|
 |
On 1/1/2012 3:48 AM, Warp wrote:
> Patrick Elliott<sel### [at] npgcable com> wrote:
>> We where better off where there was mutual fear between them, in some
>> respects. In other ways, blatant, and constant, insanity is weakening
>> their numbers, and if, as in the 1950, your "denomination" still
>> mattered, Atheism would, as Penn says, outnumber the membership of
>> *every* individual religious cult out there. Its only their redefinition
>> of their magic word, which not one bloody one of them actually thinks
>> means the same thing at all, that makes them a majority.
>
> Then there are those Americans who seriously claim that "freedom of
> religion" means that you can freely be a catholic, pentecostal, baptist,
> and so on, but it does not mean you can be an atheist. (For some reason they
> never mention other religions such as islam, hinduism or buddhism.)
>
> And these are not only some dumb individuals in their homes saying this.
> I have seen video clips of people saying this on TV. And it was not a joke
> or parody.
>
Yep. The thing being that, not that long ago, they would have said the
same thing about each other. There was a poll some time back which
basically placed the trustworthiness of rapists higher than that of
atheists...
And, they will mention Buddhists, sometimes, only, I think they
understand what those are about as well as they understand evolution.
lol Buddhist is, in a sense, atheism that never gave up the
supernatural, as far as many of its fundamental concepts, including
trying to understand the world, not trusting what someone claims is
true, without evidence, etc. They just include, "It feels like its true,
or makes me happy.", as a valid criteria for testing an ideas validity,
which lets in everything from ghosts, to fantasy creatures, and
mythological events, to "enlightenment", and "ascension".
Which makes the fact that, when some 'Christian' has to pick some other
religion to be nice to, they pick Buddhists, hilarious.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
