omg.
jeez sam, have any idea how many times christs name has been dragged through the mud on this forum?
i saw a picture of a cats ass and it had a caricature of christ as the asshole.
i felt an odd sensation of humor and revulsion.
Why does evolution select against atheists?
- Thread starter S.A.M.
- Start date
jeez sam, have any idea how many times christs name has been dragged through the mud on this forum?
i saw a picture of a cats ass and it had a caricature of christ as the asshole.
i felt an odd sensation of humor and revulsion.
Yeah, note how little the sensation of humour exists among the atheists here?
Do as I say, apparently, not as I do.
Its funny to compare theists as one stage below the knuckle draggers but present anything on athiests and purple Pandas take birth.
I see. In that case I'm not sure you're asking the right question. A better question would be why does evolution select creativity? The answer of course is that creativity (ex. art and religion) spawn cooperative behavior which leads to a greater chance of survival.
Theism gives people an easy outlet for creatifvity on a large scale and I am not aware of any substitutes at present; hence, an absent easy-to-acces creative outlet in a society will result in far less cooperative behavior.
I'm saying your methods suck. You are demanding evidence while presenting none yourself. You make claims without support.
Does it?
No of course not.
It did with humans and does for other species.
I'm presenting my observations. I'll be happy to see contradictory evidence.
You've been given plenty. You're just ignoring it, as usual.
You need a boyfriend. Maybe have some kids.
Bells
Staff member
Nope. I believe you shot yourself in the foot with that one. You claimed that religious societies encourage (and sometimes force) women to stay home to have more children and to care for them. You harped on and on about how religious societies are better for 'families' as they keep them together, supposedly encourage the sanctity of marriage, blah blah. You accused secular societies of not encouraging 'family' and you commented how women in such societies and atheist women do not apparently care for family, marriage or children, because they prefer to work:
Roman was commenting that since you are so religious and view atheists as being brain dead, feral and without any sense of right and wrong, who care not for children or family.. He was reminding you of your religious duty to marry and have children, because according to you, that is what religious women do because religious people care more for family and children and want to repopulate the world at a faster rate. So you are either not religious and you are secular (ie. without religion) or you are being hypocritical.
Nope. I believe you shot yourself in the foot with that one. You claimed that religious societies encourage (and sometimes force) women to stay home to have more children and to care for them. You harped on and on about how religious societies are better for 'families' as they keep them together, supposedly encourage the sanctity of marriage, blah blah. You accused secular societies of not encouraging 'family' and you commented how women in such societies and atheist women do not apparently care for family, marriage or children, because they prefer to work:
Roman was commenting that since you are so religious and view atheists as being brain dead, feral and without any sense of right and wrong, who care not for children or family.. He was reminding you of your religious duty to marry and have children, because according to you, that is what religious women do because religious people care more for family and children and want to repopulate the world at a faster rate. So you are either not religious and you are secular (ie. without religion) or you are being hypocritical.
Not at all. I am an example that being religious and in a religious society offers me choices that secular women may not have in secular ones. I worked in Saudi Arabia, remember? If I choose to marry or not, have children or not, I have the support system available to me. I have the family, the community, the society. There have been single men and women in our families with the same supports available to them. Will your children have the same support systems available to them that you have available to you?
I have a very large family.
Last edited:
Bells
Staff member
But you are not being overly 'religious' are you? Because according to you, religious women want to get married and have children and stay home with 'family'.
You live in a secular society, by your own admittance. So one could say that the secular society in which you reside allows you the choice in regards to marriage and family. Had you lived in Saudi Arabia since birth, the choice would not have been available to you. Ask the 8 year old girl who was forced into marriage and after a huge media blowout and anger from the world, was finally granted a divorce. That is a theist and religious society.
I am an Atheist, living in a secular society. Yet I am married, with two children and stay at home to care for them. What does that tell you? No, I have zero theist leanings. My mother, a strict Catholic, worked from about 1 month after giving birth to me, leaving me in the care of a nanny. She did so by choice. Again, what does that tell you? You, a deeply religious woman who, in this very thread, harped on about how theists care more for and about having children and staying home to care for the family, choose to not have children. Again, what does that tell you? When reminded of your own hypocrisy, you come back and say that India is apparently a 'religious society', when you have continuously reminded us of just how secular India actually is.
You have these pre-conceived notions of what secular societies and religious societies are. But you refuse to even acknowledge the actual truth, because it does not fit into what you are trying to push.
Frankly, I have been astounded by your comments in this and other threads. I guess I was wrong about you all along.
Could you quote me saying that?
India is a religious society. Secular != atheist. Unfortunately there is no such animal as an atheist society. Consider all the instances of secular society to mean predominantly consisting of atheists.
I apologise for the confusion.
What were you wrong about?
Bells
Staff member
Replying to your edit..
Do you think only religious people have community, family and society upon which to lean on?
You mean the secular society in which you live? Geez, who'd have thunk it!
Do you think only religious people have community, family and society upon which to lean on?
Good. It would seem that secular India isn't failing in that regard. Unlike Saudi Arabia where a father was permitted to sell his 8 year old daughter into marriage to pay off some debts and it was only public pressure from human rights groups and outside sources that forced the legal system to free her from her forced marriage. My, ain't theist societies grand?
Of course. Why wouldn't they?
A secular society made up of the religious.
Yup, or they lean on the religious. What other support systems do atheists have?
I've seen on this forum that atheists care primarily only about themselves.
They are willing to stand aside and destroy all societies that they do not agree with. Its evident in the way they treat anyone they disagree with. Double standards all around.
Are you citing a kingdom formed by arming and funding by secular societies as an example of a theist society? You think children are not exploited in other societies? Children are bought and sold everywhere in the world, more in poorer countries and less in richer ones, where they are merely abused or thrown into places like Gitmo. Australian troops travel to other countries to shoot children and call it collateral damages. Know any Saudis who do that?
Because they won't have the support systems available to them.
Bells
Staff member
I see.
Aside from church, exactly the same as theist one's. Or do you assume we abandon our children at birth to fend for themselves?
As opposed to theists who only care or help others because their religion dictates that they need to?
Are you saying I only care about myself and do not care about my children, family, friends, community and society because I am an atheist?
I see. And what of religious groups who are currently destroying all societies and forcing them to convert?
Lets see how you treat anyone who is not religious? Thus far, as an atheist, I have been accused of being brain dead, feral, selfish, not caring for my children or family, having no community spirit, etc. And you are accusing atheists of double standards?
Here is one thing you cannot seem to grasp. As an atheist, I value you as an individual and I also value your right to worship or believe as you please. You on the other hand value the rights of atheists to be atheists so much, that you refer to us collectively as brain dead, feral, selfish, being unable to care for others, especially our children, having no community spirit and hell bent on destroying society. Again, you accuse us of double standards?
A Kingdom that rules an overly theist society. As you have claimed in the past, you lived there and seemed to enjoy the trappings of the ultra-conservative theism that exists there.
It is also a society that is rife in abusing children and women, denying them the rights that as human beings, is their very own. Yes, children are exploited everywhere. But much less so in secular societies than in theist societies and by theist people in said societies. As an atheist, I know that my children will have the right and the freedom to believe as they wish to believe, without family pressure to conform to any religious or atheistic leanings. Can you say the same about the children in your family?
You comment on Australian troops traveling to other countries to kill children. What of Muslims who voluntarily walk into a crowded market place and blow themselves and every man, woman and child in their immediate vicinity? What of the theist laws in Saudi Arabia that allows a father to sell his daughter into marriage to pay off hid debts? Know of any atheists who do that? I don't. Such things only seem to happen amongst theists, not atheists. Are you telling me the Israeli army is actually made up entirely of atheists? Is Israel an atheist society? And yet..
And Saudi Arabia and Iran tends to kill their own children quite well. Or have you forgotten that they lead the world in the execution of children?
And you are basing this off what?
You're the one who kept saying how theists value and have children and the women stay home to care for them, more than atheist women according to your comments in this thread. So one could assume that you mean that theists care more for having children than atheists do because according to you, atheists are too selfish to have children or care for anyone else but themselves.
You once said that you should be reminded of something. Consider this a gentle reminder.