Staredit Network

Stars-Chris, by that logic we can say that we shouldn't have passed the Equal Rights Amendment because throughout our American history women had been paid less. It's conservatism at it's finest (or worst, depending on how you look at it). Oh, yeah, and black people should have separate water fountains and bathrooms, because that's how it always was. You know, until they changed it.

Speaking of which, I also read about a culture in Africa that holds deceit as the highest value. When a Christian missionary came to spread the word of God by the story of Jesus Christ, they saw Judas Iscariot as the hero because he shrewdly penetrated through Jesus's inner circle.

Ouch, speechless. Just says a random thing to look smart. No ofense, but it looked like no response to my posts after this! Sizzle! *Licks finger and puts it on ass* SCORE!

You can't seriously think what you said had any resemblence to being an intelligent post. I did respond to your post, but I guess I'll explain this time why it's stupid.

Fortunately just because they're your beliefs doesn't mean they dictate the truth.

Congratulations. I'm sure you've done the extensive studying to warrant your opinion on this matter.

First off, just saying "a germ" isn't specific enough. This "germ" and humans share single-celled ancestors, but they split off early enough and are on different branches of the "tree". We're most likely talking about split off so early that they are even in different Kingdoms. Not only that but a germ will always be a germ, just as you will always be a human. Chimpanzees did not turn into humans. What they did was become more and more human-like in each generation. The names we have for animals are just what they are like in our modern state. And since we've been around such a short time to classify animals they have just always been like this to us. But let's just say in some alternate universe that living things can become other living things and this germ could become human. You're saying that because we can't make devices that speed up time to go billions of years per second in a controlled, isolated environment, that, that makes Christianity right? Now let's go even further and say that not only this germ could become human, but that we have the technology to do this. This germ would not become human, it would just die. If you could make it immortal and you put it in this isolated environment it would just sit there forever. Things evolve because of their environment that they live in. Mutation does not make creatures better, just minutely different. Most mutations do nothing at all. Now let's just say we reset the Earth and wanted to see what it would be like for creatures to evolve all over again. Most likely we would have very different creatures and humans would never exist.

You saying humans can't evolve now is just like us saying God can't come down today.

Mr.Kirbycode774, do you have a religion, or are you an atheist?


If you're an atheist, why are you using a "book" called "The Holy Bible" in your posts? Shouldn't it just be another "Book" to you? Why don't you pull something from Harry Potter?


If you do have a religion, it doesn't matter what your beliefs are, and I think some people take beliefs too seriously.

I honestly can't see how humans could always be civiliized. Has anyone ever read "Lord Of The Flies"? The human is not civilized by nature. Modesty, respect, and so many of the fundamental blocks of society are entirely taught. One must assume society begins when, say, a group of cavemen who normally hunt alone decide to work together because food is scarce, and hunting in groups is generally more effective. They share the food on a basis of the strongest. However, after awhile, they reason they might as well look out for each other, or else they'll starve. Eventually they form a larger group, copulate, and generate new offspring. They decide to stay in the same area, and have all the males work together. The women are shared, the food is shared, and no one kills one another. Eventually they learn to farm, make clothes, and build shelters. So they cease to be nomadic, and killing each other over territory becomes taboo. The concepts of right and wrong evolve into more complex and advanced versions. All of these values are taught to their offspring, advanced, sometimes changed, and here we are, an injection or a bullet the gift for killing another human. Why are there religions? So one group of people can point at another group of people and say "You're the bad guy". That's what I honestly think.

That's right, humans aren't civilized. Killing is only natural too. If you put tons of mice in a closed up jar with infinite food, and very good living conditions, they eventually die off because of fighting. It works the same for any species.

But this is off topic...

Has absolutly nothing to do with this topic, I said religion!!!!!!! in our government, god is that so hard to understand? Womens rights + the equal rights movement is a whole different topic, hey why don't you start those topics???? I think many atheists are good people and I know some too. But I do not like it when they complain about religious stuff that has to do with the government (i.e. "under god") You took my point and blew it way out of preportion so you could have an arguement .

Just my way of saying "Dude, you just said something phenomenally stupid."

Scientists cannot create a time machine because we lack the technology. That's like asking why scientists haven't decided to give us a cure for cancer yet.

And evolution doesn't work like that. As ScrollMaker explained, for a "Germ" to evolve into a human, we would have to be a direct descendant of this germ and it would have to be subjected to the exact same environmental changes throughout generations upon generations.

I strongly suggest you stop ass-fingering yourself and so some research.

I'm not ass-fingering. Why don't you prove to us that Christianity is wrong with true science facts that are 100% true?

Because we can't. Also, we can't prove that God exists either.

Would you prefer to believe in something that you can't prove exists, or not believe in something until you can prove it exists?

The first one, which is me, cuz I'm CHRISTIAN! MUHAHAHAHAHA!

Unfortunately, that's just not logical, which is why atheists get incredibly frustrated; start spitting vitriol and irritate me.

Theists are illogical and therefore irritating when they try to form an argument.
Atheists are logical but overly sarcastic and condescending and therefore irritating also.

Agnostics are compromisers and are therefore cool.

Resistance is futile.

Thanks for proving my point for me.

Prepare to be assimilated. We will add your biological and technological distinctives to our own. You will adapt to service us.

This is turned unserious. Stay on topic please.

Okay, is it just me, or did this whole topic derail into one liners and sarcastic insults being thrown at each other? This is under Serious Discussion, NOT the Garbage Bin.



Okay, how about looking at it this way. What is wrong with complaining about things against their beliefs? Is free speech not allowed? If you have the right to state your opinions on a religious matter, then so should they. As the "UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights" states:

I want my damn question answered;
why do you use a biblical example when you claim to be atheist? Don't you think that weakens your statement...because it does.

As for my feelings towards atheists, well, I am Christian(here comes the hate crimes against us) and our religion teaches not to judge a man by his actions but by his soul. It also, however, says that we need to except people for who they are, but furthermore we must try and convert them to our beliefs. I am not saying we should tell them "be Christian or your going to hell" I am saying we must convince them that it is the best way and what Jesus wants. So, even if someone is atheist I believe they can change. I have changed one of my friends who did not believe in God. Now he attends my church. So atheists just need to be shown God, and his many works in life. Well thats my little opinion.

Hell, but if 'God' tell you to except anyone as who they are, why is he asking you to change them?
That's totally illogical... even is God does exists it makes no sense.


The reason is obviusly as if it was true, since religionists are not ready to believe that it's not true trying to explain to them would have to be bounded to the logic exits where it is true, and when it's proven to have no logic there you can simply move into where it doesn't exists (aka no god) and see how comes now everything does make sense.

It's like if you talk to a little kid and try to explain him that chocolate is bad and even tho it's tasty it will ruin his teeth.
You don't just say: "It's bad, it will ruin your teeth", he would obviusly not care what you say.
Instead, you let him eat some of that chocolate and than see himself that his mouth hurts and he needs a dentist, and than make him stop eating more when he already knows why and believes you.

The problem with doing that on religion and not on chocolate is that religion is a type of chocolate that is being eaten from ever since and only lately people found out it's infections.

Atheists use Biblical references to:
A: Illustrate a point in a sarcastic way.
B: Expose the inaccuracies of the Bible.

Actually, I'm starting to think that if you call yourself and atheist, you are against religion, and if you just don't believe in religion, you are neutral. All these topics about religion just prove that people who say they are atheist every time the word "religion" is mentioned are just pridefull to be atheists and not really on the neutral factor.

I'm not an atheist. I dislike religion, and I consider atheism to be one.