single piece of verifiable evidence at this moment that life even exists outside of planet Earth, nonetheless life which is more intelligent than humans. Humans made the pyramids, Stonehenge, and the Nazca Lines.
Could intelligent life exist that is smarter than humans? Absolutely yes. Does that in any way prove the existence of an all-powerful deity that created the universe, and counteract all the previous points I've made? Not even in the slightest imaginable way.
The fact that you're starting to delve into biblical floods, the pyramids, and so forth... my time here is clearly up.
At least you admitted the following two points:
1. Those artifacts did not just appear out of nowhere or from nothing and someone (humans) "created" them, lol.
2. That intelligent life smarter than humans does exist.
This is getting extra dumb, but I'll bite for a couple more responses:
1. Yes, because we do in fact have hard evidence that humans build things out of stone, and the civilizations that surrounded their creation. We have zero evidence that the universe was created in this type of manner, in fact everything points in the opposite direction - like I already stated. "Humans built something" does not equate to "lol there is a god."
2. I literally said the opposite, that there's no evidence right now that life more intelligent than humans exists. But if there was, that in no way, whatsoever, demonstrates the existence of a deity which created the universe. You making the assertion that it does is so fallaciously stupid that I have a hard time believing you're not trolling. "Intelligent life exists" does not equate to "lol there is a god."
Any other crap you want to deflect with? Wasting time can be fun sometimes.
Ok believe what you will but you basically just admitted to a higher power. And that’s my point. God can be as something simple like an ancient astronaut.
Also Congress jut had a hearing on UAP’s so this isn’t just an issue for “tin foil hats”.
"you basically just admitted to a higher power."
If that's what you got from what I said, we have a serious problem here fellas. Surely there are believers out there who could understand even the absolute basics of what I've posted? It's not exactly complicated, ffs.
And no, no evidence has been presented at the hearing for UAPs... and that's an entirely different subject we could get into which is totally pointless regarding this convo, and demonstrates absolutely nothing regarding evidence for a deity which created the universe. But hey, who cares about evidence, right? Who even cares about simple logic. Let's just deflect and say a bunch of ridiculous shit. Do better.
I gave you logic but you’re the one that remains ignorant.
shareSo does an overwhelming majority of the world. Any questions?
shareYes OP is coming off mighty Islamophobic and antisemitic along with his smug anti-Christianity. The trifecta of anti religious bigotry.
share[deleted]
BTW, you're coming off heavily racist, transphobic and misogynist
Ok then you're coming off very groomerish and should be kept away from children. Yes accusations are fun! Except that until now my accusations were fair and based in the reality of your comments here, the only accusation you threw at me that even remotely passes based on the content of my comments could be transphobic, and seeing as your OP included this
as delusional as a dude claiming to be a woman.
then if I'm transphobic so are you. Add that to your anti religious bigotry. Let's go back to the dumb accusations now and make sure to stay away from kids you godless heathen! share
[deleted]
Atheists have never been known to kill millions of humans or anything...
[deleted]
Religious institutions have never been known to house child predators or anything...
Like the one controlled by the devil…the same devil that is on the left of the spectrum, the same devil that you don’t believe in but places you on that left side of the spectrum where the devil owns your ass, educate yourself before you drivel more feces.
https://moviechat.org/bd0000082/Politics/6488bee124b1d7677e2dddde/Parents-not-affirming-their-childrens-gender-identity-is-child-abuse-Californian-bill?reply=6488f59d739ea60f7c562ebb
Or: people who happened to be atheists. Those other guys did their shit in the name of religion, or while using religion as a weapon.
Guess what else is on the left: Socialism, where it is responsible for 100+ millions deaths in the past 100 years. share
[deleted]
Or: people who happened to be atheists.
Ah so then those child abusers in religious institutions happened to be religious. See how that works? If you want to play the guilt by association game you have the blood of millions on your hands. share
[deleted]
Or: people who happened to be atheists
Nah I don't see how that works, you godless heathens murdered millions because you have no moral compass. Your kind are responsible for reprehensible acts of genocide. You atheists murdered 100s of millions. Stick your faux virtue up your arse.
share
[deleted]
If it quacks like a duck.
share[deleted]
Dismissing religion as simply "mass delusion" is anti-science.
share[deleted]
Far closer than what you are doing.
shareI’m chuckling that his science knowledge has taught him a whale is a fish. I think you’re wasting you words here Corbell.
share[deleted]
Do you believe that all men are created equal?
share[deleted]
That is a moral or a philosophical BELIEF, not a scienctific fact. Indeed, the "science" would be that there would be a huge range of value to people, based on their inherent genetic potential with weak, or stupid people having less value than stronger or smarter people.
And that BELIEF of YOURS, which has had such a huge practical value for the world*, is based on the RELIGIOUS idea that we are all created equally as GOD'S CHILDREN.
*(I assume we are on the same page with agreeing that basing our society on the legal and moral equality of all people has been a GOOD THING that we do not need to discuss)
This btw, is just ONE example of how the modern secular world that you are so proud of, is based on the RELIGIOUS ONE that was here first, and is still here.
Knocking it out of the park as usual.
share[deleted]
I treat those I encounter with respect because nature dictates that I do
You lying knobjockey you've been incredibly disrespectful to the religious in your OP. Your actions disprove your words, heathen. share
[deleted]
Which nuts are you referring to? I've never claimed to be religious. I'm a spiritual agnostic.
share[deleted]
Maybe I'm just allergic to your arrogant sanctimony? You should have thicker skin you're happy to mock others but cry about hostility, what a soyfilled cuck! I bet you were so happy with yourself typing up that farthuffing OP too.
I told you my beliefs, take it or leave it. I just don't mock people of faith unnecessarily because I'm not an obnoxious prick. Not without having a good reason at least.
You look at the history of the ancient and medieval world, and it seems those brain mechanisms were overuled by other factors.
It took the Age of Englightenment before human equality was codified into law and slowly enforced. And the age of enlightenment was founded on religious thoughts such as all men being created in God's image.
Ironically your refusal to see this, is an irrational emotional bigotry against religoius people.
It is worth noting how this looking down on one type of people, just happens to create a world view that elevates you and people like you to a higher, more evolved.... status?
That is.... a normal human emotional and irrational way of thinking. It is normal to have such thoughts. Idealling as one ages, introspection will lead to one trying to learn one's biases and not let them overly color one's perceptions.
I am also an intellectual person and when I was younger I also tended to inflate the role of intellectualism in judging the quality of people. As I grew older, I realized that was a self serving ego defense mechanism and it would be wrong of me to look down on people that were less intellectual or intellegent than myself.
Indeed, once I started looking, i realized some of the best people I knew, were of average intellegence and/or religious.
Would you like an example for discussion purposes?
[deleted]
Slavery became "abhorred" in the 1700s. To pretend that either the UK or colonial America was secular in the 1700s, is absurd.
[deleted]
Ideas change before laws or behavior. And yes, there was still support for it, especially from the people who's lives and fortunes were built on it, but in the realm of ideas, it was on the defense the entire century and lost by the end.
And that has NOTHING to do with secularism as you tried to imply. The people of hte 1700s, were vastly more religious than today, and they decided that slavery was wrong and started fighting agaisnt it, back when those in favor of it, were ready and willing to fight BACK.
Those people deserve to be respected for their actions. And part of that respect is to be honest about who and what they were. And they were VASTLY religious people.
Your claim is an insult to the people that fought against and eventurally ended slavery (in the western world).
[deleted]
Always back to sex with you degenerates.
share[deleted]
If you want to believe in atheism go for it.
share[deleted]
Atheism requires as much faith as any other religion. There is as much evidence for gods existence as there isn’t.
Just like your religions of climate change. White privilege. Pay gap. And the “vaccine”. You have faith in the so-called “scientists” that tell you what to think. You have faith they won’t lie, won’t cherry pick data, won’t rig conclusions. While ignoring the fact the issues are promoted by people with agendas and a huge amounts of wealth at stake.
The difference is Religion is “faith”. It doesn’t lie about that fact.
When you’re hanging off the edge of a cliff, good luck praying to atheism to give you super human strength and perseverance.
There’s a reason there are no inspiring atheists. There’s a reason y’all are addicted ineffective psychotropic meds.
But hey, if having faith in your Fauci daddy makes you sleep better Godspeed. Sorry, Dawkinspeed. Lol!
💯 Well said.
share[deleted]
As I said earlier on this thread I'm not an atheist
Backpeddling. Agnostics don't behave like you, you're lying again because you have no moral compass. share
[deleted]
If I'd only just declared my agnosticism
But you didn’t, so based on your OP and other replies; you come off as an atheist rather than a doubtful/skeptical agnostic.
Agnostic:share
A person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena; a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God.
[deleted]
I simply enjoy laughing at 21st century people who desperately cling to the utterly delusional writings of little primitive men.
Do you think you're smarter than Aristotle? Or Confucius? Or al-Kindi? Or any other number of great thinking little primitive men who could think circles around you? Because I can guarantee you you're not, in comparison you are a drooling vegetable.
You were born post 2000 I'm wagering. share
Here's that attention you're craving, Mr. Troll. 🙄
share