[Traveler]

Re: Are You an Atheist?

But you said that homosexuality being illegal was in the constitution, it is not, so stop stalling.

Also, while America is mostly populated by Christians it has a clear separation between church and state.
http:/ /www.adl.org/issue_religious_freedom/separation _cs_primer.asp

Plus, the only parts of deuteronomy that are part of US law are don´t kill and don´t steal, and if you count perjury, don´t lie. Those laws are the same in all countries, no matter what their religion.

And, no, the bible is not American law. The constitution is the highest judicial power in America, and after that comes the federal law.

http:// en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_the_Uni ted_States#American_common_law

"The government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion." USAs second president John Adams.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

You should never just claim checkmate in an argument, it makes you look rude, and it was also a faulty statement.

Are you gonna answer my post, Bobby-joe?

[Alphonse Alban]

Re: Are You an Atheist?

Good-hearted people that respect each other no matter what religion we have or what the color of our skin is? Yes we are.

It so nice that you atheists are so united without need to make any distinctions over race or belief, isn't it.

Yes you can.

[Traveler]

Re: Are You an Atheist?

It so nice that you atheists are so united without need to make any distinctions over race or belief, isn't it.

Yes you can.

I never said that atheists are united, and don´t make distinctions between each other (For instance, i don´t respect atheists because they´re atheists, I respect everybody whom I think is a good person, no matter what their religious views are), i´m just saying that we can respect each other no matter what the colour of our skin is, or what or belief is.

Also, the video which that thread is all about is a completely faulty example of what you´re referring to.
That woman doesn´t make distinctions between white atheists and black atheists because of their race, but because of their culture. Nor does she criticize white atheists.

She merely stated that it was harder for people in black communities to admit to being atheists, because religion is such a large part of their culture, and that would be like committing social suicide.

By the way, that thread is really racist and prejudiced. It calls black people Negroes and Jigaboos, and it (once again without proof or reason) calls her a Nazi.

[Alphonse Alban]

Re: Are You an Atheist?

Also, the video which that thread is all about is a completely faulty example of what you´re referring to.
That woman doesn´t make distinctions between white atheists and black atheists because of their race, but because of their culture.

Sure. She just does not believe that black God exists and don't want to be assosiated with atheists as she is a black atheist.

By the way, that thread is really racist and prejudiced. It calls black people Negroes

Have you ever called white people Caucasian?

[Traveler]

Re: Are You an Atheist?

Sure. She just does not believe that black God exists and don't want to be assosiated with atheists as she is a black atheist.
Wrong, she does not believe that any god exists (Where did you get black god from?) and she doesn`t say anything about not wanting to be associated with Atheists. She simply said that she thinks there´s a distinction (as in difference, not separation) between black Atheists and other Atheists, because it´s harder to admittedly be one in the black community.

Have you ever called white people Caucasian?

Not the same thing. Words are just meaningless grunts and sounds, but we humans give them meaning.
The years of slavery and oppression, where white people would call black people Negroes and Jigaboos (which you apparently deleted from my quote) gave those words an insulting meaning, and it´s insulting of you to refer to black people as such. We now have words to replace them, and it would not in the slightest inconvenience you to use one of the substitutes.

[Alphonse Alban]

Re: Are You an Atheist?

Not the same thing. Words are just meaningless grunts and sounds, but we humans give them meaning.
The years of slavery and oppression, where white people would call black people Negroes and Jigaboos (which you apparently deleted from my quote) gave those words an insulting meaning, and it´s insulting of you to refer to black people as such. We now have words to replace them, and it would not in the slightest inconvenience you to use one of the substitutes.

Stop being a hypocrite.

This is a real Caucasian.



I can tell you, I am not crazy islamist. I get really offended if you call me Caucasian. Negro is just as neutral or racist term as Caucasian.

[Jo Freddie]

Re: Are You an Atheist?

I can tell you, I am not crazy islamist.

Very true, we can all agree you are not a crazy Islamist, you are a crazy christian, different book, same deity, just as crazy.

[Alphonse Alban]

Re: Are You an Atheist?

Very true, we can all agree you are not a crazy Islamist, you are a crazy christian, different book, same deity, just as crazy.

Ah, but as biased as you are, you can see that there is difference between Caucasians and Caucasians. While the person who I directed my answer claimed that Negro is racist because it is, but Caucasian is OK because it is not and it is true.

This is just further proof. Even off the wall crazy Pastafarian is more sensible than atheist.

[Traveler]

Re: Are You an Atheist?

Stop being a hypocrite.
I´m not a hypocrite, please explain why you call me one.


This is a real Caucasian.



I can tell you, I am not crazy islamist. I get really offended if you call me Caucasian. Negro is just as neutral or racist term as Caucasian.

The word Negroe has become the equivalent of slave in the English language and that is why, after African-Americans were granted equal rights, it was decided that there should be a different name for them, which didn`t bring up the hurtful past. So no, it´s not a neutral term.

The term Caucasian is often incorrectly used as fair-skinned, when it really means a person from Caucasus.
However, I find your picture misleading. A Caucasian person could be anyone from the area around Turkey and Iran. It can be a baker, a doctor, a banker, a lawyer or the CEO of a large international corporation.

It´s true that these countries consist mainly of Muslims, but that doesn´t mean that they are extremist Muslims (contradictory to what most Americans believe, most Muslims don´t go around blowing stuff up), and they could just as well be Christians or Hindus or Pastafarians.

So most people wouldn´t be offended if you referred to them as
Caucasian.
If they knew the true definition of the term they could just correct the person if they wanted to. But most people wouldn´t be offended when referred to as Caucasians because they realize that people from the middle-east are just as good as they are.
So no, I wouldn´t call the term Caucasian racist (racism is the belief that a specific race is worth more or less than another, and should be treated differently) or insulting, I´d call it incorrect.

If you really get offended when called Caucasian, just tell your friends not to call you that.
Being offended doesn´t justify offending.

[Alphonse Alban]

Re: Are You an Atheist?

A Caucasian person could be anyone from the area around Turkey and Iran.

This is exactly why it is so racist to call someone outside that area as Caucasian.

[Katander]

Re: Are You an Atheist?

I just want to Thank god for making me an atheist, I could only have done it without him...

[Cursed]

Re: Are You an Atheist?

The word Negroe has become the equivalent of slave in the English language

No it hasn't, you couldn't be more wrong! People of all inferior (i.e. Ham and Canaanite) races have been and are slaves, negroids aren't anything special.

and that is why, after African-Americans were granted equal rights, it was decided that there should be a different name for them, which didn`t bring up the hurtful past.

Please describe who decided this and when, sir.

In a decade or two, negroids will doubtlessly complain about being called african american because the label will have become equated with drug dealers, criminals, and pimps. If only the negroids would stop embarrassing themselves with their monkeyshines, they wouldn't be ashamed of the connotation their descriptor implies!

So no, it´s not a neutral term.

Actually, it is a neutral term. Caucasoid, mongoloid, and negroid are the race classifications, that's a cold, hard, neutral fact, jack.

If anyone gets their feelings hurt at being called what they are they are stupid and should not be allowed to procreate without prior sterilization. If this results in the extermination of an entire race, so be it. It's for the best.

The term Caucasian is often incorrectly used as fair-skinned, when it really means a person from Caucasus.

However, I find your picture misleading. A Caucasian person could be anyone from the area around Turkey and Iran. It can be a baker, a doctor, a banker, a lawyer or the CEO of a large international corporation.

You call a Caucasian person "it?" Your racism is showing, you monster.

It´s true that these countries consist mainly of Muslims, but that doesn´t mean that they are extremist Muslims (contradictory to what most Americans believe, most Muslims don´t go around blowing stuff up),

Source please? Hint: Al Jazeera is not a valid source, because they are terrorists.

and they could just as well be Christians or Hindus or Pastafarians.

All hindus and pastafarians are monsters that should be put into work camps. The world would be a much better place without them, wouldn't you agree? The Bible supports this, Praise God and His Almighty Wisdom!

So most people wouldn´t be offended if you referred to them as
Caucasian.

You're missing the point. They aren't offended by the descriptor because the vast majority don't behave like savages so they aren't ashamed of their people.

Unlike some other races I could mention but will not as I am polite and nonjudgmental.

If they knew the true definition of the term they could just correct the person if they wanted to. But most people wouldn´t be offended when referred to as Caucasians because they realize that people from the middle-east are just as good as they are.

Sheer lunacy. Even a mexican is better than anyone from the middle east, that's common sense.

So no, I wouldn´t call the term Caucasian racist (racism is the belief that a specific race is worth more or less than another, and should be treated differently) or insulting, I´d call it incorrect.

Ha! You'd call it incorrect because you're wrong. You should educate yourself if you're still able to do so.

If you really get offended when called Caucasian, just tell your friends not to call you that.
Being offended doesn´t justify offending.

I find your arrogance offensive. I find your lack of general knowledge offensive. I find your conjecture stated as fact offensive.

I find YOU offensive, sir. And if that offends you, I don't care, because you have no value to me. God might love you, but I don't.

[MitzaLizalor]

Re: Are You an Atheist?

Imagine how an Aussie, a Kiwi or a person from Pakistan must feel

[Traveler]

Re: Are You an Atheist?

I´ve been recieving warnings left and right, so this could be my last post.

No it hasn't, you couldn't be more wrong! People of all inferior (i.e. Ham and Canaanite) races have been and are slaves, negroids aren't anything special.

We´ve struck a sort of roadblock here, since i don´t consider any other races inferior (Btw, how could you accuse me of being racist when you write things like that).

But yes, the word Negroe is nowadays associated with the word slave, as it´s one of the many demeaning words white slave owners would call them. That´s why most black people get offended when called that. Just because it used to be a technical term doesn´t change the fact that history has made it offensive.

It´s true that slavery has occurred many times to many different races throughout history, but I never claimed the enslavement of Africans to be special. I deem slavery unjust no matter who it happens to.


Please describe who decided this and when, sir.

Languages adapt all the time, without people deciding which words should and should not be used. Over time, new words appear, and old words get new meanings.

In a decade or two, negroids will doubtlessly complain about being called african american because the label will have become equated with drug dealers, criminals, and pimps. If only the negroids would stop embarrassing themselves with their monkeyshines, they wouldn't be ashamed of the connotation their descriptor implies!

So slavery was one of the black peoples "monkeyshines"? Yep, they sure embarrassed themselves by being stolen from their homeland and forced to do the dirty work their tormentors didn´t want to. Stupid people (for those of you who didn´t get this, that was sarcasm).

While you apparently have a very negative view of African-Americans, you cannot claim that the link between the word Negroe and slavery was their fault.

Actually, it is a neutral term. Caucasoid, mongoloid, and negroid are the race classifications, that's a cold, hard, neutral fact, jack.

Once again, words change meanings. It doesn´t matter what the word used to mean, because American history has given it an offensive tone.

If anyone gets their feelings hurt at being called what they are they are stupid and should not be allowed to procreate without prior sterilization. Sterilisation prevents procreation, so I´m not quite sure how they´d go about procreating after sterilization.

If this results in the extermination of an entire race, so be it. It's for the best.
No, it´s not. And once again: Racism.

You call a Caucasian person "it?" Your racism is showing, you monster.
I say "it" so as not to imply whether the person is a man or a woman. For example, when talking about an unborn child, when´s it coming?
Do not accuse me of racism over trivial things like that, when you clearly believe other races inferior to you. (Interesting fact about racists, they never deem their own race inferior, wonder why.)


Source please? Hint: Al Jazeera is not a valid source, because they are terrorists. Source please.

http://www .awesomelibrary. org/Muslims.html

http://www .jewishmag.c om/50mag/pipes/pipes.htm

http://www .islamfortoday.co m/terrorism.htm

http:// unreasonablefaith.co m/2010/08/09/muslims-against-terrorism/

http:// www.freemuslims.o rg/

http:// www.islamagainstextremism.c om/categories/articles.cfm

http:// pewglobal.org/2005/07/14/isl amic-extremism-common-concern-for-muslim-and-western-publics/


All hindus and pastafarians are monsters that should be put into work camps. The world would be a much better place without them, wouldn't you agree? The Bible supports this, Praise God and His Almighty Wisdom!

No, I wouldn´t agree.
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

You clearly like using the word monster to denote people with different opinions than you, but please explain this. Why do you accuse Pastafarians and Hindus of being monsters? How are you a better person than they are?
Saying that they do not worship your god, or that the bible says they should be killed is not a valid response. Why are you a better person than they are?

You're missing the point. They aren't offended by the descriptor because the vast majority don't behave like savages so they aren't ashamed of their people.
That is exactly what I said. The vast majority of Muslims aren´t terrorists, which is why most people aren´t offended when associated with Islam.

Unlike some other races I could mention but will not as I am polite and nonjudgmental.
I beg to differ.
Here are some of your statements in this post:
"People of all inferior (i.e. Ham and Canaanite) races have been and are slaves"
"All hindus and pastafarians are monsters that should be put into work camps. The world would be a much better place without them, wouldn't you agree?"
"If this results in the extermination of an entire race, so be it. It's for the best."
"Even a mexican is better than anyone from the middle east, that`s common sense."


Sheer lunacy. Thinking that other people are equal to you is sheer lunacy? I know it´s hard for people to imagine opinions that they do not hold themselves, but it´s actually true. Most people nowadays respect each other as equals, no matter what their race or gender is.
"All men are created equal."
Even a mexican is better than anyone from the middle east, that's common sense.

Please explain why this is common sense, and why you use a condescending phrase like, "even a mexican is better".



Ha! You'd call it incorrect because you're wrong. You should educate yourself if you're still able to do so.
How am I wrong? Using the word Caucasian (from Caucasus) as fair skinned is incorrect. Please refrain from petty insults if you cannot back them up.


I find your arrogance offensive. How am I arrogant? You claim that other races, countries and religions are inferior to yours, and believe they should be executed for holding a different belief than you. You believe that god loves you for no other reason than the fact that you believe in him, and that god will grant you an eternity of bliss, whilst punishing everyone who doesn´t think like you. Who´s the arrogant one?

I find your lack of general knowledge offensive. I find your conjecture stated as fact offensive. Please tell me what this conjecture has been.
Such accusations shouldn´t come from someone who claimes that Al Jazeera is a terrorist organization.

I find YOU offensive, sir. And if that offends you, I don't care, because you have no value to me. God might love you, but I don't.

I don´t know why you would be offended by me. I´ve simply stated my opinion on why I don´t think it´s right to call black people Negroes and Jigaboos. If me saying that all people should be treated as equals offends you, then I deeply apologize.

I´m not offended by you stating your opinion, but there is one thing in your post which annoys me.
Your hypocrisy.
You call me a racist, and then claim other races to be inferior to yours.
You call me a monster, and then suggest genocide.
you call me a liar, and then you spit lies all around you.

I know this will offend most of you, but i mean no insult when I say that you are the al-Qaida of Christianity.

Most Muslims don´t go around bombing innocent people, just like most Christians don´t think it´s right to kill innocent people because of their beliefs or support slavery. Christians everywhere are ashamed of you, and Americans think you´re disgracing their country.

And just like al-Qaida, the whole world hates you.

[Born Again Bob]

Re: Are You an Atheist?

I know this will offend most of you, but i mean no insult when I say that you are the al-Qaida of Christianity.

Dear Friend,

No offense taken! al-Qaida are going to Hell, but at least they have the courage to believe in something bigger than themselves, and the loyalty to stick to their Scripture no matter what it tells them to do. Much better company than your run-of-the-mill half-hearted Christian or wishy-washy agnostic.

Yours in Jihad,
BAB