Kinky Christians.

Luca
Posts: 6668
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 7:39 pm

Re: Kinky Christians.

Post by Luca »

Charles wrote:
Yeah right. The victims' religiosity was an outlying result in Pol Pot's efforts. Not denying he persecuted those who were religious, but it wasn't the main reason.

The mistake you continue to make is splitting hairs on which regime is atheist, which is merely secular, which is non-christian and thus fair game to be called atheist.

You might want to read up on Pol Pot before you post a litany of garbage.

Pol Pot was actually Theravada Buddhist and the Khmer Rouge were composed of Buddhists.

Pol Pot’s Education:
1934 – 1935 Buddhist monastery Wat Botum Vaddei in Phnom Penh
1935 – 1943 Catholic school in Phnom Penh École Miche
1943 – 1947 Collège Preah Sihanouk at Kampong Cham
1947 – 1948 Lycée Sisowath in Phnom Penh
1948 – 1949 Technical school in Phnom Penh
1949 – 1952 École Francaise de radio-électricité

"He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts... For support rather than illumination. "

It's not entirely clear how you conclude that any historical movement which uses theism as one of its justifications for barbarity serves to demonstrrate that theism is invalid, whereas any movement that uses atheism as a justification for its barbarity merely indicates an "outlying result." If atheism was not intrinsic to the barbarities of communism in recent history, then theism is likewise not intrinsic to the barbarities of past centuries. You cannot have it both ways, Charles.

To refer to Bolshevists, Maoists and the Khmer Rouge as "merely secular" is like referring to the Nazis as "merely discriminatory."

You know you've entered another dimension when somebody tries to argue that Pol Pot was a Buddhist. And, of course, we know this because when he was 9 years old he briefly lived in a Buddhist monastery. Seriously.

Charles, if you want to debate history with somebody you have to be familiar with history. History is not a mixed drink where you can mix in a little bit of this and a little bit of that until you get the desired results. You have to actually know this stuff and can't substitute Google searches and cherry picking random pointless facts for intellectual insight.

And no, at the risk of stating the obvious, Pol Pot was not a Buddhist.

By the way, can I assume that your neglecting to rdefend your previous comments about "religious wars" indicates you admit your sources are in error? Luca
Charles
Posts: 809
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 4:39 pm

Re: Kinky Christians.

Post by Charles »

Luca wrote: If atheism was not intrinsic to the barbarities of communism in recent history, then theism is likewise not intrinsic to the barbarities of past centuries.
No, you can't make that assertion. Atheism wasn't the main driver of communism in recent history and theism was the main driver to [many of] the barbarities of past centuries [and present]. Few historians would argue that atheism was behind the barbarities of communism - it may have been a side lobe - but these "bad guys" weren't out to wipe out theists simply because they were religious, there were other reasons and perhaps religiosity was related to those reasons. However, the "bad guys" of past centuries and of today are committed to religious hatred.

Religion is at the core. Without religion, there are a lot less problems. You can thank both sides, christians, jews, muslims, hindu, etc for these problems. The christian parents in this country brainwashing their kids (and the politicians and priests brainwashing the adults) have counterparts in muslim countries and hindu countries and jewish countries who brainwash their kids. Once brainwashed all reason and rational go out the window. The hate is perpetuated. Each group thinks their god is the right or real god. You can't have a rational conversation with these people. Are they mentally ill? Not sure if being brainwashed and delusional is mental illness - in which case they should be treated as ill people. Either way, they are victims. You can't have a logical discussion with the anti logic crowd. I can't call them fools or idiots because there are a lot of very intelligent, successful, articulate, technical, educated people who believe in these silly myths. So, while they aren't fools or idiots, they have some sort of mental problem it seems. The brainwashing they received as a kid affects their brains more than their education does. (Either that or they are born again and their brains were "shifted" into a state of delusion.) It is mind boggling. In every facet of their lives they are logical and rational - except when it comes to superstitions. Some people believe all this nonsense and some people don't - it isn't a matter of being "smart" enough not to accept it. There are certainly a lot of people smarter than I who believe in god. Just like alcoholism. Some people can drink two beers and walk away - others can't stop. It isn't a matter of being "smart" enough to stop. There is something wrong with their brains that makes it difficult to stop.

So getting back to religion and spirituality, if someone believes in god and can't admit there is a possibility that god does not exist, then I think there is something wrong with his brain. I think it is possible that god exists, just not a very high probability, less than 1% or so - but it is possible. I am open minded. I am not brainwashed. I am unlike these people with brain problems who think there is no possibility god doesn't exist. I think they may be hearing voices in their head when they think god is speaking to them.
Luca
Posts: 6668
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 7:39 pm

Re: Kinky Christians.

Post by Luca »

Luca wrote: If atheism was not intrinsic to the barbarities of communism in recent history, then theism is likewise not intrinsic to the barbarities of past centuries.
Charles wrote:No, you can't make that assertion.
So, I cannot make the assertion that the atheistic based communist barbarities of the last century are attributable to atheism, but you can make the assertion that the religiously based barbarities of past centuries are attributable to theism?

Let's momentarily overlook the fact that atheism is fundamental to Marxism/Leninism and allowed it to ethically justify the butchery of tens of millions of people in our lifetime.

Before you tell me what assertions I can and cannot make, let's go back and look at your own assertions which you claim as historical fact:

1). The Boxer Rebellion was a religious conflict?

2). The Jonestown suicide was a religiously influenced episode?

3). "Witch hunts" are "religion related deaths"?

4). The Shang China episode, which occurred approximately 1300 years before the time of Christ ia a "general Christian culpability?

5). The Iran-Iraq war was a "religious war"?

6). Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge were "Buddhists" even though they tried to exterminate Cambodian Buddhism?

(For your edification, I will include a passage from Wikipedia regarding the Khmer Rouge in in Cambodia: "In 1975 when the communist Khmer Rouge took control of Cambodia, they tried to completely destroy Buddhism and very nearly succeeded. By the time of the Vietnamese invasion in 1979, nearly every monk and religious intellectual had been either murdered or driven into exile, and nearly every temple and Buddhist temple and library had been destroyed.
The Khmer Rouge policies towards Buddhism- which included the forcible disrobing of monks, the destruction of monasteries, and, ultimately, the execution of uncooperative monks effectively destroyed Cambodia's Buddhist institutions....."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism_i ... _Rouge_Era)

There is an old saying, Charles, that "You are entitled to your own opinion. You are not entitled to your own facts."

You have made a number of assertions regarding theism and have attempted to buttress your assertions with a number of facts which are patently untrue. You are not Gloria Allred and in the real world we don't debate by throwing a bunch of BS against the wall hoping that some of it will stick. If you want to prove your point then you have to defend the "facts" upon which you have made those assertions.

As you can tell from my delayed responses, I don't have a lot of time for message boards. If it is your intention merely to ramble on about your religious bigotries, just let me know so I can turn my attention to a more serious discussion. If you're actually trying to demonstrate a point, then defend your comments. Then we can discuss what I can and cannot assert. Luca
Post Reply