[MikeyMilam]

Originally Posted by Heathen_Basher

STALIN

MAO

POL POT

CEAUSESCU

MILOSEVIC

LENIN

MUSSOLINI

NIETZSCHE

MARX

OBAMA

RAND

KINSEY

D'HOLBACH

DE SADE

SINGER

JUSTIN TIMBERLAKE

MORGENTALER

MAO - Communist. i explained this.

POL POT- see above.

CEAUSESCU - see above.

MILOSEVIC - see above.

LENIN - freedom fighter before becoming corrupt with political power.

MUSSOLINI - aided and abetted by the catholic church

NIETZSCHE - never killed or tortured anyone

MARX - never killed or tortured anyone

OBAMA - fought against torture when many american christians supported it. never killed anyone.

RAND - never killed or tortured anyone.

KINSEY - don't really know anything about Kinsey other than that he forged psychological analysis results to become famous.

D'HOLBACH - never killed or tortured anyone.

DE SADE - poet and advocate for freedom. never killed or tortured anyone.

SINGER - don't know who you're referring to.

JUSTIN TIMBERLAKE - never killed or tortured anyone (that is unless you don't like his music ).

[Meek and Humble]

Originally Posted by MikeyMilam

MAO - Communist. i explained this.

No, you didn't explain this. Because they were communist does not excuse the fact that they were atheists. They felt secure in killing because they didn't believe in god.

POL POT- see above.

CEAUSESCU - see above.

MILOSEVIC - see above.

See above.

LENIN - freedom fighter before becoming corrupt with political power.

So that's an excuse?

MUSSOLINI - aided and abetted by the catholic church

Right you are. Catholics are one of the most evil organizations on the planet!

NIETZSCHE - never killed or tortured anyone

No, he only encouraged it.

MARX - never killed or tortured anyone

No, he only encouraged it.

OBAMA - fought against torture when many american christians supported it. never killed anyone.

O RLY?

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle5575883.ece

RAND - never killed or tortured anyone.

No, she only encouraged it.

KINSEY - don't really know anything about Kinsey other than that he forged psychological analysis results to become famous.

He supported the rape of children, but collecting information from pedophiles who raped children to get info on child sexuality, instead of turning these pedophiles in to the police.

D'HOLBACH - never killed or tortured anyone.

No, he only encouraged it.

DE SADE - poet and advocate for freedom. never killed or tortured anyone.

No, he only encouraged it.

SINGER - don't know who you're referring to.

Typical atheistic ignorance.

[MikeyMilam]

Originally Posted by BelieverInGod

How can a strawman be a false atheist? See you're just using the term so that if any atheist does something you don't like you can say well he wasn't a "REAL atheist".

Answered your own question there, didn't you. Stalin condoned rape and murder. You do realize that the word condone does not mean "did in the name of something" right?

my point is that people do bad things, not because of their religion, but because they are bad people! demonizing and stereotyping people based on what other people have done is just wrong. in fact, why don't i say that christians are mass murderers because the bible commands it. the catholics forced christianity on the romans and greeks on pain of death! then the christians massacred the arabs and jews to claim israel as their own! by your own logic, christians are just as bad of people as atheists. you're just better at justifying it.

[Meek and Humble]

Originally Posted by MikeyMilam

my point is that people do bad things, not because of their religion, but because they are bad people! demonizing and stereotyping people based on what other people have done is just wrong. in fact, why don't i say that christians are mass murderers because the bible commands it. the catholics forced christianity on the romans and greeks on pain of death! then the christians massacred the arabs and jews to claim israel as their own! by your own logic, christians are just as bad of people as atheists. you're just better at justifying it.

Catholics aren't Christian.

[BelieverInGod]

Originally Posted by MikeyMilam

my point is that people do bad things, not because of their religion,

No you specifically said that people did bad things because they though God was on their side. Keep shifting those goal posts.

but because they are bad people! demonizing and stereotyping people based on what other people have done is just wrong. in fact, why don't i say that christians are mass murderers because the bible commands it. t

See, there you go.

he catholics forced christianity on the romans and greeks on pain of death! then the christians massacred the arabs and jews to claim israel as their own! by your own logic, christians are just as bad of people as atheists. you're just better at justifying it.

The catholics were the Romans, sheesh, how stupid can you get. Anyway, as has been pointed out. CATHOLICS ARE NOT CHRISTIANS

And what do you mean we're better at justifying it. We know that we have to answer for everything we do, even every word that comes out of our mouths
Matthew 12:36 But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment.

Atheists on the other hand, don't have to justify anything other than, "it's all legal if you don't get caught". Look at the lying and backpedaling you're doing.

[MikeyMilam]

Originally Posted by Heathen_Basher

Catholics aren't Christian.

i call bullshit. they worship christ and read the bible.

[BelieverInGod]

Originally Posted by MikeyMilam

i call bullshit. they worship christ and read the bible.

Did you read the link? I'll give it to you again.

http://www.landoverbaptist.net/showthread.php?t=7490

Catholics are nothing more than old Roman pagans with Jesus' name slapped on it.

[MikeyMilam]

Originally Posted by BelieverInGod

Did you read the link? I'll give it to you again.

http://www.landoverbaptist.net/showthread.php?t=7490

Catholics are nothing more than old Roman pagans with Jesus' name slapped on it.

don't link to yourself until you establish your own credibility

[Billy Bob Jenkins]

Originally Posted by MikeyMilam

i call bullshit. they worship christ and read the bible.

They worship the goddess Mary, and confess to a man in black robes. How is that Christian?

[Billy Bob Jenkins]

Originally Posted by MikeyMilam

don't link to yourself until you establish your own credibility

Our beliefs are all based on the KJV1611. So we speak with the authority of God.

[Bobby-Joe]

Originally Posted by MikeyMilam

RAND - never killed or tortured anyone.

You are familer with Ayn Rand's admiration for William Edward Hickman, a child killer?

Rand pretty blatantly fits your demand for an atheist who supports torture, rape and murder because they scorn morality.

[BelieverInGod]

Originally Posted by MikeyMilam

don't link to yourself until you establish your own credibility

I didn't write it. In fact IF you had bothered looking at the link, it would have shown you how Biblically incorrect the Catholics are.

But hey, don't let a little education get in the way of your intelligence, after all, you and your mommy know how smart you are; she tells you that every day.

[handmaiden]

Singer is Margret Singer, founder of Planned Parenthood, the foremost terrorist organization in the world.

She is responsible for more deaths than ANYONE, because she encouraged and distributed birth control which is the killing of unconceived souls by preventing the seed of men, which God created and directed to the production of life, from reaching the eggs of females.

There are countless billions upon billions of spent sperm which have been condemned to death because of the vile activities of people like Singer.

At the very beginning of the world, God decreed that the people that He created should go forth and multiply. His primary tool for creating human life after the first two that He sculpted by hand has been the copious seed of men. If it wasn't so important to Him, He wouldn't have provided men with so much of it.


ALL of the gazillions of sperm produced in the testes of men throughout human existence contain the soul source-- any waste or misdirection of that precious resource is a grave sin, indeed.

Singer and all homosexuals are in many ways, the ultimate abomination. They are killers and condemners of souls that God Himself fashioned to give glory to Him. Murdering one, or a few million people, is nothing compared to that. Physical death is nothing next to spiritual condemnation.

Those who place any sort of stumbling block before a soul that robs it of its chance to know God are vicious beyond human comprehension.


Somberly Yours,

Handmaiden

[Meek and Humble]

Thank you sister Handmaiden. You are very right about Margaret Singer.

However, I actually meant Peter Singer. Seems there is no end to the list of evil atheists, is there?

PETER SINGER (Bioethicist)
Singer, by trying to be more broadminded than is reasonable, has created a philosophy that actually dehumanizes people, reducing them to points of consciousness that are indistinguishable from those of many non-human animals. Therefore, what is of primary importance for the Princeton bioethicists is not the existence of the being in question, but its quality of life. But this process of dehumanization leads directly to discrimination against those whose quality of life is not sufficiently developed. Singer has little choice but to divide humanity into those who have a preferred state of life from those who do not. In this way, his broad egalitarianism decays into a narrow preferentialism:
When we reject belief in God we must give up the idea that life on this planet has some preordained meaning. Life as a whole has no meaning. Life began, as the best available theories tell us, in a chance combination of gasses; it then evolved through random mutation and natural selection. All this just happened; it did not happen to any overall purpose. Now that it has resulted in the existence of beings who prefer some states of affairs to others, however, it may be possible for particular lives to be meaningful. In this sense some atheists can find meaning in life.
Life can be meaningful for an atheist when he is able to spend his life in a "preferred state." The atheistic perspective here does not center on people, however, it centers on happiness. This curious preference for happiness over people engenders a rather chilling logic. It is not human life or the existing human being that is good, but the "preferred state." Human life is not sacrosanct, but a certain kind of life can be "meaningful." If one baby is disabled, does it not make sense to kill it and replace it with one who is not and "therefore" has a better chance for happiness? "When the death of the disabled infant," writes Singer, "will lead to the birth of another infant with better prospects of a happy life, the total amount of happiness will be greater if the disabled infant is killed.
According to this avant garde thinker, unborn babies or neonates, lacking the requisite consciousness to qualify as persons, have less right to continue to live than an adult gorilla. By the same token, a suffering or disabled child would have a weaker claim not to be killed than a mature pig. Singer writes, in Rethinking Life and Death:

Human babies are not born self-aware or capable of grasping their lives over time. They are not persons. Hence their lives would seem to be no more worthy of protection that the life of a fetus.

And writing specifically about Down syndrome babies, he advocates trading a disabled or defective child (one who is apparently doomed to too much suffering) for one who has better prospects for happiness:

We may not want a child to start on life's uncertain voyage if the prospects are clouded. When this can be known at a very early stage in the voyage, we may still have a chance to make a fresh start. This means detaching ourselves from the infant who has been born, cutting ourselves free before the ties that have already begun to bind us to our child have become irresistible. Instead of going forward and putting all our effort into making the best of the situation, we can still say no, and start again from the beginning."

[MikeyMilam]

Originally Posted by Billy Bob Jenkins

They worship the goddess Mary, and confess to a man in black robes. How is that Christian?

how isn't it? the pope does say he is the true emissary god. ITS TRUE BECAUSE HE SAYS SO!!! oh wait, thats your line, isnt it

[Meek and Humble]

Originally Posted by MikeyMilam

how isn't it? the pope does say he is the true emissary god. ITS TRUE BECAUSE HE SAYS SO!!! oh wait, thats your line, isnt it

Hmm, isn't it interesting how it has shifted the conversation when it realized it was losing the debate?

Stay on topic or be banned, troll.

[MikeyMilam]

Originally Posted by Heathen_Basher

Hmm, isn't it interesting how it has shifted the conversation when it realized it was losing the debate?

Stay on topic or be banned, troll.

as if any of you haven't shifted it. you want to go back to the basics, fine. then tell me why i should believe in A god. then tell my why i should believe in YOUR god. if you can satisfy this, then we'll be done here.

[Lisa H]

Originally Posted by MikeyMilam

as if any of you haven't shifted it. you want to go back to the basics, fine. then tell me why i should believe in A god. then tell my why i should believe in YOUR god. if you can satisfy this, then we'll be done here.

Mikey you originally asked why God hated you from Leviticus 18:22. Why are you unable to stay on topic of the thread you started.

Leviticus 18:22
Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.

Leviticus 20:13
If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

[Billy Bob Jenkins]

Originally Posted by MikeyMilam

as if any of you haven't shifted it. you want to go back to the basics, fine. then tell me why i should believe in A god. then tell my why i should believe in YOUR god. if you can satisfy this, then we'll be done here.

No you have it backwards. Tell us why you shouldn't believe in our God. The burden of proof is on the one who fails to assert the claim first.

[Seth Campbell]

Originally Posted by MikeyMilam

as if any of you haven't shifted it. you want to go back to the basics, fine. then tell me why i should believe in A god. then tell my why i should believe in YOUR god. if you can satisfy this, then we'll be done here.

Personally, I don't care whether you believe or not. If you want to spend your eternity in Hell, by all means it's your choice. After all, that's what free will is all about.

Now you may have noticed, but we're not the ones who barged into a Christian forum screaming about false atheists and how all Christians are evil. If you didn't want to discuss the LORD why did you sign up in the first place?