Wednesday, January 28, 2009

Atheist defense of Zuckerman is not only lame but lying

The defense mounting by ridicule artists and character assigns (ie atheist apologists) in the comment section amount to nothing more than a bag of hot air and lot of self deception. The first "major" issue was that I said Zuckerman is claiming "atheist nations" but he actually says "secular." In the original version of the study (not the book, the first study--which I can't find on the net anymore) I believe it did say atheist nation. Even if it didn't how utterly stupid to contend that my argumetns all invalidated because of a label that' is not even sufficiently different from the actual article to mean anything.

Atheist play this kind of knit picking bs word game all the time. There is no significant difference. Nor is there a significant difference in saying that society without God is more content (which is just what the Z man does say in the subtitle of his book) or saying that people can be moral without God.Both are imbecilic claims and are far from bring proved; but they not all that different if you understand Christian assumptions.

The truth of it is my arguments against Sucker, man are devastating. If not why are thes little atheist yappers spending so much time trying to yap at my heals? there are several other issues they did not touch:


(1) you don't answer the adherent's.com pate that says his data can't be used to assertain the percentages of atheists.
(2) you don't say anyting to refute the argument that the religious traditon laid down the values. you have left that compeltely untouched.

(3) you have done absoltuely noting to tranlate the stats of socail wefare into any kind of solid basis for "conentent" or "happiness" or even moreality.

(4) your assertions that lack of certain kinds of crime equal morality is the just the kind laughable little sixth grade analysis I would expect from an atheist moron.

(5) you don't undersatnd the place of religoius riturals in a socity,


you assert your opinon rather than offering evdience and completely ignore the evidence I site pretending it's not there.

(6) It' a well known fact that the Japanese are very intent upon staying connected to their tradistons and they see the festibals as a crucial way to do that.
(7) you also totally ignore the evidence on the new religions of Japan

(8) totally ignore the evidence the growing sense of a need for religious feelings in Sweden,and the evidence specifically sites Pentecostalism as growing.


(9) totally ignored the evdience from the anthology on social reform in Europe which says that there is a new ground breaking understanding of European history that include religious background to the values laid down.


I don't believe the atehist detractors even understand the argument about the background values handed down from religous society that built the social welfare state. Be that as it may the bottom line is you can do a lot with a good welfare state. If I had my way, I'm a social democrat Sweden is my model, I would have a Swedish style welfare state with nationalized medicine and the lot. That is still not going to touch people's deepest needs. that is only material it doesn't effect the spirit.

10 comments:

A Hermit said...

"I don't believe the atehist detractors even understand the argument about the background values handed down from religous society that built the social welfare state."

Of course we understand them. What you fail to understand is that appreciation of those traditions does not require an actual belief in God.

J.L. Hinman said...

What you fail to understand is that appreciation of those traditions does not require an actual belief in God.

Yes of course they do. They wouldn't have been value without God. Besides. you don't' hold them.

I know you think you do, but without God they are all messed up and truncated.

Abortion is a great example. The value of protecting and cherishing life so easily rationalized away when people want to screw.

Now I'm not a right to lifer. I once sat in a coffee shop across the street from an abortion clinic and watched a woman cry because the mob of fundie apes across the street wouldn't shut up. She was obviously in anguish about her decision. I know the issues are complex, much more so than the right to life guys admit; and I would never support their tactics.

But the simple fact is the organism growing inside a pregnant woman is life in the process of becoming a person. Leave it alone it most likely be a person.

I don't think of terminating it on the same par with ax murder, but I still think to really cherish and protect life we should disallow abortion. But the "Godless" can so easily rationalize terminating the process of life.

There are documented cases (60 minutes) of fetuses who were viable outside the womb being "murdered" or "terminated" otuside the womb! This was done in an abortion clinic because they could so easily rationalize and say "well we were about to do it anyway when it was inside."

A Hermit said...

"Yes of course they do. They wouldn't have been value without God. Besides. you don't' hold them."

As a matter of fact I have always acknowledged that a lot my ethical standards are firmly rooted in my Mennonite upbringing; my opposition to war and violence, my desire for tolerance, my pursuit of the "simple life." But then again, my ancestors were persecuted by "mainstream" Christianity for those beliefs...;-)

On abortion (as on so many issues if you'd calm down long enough to notice) you and I probably aren't that far apart. I don't see abortion as something desirable, I think every effort should be made (through education, contraception, counselling, adoption services, support for families with children, especially single mothers and teenage mothers) but that ultimately neither you nor I nor society in general has the right to tell someone what they must or must not allow to happen inside their own body. This is not because I have less respect for life as an atheist (I would say I have more respect for life now than I did when I was a believer) but because of my belief in the importance of individual freedom.

When my wife and I decided we wanted to have children we experienced a lot of difficulties (one fertility expert told us we had a less than one percent chance of conceiving a child.) Later we were told that her "irregular periods" were probably in reality a long series of very early term miscarriages. So please don't accuse me of having a casual attitude to ward these issues; I don't. And neither, I believe, do most pro-choice supporters. We just understand, as you say, that these are complicated issues, and in the end the decision must lie with the individual and not with the State.

And remember, it takes a believer in God to act on the directive to "Kill them all, God will know his own..." Belief in God is no guarantee of a respect for life.

(Speaking of which, are you planning to take down that link to the http://www.tencommandments.org/ hate site? If you have such respect for life why are linked to people who want you to kill homosexuals? Just curious...)

J.L. Hinman said...

As a matter of fact I have always acknowledged that a lot my ethical standards are firmly rooted in my Mennonite upbringing; my opposition to war and violence, my desire for tolerance, my pursuit of the "simple life." But then again, my ancestors were persecuted by "mainstream" Christianity for those beliefs...;-)


O poor you. I'm sure you are so close to your ancestors. Of course mine weren't ever persecuted at all we've always had it good.I don't' suffer, I don't live in poverty, never had any problems. I my heart just bleeds for you and your ancestors, whoever they were.

On abortion (as on so many issues if you'd calm down long enough to notice)

calm down? you mean like how I'm disagreeing with your view point? I forget pc people defense any of divergence from lock step with their view as hysterical.

that is what you man free thinking isn't it? You are free to think as i tel you to think and if you diverge from it at all you are being hysterical and I have ridicule you.




you and I probably aren't that far apart.

except that you are a character assassin and ridicule artist and I'm a thinker. I'm a victim of hate group that hates me because I dare to disagree with their stupid little views, and you are one of the people that's helping feed the hate.


I don't see abortion as something desirable, I think every effort should be made (through education, contraception, counselling, adoption services, support for families with children, especially single mothers and teenage mothers) but that ultimately neither you nor I nor society in general has the right to tell someone what they must or must not allow to happen inside their own body.


sure we do. we do all the time. we tell people "you can't put that smoke in your body." the little self righteous pc crowd doesn't mind that one. We seem to think we have the right to tell people "you must put your body in harm's way to protect me and my property so go to war" many don't seem to mind that--especially women. How many women will say "you can't tell me what to do with my body" but they want to tell lots of young men to die for them?

We tell all people "you don't have the right to use your body to murder." So why don't we have the right to tell women "you can't murder your unborn child?"

I admit it's open argument as ti weather or not it is murder, and there are good arguments on both sides. but the fact is fudnies see it as murder, and that explains why they are upset by it. but atheists and pc people hate them for that as they are some evil scourge rather than just people who think something is murder and want to stop murder.





This is not because I have less respect for life as an atheist (I would say I have more respect for life now than I did when I was a believer) but because of my belief in the importance of individual freedom.


you probably weren't much of a believer. Hey I don't have that much respect for fundies. I think most of them are hypocrites. But I at least am willing to allow them to hold their beliefs without ridiculing thema s evil.

When my wife and I decided we wanted to have children we experienced a lot of difficulties (one fertility expert told us we had a less than one percent chance of conceiving a child.) Later we were told that her "irregular periods" were probably in reality a long series of very early term miscarriages. So please don't accuse me of having a casual attitude to ward these issues;

I don't think I ever said youd id. I said yo don't allow disagreement. That's not exactly true either.


I don't. And neither, I believe, do most pro-choice supporters. We just understand, as you say, that these are complicated issues, and in the end the decision must lie with the individual and not with the State.

I was actaully pro choice when I was in seminary. So I was a pro choice Christian, which almost got me beatten up at the anti-Bork rally. So I don't have any big hate for pre choice people. I don't think anything bad about you for that. That's not the beef I have with you.

I tell one thing man it's almost impossible to get any sort of reason on that topic on either side. Its' so violotile you just have to walk on egg shells to say anything.


And remember, it takes a believer in God to act on the directive to "Kill them all, God will know his own..." Belief in God is no guarantee of a respect for life.


Well I used to think we didn't have to worry, all those kind of people died with the OT. But then Reagan came along.

Believe it or not I can hear your concerns on that sort of thing. I know your fear on that score, and I am not deaf to it. But at the same time I think many just use that as an excuse to lump all religion people into the same group.


(Speaking of which, are you planning to take down that link to the http://www.tencommandments.org/ hate site?


ahahaha, yes, that guys is an idiot isn't he?

It's it obvious I'm just trying get your goat! I mean what the hell? ahahahahaa (I am laughing big) you are so bothered by it.

you don't I don't go for crap like that! I was kicked out of the hysterical Christian society for going to that anti-Bork rally.




If you have such respect for life why are linked to people who want you to kill homosexuals? Just curious...)


pull your chain! ;-)


hey look man I know you have good well meaning intentions. I appreciate your humane nature.

A Hermit said...

"except that you are a character assassin and ridicule artist and I'm a thinker."

I'm the character assassin? Which of us has called the other a "fucking idiot" on this blog? And is insulting my ancestors, instead of acknowledging my recognition of the importance of my heritage, an example of your "deep thinking?" Aren't you the one making all the noise about the importance of tradition? Just not MY tradition, I guess...

"calm down? you mean like how I'm disagreeing with your view point? "

No, I mean like the way you call me a "fucking idiot" every time I disagree with you.

"you probably weren't much of a believer."

I'm not even going to dignify that with an answer...

"Hey I don't have that much respect for fundies. I think most of them are hypocrites. But I at least am willing to allow them to hold their beliefs without ridiculing thema s evil."

Have you ever seen me ridicule anyone as "evil?" That's your game; ridiculing atheists and calling them evil.

And when I object you call me a "fucking idiot" attack my character, insult my ancestry, question my sincerity...

But YOU'RE the victim...right?

That's why people mistake you for a fundie (besides crap like your gay-bashing link); it's because you so often act like one...

J.L. Hinman said...

atheists are so selfish and so self defending and impervious to what they do to other people.

Is there a website where hundreds of atheis who don't know you spend nine pages calling you a liar, deying the things you are the most proud of in your life and telling you how stupid you are?

you are such a creep. such selfish little creep

O you are the victim. OK I see. I'm sorry I thought I was a victim I see you are.

your paretns died after you took care of them for three years, they stole your career becasue you took care of your parents, they stole your house, they gabd up and destoryed your reputation so you don't even have the third rate compensitory hobby anymore, becasue they are super shollow idiots who don't know anything.

I see you are the true victim. becaue I called you name when you were acting like an ass, so that means I have to pay for it for the rest of my life and nothing I can say can ever be good. I'm evil and bad and you the true victim.

J.L. Hinman said...

you never think about issues. all you are capable of is revenge trying to get even for things people said to you. you can't think about substance.

A Hermit said...

I do think about substance, but I notice most of my more substantive comments never show up here. Why is that?

And you might want to keep in mind that you're having a conversation with a distinct individual human being here, not with some archetypal atheist that lives in your head.

I didn't make you parents sick, I didn't have anything to do with the loss of your academic career, I didn't mock you, I didn't do any of the things you're constantly whining about.

And apart from a few loudmouths on the internet, neither did any other atheist.

You've had misfortune in your life, and I'm sorry to hear it, but using that misfortune as an excuse for your own childish behaviour in a conversation with me is just an excuse to avoid dealing with challenges to your ideas. Whenever you run into an substance you can't deal with you resort to personalizing it with this abusive behaviour.

I know people who have survived much worse than you have and didn't let it turn them into self-pitying pricks...

A Hermit said...

I wish I'd taken a screenshot of this page last night; your reply was a classic...

J.L. Hinman said...

classic peranoia.