Bill Maher and Larry Charles interview "religulous"

[Lennon4ever1]

Religion= The biggest scam on humanity! -The ultimate fraud

[PROCLAIMEROFTRUTH]

@Lennon4ever1 I would say moreso of evolution. the largest hoax ever perpetrated on civilization. Evolution is not science..

[Lennon4ever1]

@PROCLAIMEROFTRUTH Say anything you want! We've exchanged a few comments before and you're not worth any further discussion. So go ahead and preach and I'll never reply back again. -Cheers

[HIMYNAMEISEVAN]

I SOOOO wish I had seen it there. GO TORONTO!

[laird47]

I agree with Maher. Some people do need a system to belong to. An atheist group in general should be created so that many can join, but for many other people individualistic knowledge is sufficient. Just the knowing that "I'm not insane, other people think logically just like me" would help many atheists feel more comfortable in there lives. Religion is running a muck in this society, it should be put in check by sane individuals. Both systematically and individually.

[fuckutube74]

Bill Maher the faggot pot smoker is right about religion

but this coward still says that 9/11 was not an inside job

He is a boring old queer

[sagacity81]

Does anyone else find it funny that the interviewer keeps saying "Thank GOD"?

[fuckutube74]

@sagacity81 lmao

[ooglebydoogleby]

It always amazes me that musicians think any god would be interested in their self obsessed self important notion of their importance in the world. What a joke the notion of a baby sitter god for people's personal ego is a joke.

[greeny202a]

Religious people are fucking nuts! end of story.

[123backinyerface]

Religulous was funny as Hell (no pun intended).

[evilisbliss]

@123backinyerface It's still "funny as Hell" to me...and I've seen it six times!

[myoldshorts]

Listening to Bill Maher most of the time makes me ask the big question. Who exactly does he respect? He doesn't seem to respect anybody but himself. He acts as if he is the greatest thing in the world and anyone that doesn't believe in what he believes in is a complete idiot. Well I say anyone who believes that when you die then that's all there is, has many issues that he or she should look into rather than telling everyone else to believe the same.

[evilisbliss]

@myoldshorts He gives as much respect as he is given...btw respecting someone is not synonymous to respecting his/her beliefs.

On your last statement, maybe those who believe that when you die, you go to heaven or hell have many issues that they should look into rather than telling everyone else to believe the same.

[myoldshorts]

@evilisbliss You must be watching a different Bill Maher because every time I see him, he is always whining about how dumb some one else is and prides himself on how smart he is when I haven't heard to many intelligent things come out of his mouth. And all you can do is plagiarize so that tells me what kind of people actually agree with Bill Maher.

[PROCLAIMEROFTRUTH]

Bill Maher is equivalent to pre-war Germany's propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels. Except Maher doesnt wear a uniform-not yet anyway. Goebbels one determination was to make sure the public outcry was that the jews were responsible for the country's condition. Mahers hate speech is worse than the pre-selected religions he is condemning.

[evilisbliss]

@PROCLAIMEROFTRUTH Are you one of those people who believes that freedom of speech only goes so far? Otherwise, I cannot see a valid comparison between Goebbels and Maher.

[SeoulSon51]

@PROCLAIMEROFTRUTH Goebbels? You are delusional. PROCLAIMEROFTRUTH. PROCLAIMEROFNONSENSE should be your name.

[bondurango]

Religion is the oldest form of mind control on the planet. The hardest thing to do is to debunk yourself. But, once you do, it's wonderful. It's like a good dump.

[journalism101]

It's Godless because they use it in their favor in Hollywood and call on God for help but God is a verbal tick to people that have something to sell!

[h2omanz]

bill is a chump

[crisco80]

how ironic that the reporter says "thank god" for their point of view and their point of view is that there is no god. :)

[djfingersflores]

agree 100% ... nicely done

[alphacause]

I love that last line where Bill Maher says: "Its the easiest thing to sell [religion] because its an invisible product...by the way you cannot test it out until after you die...so there is no one there to complain when you drive this thing off the lot and it breaks down."

I don't even think any of the philosophers of past ages, who have argued forcefully against religion, could have put it as well as Maher did right there. Sometimes, to bring clarity to the issue, you need a comedian

[RioDePensamientos]

@alphacause You actually think Bill Maher posed a more intellectual argument than a philosopher? No, he just made fun of people, not telling them what he actually wanted to interview them about, and spliced together the clips for comedic effect.

[alphacause]

@RioDePensamientos I never implied that Maher presented a case that was more intellectually sophisticated and substantive than a philosopher. What I meant is that his comedic manner of articulation brings more clarity to the issue of religion, and therefore his message is more accessible to the masses. Of course philosophers like Michael Martin, Theodore Drange, Walter Kaufman, etc. bring more intellectual gravitas to the issue, but for many, their message is too esoteric to make an impact.

[Lennon4ever1]

@RioDePensamientos He made fun of delusional people. If religious people want to push such absurd ideas on the rest of us -then they're asking to be made fun of! This ridicule is long overdue

[brianpadrickdrake]

@alphacause You are so right. You hit the nail on the head. Thanks for the comment.

[ncusa367]

Great interview, so true

[zahropit]

lol at larry charles shoes 7:53

[Chadner]

Have you guys seen Larry's pink crocs at the end!

How RELIGILOUS! hahahaa

[jamesdavidtimmons]

Wait til he's on his deathbed. I'm sure he'll start to think a little more in depth about God, and not so much about his image and ego. These guys are all clueless. Don't debate the Catholic religion and think you're debating Christianity. Catholicism contradicts Christianity almost as much as Bill Maher. If you wanna know what you're opposing, read the bible, IN CONTEXT.

[Chadner]

Always with the deathbed thing...

Richard Dawkins has said that he will have a tape recorder on his deathbed just to make sure noone says that he was converted in the end...

Can't you just accept that someone out there has a different point of view?

[jamesdavidtimmons]

I'm sure he won't. But that would be interesting to see how hard he'd have to suppress what's truly important just to make a point at the end of his life. But, a deathbed conversion isn't really a good idea anyway, cause you don't always go slow. The reason SO many people convert on their deathbed is because they no longer have the worldly distractions and pointless temptations. If everyone read the bible in context, atheism wouldn't be so popular. I was atheist for 7 years. I get it.

[jamesxoxbond]

u "never" choosed to be christian based on "logic" "fatcs" and " evdinces" , u were "born" and "raised" following ur parents believes and auto-rejecte questioning and proves , i wish u realise that aswell .

[jamesdavidtimmons]

You know me really well. Don't you think it's hypocritical to dislike a group of people cause THEY generalize and stereotype and then you do the same thing? My father and mother have never been to church with me in my life. I made these decisions on my own. I was atheist for 7 years, like I said...

[jamesxoxbond]

as Richard Dawkins said :" as i die , i'll bring a recorder and record every single word " to prove to ppl such as urself that when facts are fully proven there is no way to think again .

and no thanks i wont read a BOOK that says earth is 10,000 years old and beleive that coz ur God says so . God .... is....a Dilusion ..face it

[jamesdavidtimmons]

So, scientists are infallible, but the word of God is not? Despite the fact that the Bible predicted Alexander the great, Jesus' coming (to the day!), and prophecied hundreds of events that He fulfilled, you trust scientists and people? If you did an in depth study of history and it's correspondence with the Bible, it'd blow your mind!

[jamesxoxbond]

"So, scientists are infallible, but the word of God is not?" do u even lsn to urself ?

Scinence is based on "EvidenceS""FactS"&"Experiment­S" u cannot deny scinece unless u r " a retard with no education "

YOU can NOT prove if the bible is true or not and once it comes to a point that we find a "contradiction" between science an Bible then this means UR bible is "FAKE" and u have an "ADDICTION" to convnice urself that u r true .

and the fact that u were an athiest makes u look even dumper.

[jamesdavidtimmons]

I'm not denying S-C-I-E-N-C-E. I'm denying that scientists are infallible. Just because a bunch of people say one thing and completely suppress the argument, doesn't make it true. I know I can't prove the Bible. I believe, personally, that the Bible is true. I just want everyone to know my side of the argument.

[jamesxoxbond]

those "bunch of ppl" follow a "scientific method" which is finding "provs and evidences" and study them "carefully and logically" , those " bunch of ppl did't assum that the sun is a "star" our of "NOTHING" and they dont just "BELIEVE" .

u just still dont get it do u ?

[jamesdavidtimmons]

Yes, I understand how science works. Thank you for that. If you're going to claim that Christianity hasn't been dissected and examined and studied than you're kidding yourself. Here we are almost 2000 years later and people are STILL trying to disprove it. Trust me, all scientists can collaborate and will still have a heck of a time refuting it. Science is constantly growing, and we're always learning more and more. We know everything we need to know about Christianity :)

[ksengage014]

You CAN NOT disprove religion. I can't believe the amount of people that think that it's an argument.

Science hasn't disproved the invisible Unicorn I pray too either. So it must be true

[Heshhion]

Bill Maher just did disprove religion.

You need to watch the movie again. Its al there :)

[zofspade]

The argument isn't if it's real. The question the film poses is "why is faith so good"? Why is it valued to believe in something that cannot be proven?

[ksengage014]

There is not argument for the bible, that's the problem.

[pattymayonaiselol]

scientist are not infallible and even scientists know that! science is supposed to change because new evidence tells them to. if scientist were infallible, science would be like religion wherein no one is allowed to change and learn new things.

[GoOutStrange]

A "New" thing for most christians would be to really learn the "old" things. I rarely meet a christian who really knows why they do what they do. So many are misinformed. When discussing the "Law" with a young man, Jesus told him the most important thing was to "love thy neighbor." If every "christian" did simply that, the world would change overnight!(we are talking about nearly two billion people according to most polls) Two billion people loving their "enemies"....think about it.

[xXimbleXx]

Well It might be so, but just saying you are Christian wont make you Christian, that's the real problem we have there are just too many pretenders and hypocrites amongst us. Just like these Atheists are hypocrites to themselves, pretending and laughing it off, being barely able to sleep at nights, trying to ignore, just forget about God. But don't think you'll be able to keep those false faces up for too long, because God wont leave you alone no matter what. Your hearts will never be at ease...

[gblueslover2]

Good concept, but the truth is we can't. This is because humans are tribal, always have been, always will be. We all naturally form groups(tribes) & compete against the "others". All humans naturally carry this " Us against THEM " behavioral gene within themselves that is inescapable, UNLESS we notice that we have the natural tendancy towards it. And like all things in nature, we compete for our survival...These are evolutionary behavioral traits learned for our tribes success. Humans evolved.

[korzon]

@GoOutStrange Some of us do,Few will walk down that norrow path.Most people love to hate and that goes for everybody.

[pattymayonaiselol]

and there are two reasons why history and the bible correspond.

1) the bible was recorded after jesus' death. before that everything was passed down by mouth. it would be easy for someone who lived in a time after jesus (knowing the birth date) to put in a previous book that the birth was predicted.

2) #1 is assuming that jesus arrived on dec. 25 and all of this is true, even thought there is evidence that he was not born on dec. 25 (if he existed). plus this is not history, this is theology.

[CyberHaloGamer]

He was not born 25 dec, that is when we celebrate.

We don't know when.

[GoOutStrange]

The ancient Hebrew texts which comprise the Old Testament were written before Jesus and some were written over a 1000 years before Jesus. Regarding the dates such as Christmas, the Roman Emperor Constantine was a pagan, but over half of his kingdom were "christians." He publicly claimed to have converted, and made his whole kingdom "Catholic"(which means "Universal"). He then spent the next decade abolishing traditional practices and started new ones which lined up with his "closet paganism."

[SoftwareEngineer3]

I've actually read the bible, and the thing about Alexander is new to me... could you show us what you mean?

In any case, how do you know the predictions weren't written after certain events transpired, or, like in the Jesus case, people just made it match the "prophesies" (to the day? really?)

Also if you can tell me what the hell is a Jesus - it doesn't sound at all like his real name in Hebrew.

[shayshalom]

jesus is the latin translation 2 his real hebrew name - Yeshua. Latin change usually the hebrew name with Y 2 J. jesus was mythology built on poor jewish boy's body who claimed 2 b god(!) - this mythologies built on jewish fary tales created Christianity in 300 ac. Islam built other mythology in 620 ac based on a black ston deliverd from god 2 his "new prophit" Muhamad.

[ksengage014]

You are an idiot. Seriously. Go evaluate your life and kill yourself.

[trashcanman23]

Wow!!! I'm amazed at the reaction of people. It's so sad. Jesus is alive and is coming sooner than you think. Jesus Christ is my Lord and Savior and ALWAYS will be. God Bless You all.

[soundbeans]

Why would I want to go to church and get my asshole raped by a priest?

[AlbertDarwin007]

Amen! PWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA thanks dude you're funny...

[Jitpring]

Maher is a fundamentally shallow man with a correspondingly shallow understanding of religion and no understanding of theology. Like today's herd of "individuals," however, he fashionably wears his ignorance as a badge of honor. Similarly, I wouldn't be surprised to learn that he too has branded himself with at least one tattoo. Such is his bovine mind.

At any rate, see the video here called:

Father Barron on Bill Maher's "Religulous"

[martinimix79]

The movie was entertaining but Bill Maher could have picked better people to debate with. The people he picked were really shady and questionable and I don't think it's a fair assessment of the religions on the gradient of beliefs. Though he does bring up some credible points, he should not only go after fundamentalists and independents. He should also go for the bigger body of Christians and Muslims that are more spiritual than textbook religious.

[zachflame123]

i hope this movie stirs things up, but it inevitably is going to be dismissed as "just another sinful flick" and people as a whole will still drive towards the cliff with the petal to the metal.

[RedOnChrome]

i think its pretty funny that the interviewer thanks god on several occasions for bill mahers war on religion. isnt that an oxymoron? isnt he then damning bills meaning with his documentary?

[daydreambelieverrr]

haha, it is an oxymoron. sometimes i have to watch myself when i say "thank god" or "for the love of god", because i am actually an agnostic and i don't want to seem like a hypocrite. but, you know, we all say things like that. oh, well. it is funny though.

[xdegenerate18]

I'm not religious and I say "thank god" and "for the love of god", and its not any way hypocritical. Why? Because its basically a part of modern culture, even pop culture. Like saying "Oh that's gay.." as a bad thing.

Not that it matters anyway, considering many Christians and Catholics use god's name in vain, haha.

[daydreambelieverrr]

you're absolutely right, lol. :)

[truemonolith]

like i said before, you have this mentality of a secular government with a faith based leader.

It doesnt make sense, no matter what type of analogy you try to describe it as.

[newworldorder08]

your purist attitude is one of the reasons why the founding fathers fought for independence. your mentality would definitely create another hitler, stalin, mao, pol pot. you are a dangerous man.

[truemonolith]

Purist?

Btw, in case you didn't pay attention in school, the main reasons the founding fathers put the case forward for independence was Britain's policy of taxation without representation, SUBSIDISATION OF RELIGION (that's right, the king of england taxed faith), and restriction of trading capacity of the colonies.

Like i said before, you're just bloating up comments, i dont really see your point, and thats not my fault. The responsibility is yours to make a point clear.

[newworldorder08]

and its your responsibility to study more!

[truemonolith]

and what should i study?

If you're going to call someone uneducated, you need to point out what they should be educating themselves in.

[newworldorder08]

you should learn to read history in a deeper sense pal and i don't call you as uneducated just to make it clear. you are a purist because in this world there is no black and white yet you are making it as such. Hitler was a purist, so as pol pot and mao and stalin. hitler, for purity of his aryan supremacy, while the rest for purity of their communist ideology. have to heard of cultural revolution? the green tunics that everybody must wear as the only garment?

[truemonolith]

i'm sorry...you said i should study more. Now, why would i need to study more, unless i was uneducated on a topic?

I said nothing about the world, i said when it comes to serperation of church and state it is black and white, you either have it, or you dont. One leads to potential abuse, and the other is unabusable. I said earlier, theres no such thing as "sort of a seperation of church and state", this isnt a divorce, so we cant say "Well church gets visitation on sundays"

[newworldorder08]

your kind of mentality equates to the mentality of bill oreily. open your mind man. the world is complex and one must not see the world in just one set of lens. you have to realize that there issues that cannot be defined as simple arithmetic. you seem to be intelligent but you lack the wisdom to understand things that surrounds you.

[newworldorder08]

bye for now man. i have work to do. ciao!

[newworldorder08]

and yes, you are a purist. you don;t don't want to accept it. you are a purist and a purist mentality is very dangerous

[truemonolith]

Purist in what capacity?

By defintion purist means "One who practices or urges strict correctness, especially in the use of words."

You're equating a grammar nazi (which you cant prove anywhere that i was) with the likes of hitler, stalin and mao and saying i'm the most dangerous person? I think you might need to re-asses what you were trying to say, cause thats just HILARIOUS.

[truemonolith]

Hrmmm.

After reading all the comments its pretty obvious why Atheists in the US feel so suppressed. Usual talking points about Stalin and Mao (which can easily be countered by mentioning Hitler and Pope Pius XI, who both actually attempted genocide).

Faith is a personal belief, and whenever politics crosses with religion, there is ALWAYS a negative reaction. There is no greater reason for a seperation of church and state just because of the 4 individuals i mentioned.

[newworldorder08]

that is because its true my friend. stalin really killed millions and mao killed millions to. look at the graves. hitler? oh yes he killed millions too. and the worse part is that he hated christianity but he used christianity as a front to hide his true color.

[truemonolith]

urm...he didnt hide his christianity at all.

His christianity is what gained him favour with the roman catholic church and got him to power in Germany. It wasnt until Pope Pius XI died and Pope Pius XII (a pope who was pro-allies) that he turned against the church.

He was a religious man to the end saying that god was with the german people, and that christianity had turned their backs on him (see his speech at hamburg in 1943 the last public one he gave).

[newworldorder08]

that is the power of media manipulation. we don't even have to go far. look at Bush. he claimed to be christian, baptist and all. he claimed that he is a born again christian. but behind that facade is a reality that his family history were member s of a secret society that is entirely anti-christian. remember the scriptures once said that evil will always show himself to the world as an angel of light. so be careful when one tells you that he is christian etc. he might just fooling you.

[newworldorder08]

hitler is religious. oh yes he is religious. he is religious to his aryan religion, the religion of the blood. he use the trappings of christianity so that the majority would not feel alienated. he indeed made speeches about christianity precisely to fool them. have you ever heard the word "propaganda"? or the word "lie". goebbels said you mix lies with the truth and repeat it always and people would eventually believe in it. thats propaganda 101 for you.

[truemonolith]

your point is that he wasnt christian. Ok, i cant assert that anymore than i have, simply because we cant ask him anymore. But like i said earlier, it just proves my point that faith and governance should never mix.

[newworldorder08]

no, that is not entirely correct. history proves one thing, and that is power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. from the inquisition to stalin's purges and hitler's genocide, they all have the same mark, and that is that they were given the license to do anything without an effective check and balance. all of us, regardless of political, religious or racial affiliation, want freedom, free do share, practice our beliefs without somebody imposing it on us.

[newworldorder08]

so if we see this history of violence, we have to look at it at a clearer perspective. lets say for example that you and i meet one day knowing fully well that we share different beliefs. would we kill each other? of course not, we don't have the urgency. but when people in power tells you that, for example, religion must be abolished and those religious people must be incarcerated, what would you do? probably you would not follow it because your conscience would not allow it.....

[newworldorder08]

...but lets say that you're in a dire situation like your in deep poverty and trying to figure out why your life is in a pit and suddenly a leader or organization would tell you that these people or that religion is the real cause and tell you to wipe them out saying that they are plague or whatever. what would you do? probably in your desperation and urgent need for a scapegoat you would do it maybe even worse than what you are ordered to do...

[newworldorder08]

that is why there is a saying that the price of freedom is eternal vigilance. we must not allow people, institutions or organizations, no matter how esteemed they are or honorable they are, to be given powers that are beyond their ability to use it properly. nor we must allow somebody to give us that same power, without an effective check and balance.

[newworldorder08]

and when it comes to war, we must not have this absolute view that war is evil or such because we all have the right to defend ourselves, our lives, properties and beliefs. we just have to make sure that our leaders are saying or telling the truth. like this war on terror. are we really fighting for freedom or is it something else?

[truemonolith]

this is the biggest load of garbage i've ever heard.

Have you read the constitution...if not i suggest you pick up a copy or even wikipedia it up. Government isnt meant to stop religious freedom, but it sure as hell isnt supposed to promote it.

Let me put it this way...what if we allow faith based governance...and its NOT your faith. What about then? DO you still believe the church and state should be one entity?

[newworldorder08]

i guess it is you who has a mind full of trash! am i saying that the government must promote a certain religion? can you read english? did i say that the state must sanction a religion?! WHAT STUPIDITY! a free society is a society that has limited powers, which means that nobody must have absolute powers in which, by the way, YOUR constitution is trying to promote! Boy! this is the stupidest comment! can you read english?

[newworldorder08]

boy what STUPIDITY! again! where in my comment said that we must promote a certain religion to the affairs of the state?

[newworldorder08]

what YOUR constitution states, as in most constitution in most democratic nations also state is that there MUST be FREEDOM of religion and speech and assembly. the comments i made before CLEARLY state that nobody, whether its the church, or any organization to take total control on the affairs of the state. Like when a president is a catholic or protestant, he MUST not use his religion in imposing rules to those who don't share the same belief! GET IT!?...

[newworldorder08]

...or shall i translated to spanish or german? what a moron!

[truemonolith]

i think you do need to translate. Because i think you just said the person in government should be a person of A faith (any faith), but they should take no preference to their own.

And yes, what you said was garbage, because it looks like you're argueing for a secular government where the head of state that atleast BELIEVES IN GOD, in which case i have to point out the article 6 of the US constitution clearly states no religious test is required for office.

So yes...please explain.

[newworldorder08]

here! lest say that the next president happened to be a buddhist, the state must not use that as an issue to disallow him from taking the office because he was elected by the citizens. same thing when an avowed atheist would be at that position. but at the same token, the buddhist prez or the atheist prez must not impose his religious belief on anybody through legislation or executive orders. I'm a catholic but when a catholic president would make a law states that all schools must have.....

[newworldorder08]

a catholic bible in every classroom, i would be the first one to cry foul because that is tyranny. Same thing when an atheist would make a rule to take away from schools the word God, i would also cry foul because that is also a form of tyranny because just imagine forcing the majority, who believe in a God, not to say that word just to appease the atheist few. Now that is autocratic and oppressive

[newworldorder08]

you might ask, how about the rights of the few. a free society must RESPECT the rights of the few by not forcing them to believe in something they don;t believe in. when an atheist happened to be in a caucus and the caucus is praying, he has the right get get away first or not participate and those in majority must not take it as an offense as the atheist is exercising his right to express his belief. I guess that is very simple!

[newworldorder08]

I'm sorry if you would get offended, but your comment merit that response. your brainwashed mind and simplistic view of things inhibit you from seeing things on a broader light. and couple it with bad mouthing only worsens your ability to make a decent discussion.

[truemonolith]

so basically....you just took my first comment which was that really bad stuff happens when governance and religion mix and extrapolated into area's which really didnt need to be explored (because it could easily be asserted that an atheist coming down on religion is the same as a religious person coming down on athiests).

Btw, before asking people if they can read english read what you have written first.

[newworldorder08]

you cannot get it. every person, from an ordinary citizens to government officials, has the right to practice his faith everywhere he wanted to. and since almost all nations are in one form of democracy, majority always rule. but the majority must not use that as a license to persecute the minority because they have rights too. i guess the only nations that has theocratic gov't are in the middle east....

[newworldorder08]

...i guess you have to go to saudi arabia or iran and there you can really feel the oppression and say how lucky you are that you lived in the US or any western states. you are so lucky to lived in that free society coz otherwise, you might not be even be writing here right now.

[truemonolith]

you may want to read what i've said, right from the top.

[newworldorder08]

no. you are just plain stubborn. and since you have a thick skull, let me explain even further. you said that faith and governance must not mix. i said not quite right. lets make an example. lets say we are at war and in that war a small group of intellectual atheists are being persecuted because of their being atheist. now, this president, who happens to be a muslim, went out his way, using government assets, the military and the legislature to save these atheists from the jaws of death....

[newworldorder08]

...all because this president acted based on his religious belief that every muslim must help people in danger regardless of their color or creed. now, was he wrong?

[newworldorder08]

he was clearly using his faith as a basis of his actions and he use the federal government, taxpayers money to achieve it. now, is that wrong just because he used his belief?

[newworldorder08]

but lets say a muslim president, bacause of his avowed hatred towards hindus, makes laws making the lives of hindus difficult by not giving them rights or the opportunity to make business etc. was he using his belief in the wrong way. of course he is!

[truemonolith]

what belief?

Seems to me he did what his office required of him. This is why i said what you're saying is garbage. You have an emphasis on the faith of the presidency, i DONT, it doesnt matter if he's jewish, christian, muslim or atheist, he has a job that is specified in the constitution. I would rather have a president who abides by the laws that empower him than one that performs actions as a matter of "faith".

[newworldorder08]

you are really stubborn and utterly moronic. you just said clearly that faith and governance cannot mix. i guess you're a bunch of mixed nuts. take a nap first.

[truemonolith]

no...i said faith and governance SHOULDNT mix.

I gave 4 great examples of why too.

[newworldorder08]

i guess its better that you made a question: when does really the church has to separate from the state? when must a government official be allowed to use his faith in matters of the state? because the issue of the separation of the church and state is not a black and white thing.

[newworldorder08]

now this separation of church and state is really a difficult thing to discuss and we can take the whole day without resolving that issue.

[newworldorder08]

what belief?

Seems to me he did what his office required of him...

not quite. because lets say that there is an existing law disallowing the state to mess us the affairs of the other state and he is duty bound NOT TO INTERFERE.

[truemonolith]

it is a black and white thing.

The state has a very specific set of laws that govern what it can and cant do. Even if a person of faith is elected into government, it doesnt mean all of a sudden they will do bad things because theres no church influence in the government. It means they will adhere to the powers they are given.

On the converse, if Church and State are no seperate, you allow bigotry and social inequality because one faith will claim the top job and subsequently act as such.

[newworldorder08]

my god you are so narrow minded. who make the laws and on what basis that they made those laws? they made it on the basis on their OWN PERSONAL BELIEF whether it is religious in nature or humanist in nature. sheezzzz. Do you think that they make laws just because they just feel like it? oh yeah lets make a laws to protect the rights of humans because its cool man.

[newworldorder08]

lets make a universal declaration of human rights because i have just smoked pot and i said wow what an epiphany!

[newworldorder08]

Look at the founding fathers of the US constitution. many were religious, some of them deists and some humanist. of course they form the constitution based on their personal belief and their personal experience.

[newworldorder08]

church and state must be separate on the basis that the church must not use the assets of the state to pursue its religious goals and vice versa. but when a government official made decisions based on his belief and its not in conflict to the law, then there is nothing wrong with it.

[newworldorder08]

because when the church has the ability to use state assets to pursue its goals, that is theocracy and that is exactly what the constitution is trying to avoid. a theocratic society is not a free society and must be shunned upon.

[truemonolith]

i'm going to have to stop you right there. They were Secular Deists at best.

Jefferson said "In every country and every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty." In his book, the wealth of nations.

Now, theres other things they said to, but im going to keep this within 250 characters.

You're paddling around some strange ideas, and dont seem to have a direction am i accurate in saying you DONT believe in seperation of church and state, but say a secular government is best?

[newworldorder08]

hahaha. i ask you, where in the constitution that reads "In every country and every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty"? you have to take a lesson from Jefferson himself because despite of his bias against religion he didn't put that in the constitution while you on the other hand wanted to impose that on the public.

[newworldorder08]

a government that respects every religion and creed is the best. a society where there is freedom is the best.

[truemonolith]

so basically, you want more church inclusion in state policies?

[newworldorder08]

no. the government officials can make decisions based on the beliefs but they have to make sure that its within the bounds of law.

[truemonolith]

so then you agree with me, that the church and state should be seperate.

[newworldorder08]

as i said there is a separation of church and state. but the real reason is not to allow any religion or creed to use state assets for its own ends and to the detriment of others.

[newworldorder08]

now, if one believes that there is a law that seems to be unconstitutional or not right and somehow it is in conjunction to his religious beliefs, he can use the legislature to make complaints or demand for amendments or outright removal of a certain law but he must follow the rules of making the law and not put the law in his own hands, even if he believes that the law is immoral or evil.

[newworldorder08]

lets make the issue of abortion for example. i'm catholic and i'm definitely pro life and lets say if i'm a lawmaker and i saw there is a bill to legalize it, i would go against it, yet i must not use the rules of congress and i must not make my own law and impose it on others even if i personally believe (and I really do believe) that abortion is immoral and unlawful because its murder.

[newworldorder08]

i would sat that its unconstitutional, etc. but once it became law, i would still go against but i would not use the police or the military to harass the clinics nor call on pro lifers to burn the clinics and kill the practitioners because its against the law. all i can do is to make an announcement against this particular law.

[newworldorder08]

and since that abortion is legal, i cannot go out and burn those clinics. all i can do is to make public protest against the law and urge for its outright removal as is it within my constitutional right to express my religious and personal beliefs on the issue of abortion.

[newworldorder08]

you see, separation of church and state is not as simple as it seems. good day to you. peace for now.

[truemonolith]

so i was right, you said a bunch of garbage that had no relevance to the topic in an attempt to contradict my point (a point you agree with apparently). Maybe you should find a hobby outside of bloating up you tube comments.

[newworldorder08]

your egotistical arrogance really amazes me. get out and see the world man. i guess that is what you are really missing

[newworldorder08]

as milton friedman said (not in verbatim) "when one puts equality before freedom, he can loose much of both. but when he puts freedom first before equality, he can get a great measure of both."

[truemonolith]

So you like to hear yourself talk then.

[JNdigital]

I wonder if Maher would feel differently toward God if he realized God was not also a he, but God does not need to be one gender and encapsulates masculine and feminine polarities throughout the cosmos.

[joeymod135]

There is no need to got ya anyone to show the stupidity of Religion.

[GodKillerAtheist]

this movie is really good

Ben Stiens movie is dumb creationist nut job propaganda

[toxzen]

I like the product analogy.

[ferrariModenas]

religion does not deserve respect

[NorrisChuckling]

Most religious organizations do not deserve respect, but I think people's beliefs deserve respect.

[TheBSG]

I'm sorry, no. Maher wasn't respectful about religion in Religulous. I'm a stone cold atheist, I hate religion, I think most people who are religious are mildly psychotic. I still think he's rude and arrogant about things.

[RisenAsh]

The interviewer states: "anti-religion has always needed some sort of a preacher or leader" - I think Bill Maher and Larry Charles rebuked him excellently on this quite ignorant statement. Anti-religionism doesn't need 'leaders', but representatives: Verbal persons who speak out.

[chrisman737]

Religion is here to stay.  Atheists simply have to accept this.

[GodKillerAtheist]

statistics show atheists will equal or out number religious people within the next 15-20 years and we don't even go out preaching =P

[BeatBuddy]

You have it backwards. It's theists who can't deal with atheists. All you have to do is take a hard look at history.

[chrisman737]

No, you have it backwards. All you have to do is look at youtube and compare with hate-filled atheistic videos with the pious and loving theistic videos.

[H5LL2O25]

I love the pious and loving theistic video where the CNN commentators tell their viewers that atheists should just SHUT UP! And the ones where VFX calls atheists OBNOXIOUS JERKS. And the ones with those wonderful Baptists protesting at funerals. And any video with Bill O'Reilley. Feel the love people! Feel the love!

[Kimbert91]

The only "hate-filled" athiest videos i've seen are from TAA, and his not always even serious. You might be mixing "hate" with "frustration"...

[BeatBuddy]

A great many Christians, but not all, on YouTube wear sheep's clothing. There's a heavy strain of intolerance between the lines. And surely you can understand why so many atheists are distraught. They see themselves overwhelmed by so much reverence for patent absurdity and irrational drivel.

[chrisman737]

Atheists can improve their lot by staying away from our churches. That's right -- encourage the militant atheists who invade churches and steal hosts and desecrate them to simply stay away from our churches and our sacraments. We are not overwhelming you with our churches and our sacraments. You are the ones doing the invading, stealing, and desecrating.  If you don't like our churches, don't go. If you don't believe in God, then don't complain so much about him.

[BeatBuddy]

Atheists do all that? Methinks thou art paranoid, pal. First of all, atheists don't complain about God. How can they? What they complain about are the masses that are stupid enough to believe that such a ridiculous God exists. Second, atheists rightfully complain about Christians who have the presumptuous arrogance to claim that they're entitled to a hegemonic status under our system of government. Atheists are finally speaking up, and should!

[chrisman737]

Yes they do. Not paranoia, just facts. And, as I have stated plainly, the new militant atheism goes beyond simple "complaining." It degenerates into hate speech and hate actions. The actions I described have occurred and actually do occur. No paranoia. Just facts. And I haven't even told you anything, "pal," about the atrocities of atheists in the USSR, in Maoist China, etc...

[BeatBuddy]

And you need to read your history books. Maoism and Stalinism were held with the same intensity, the same dogmatic fervor, the same absolutes as the organized churches of the world. They were economic systems held to be beyond reproach. And bear in mind that scores of atheists who despised communist doctrine were also killed or sent to the camps.

Go to the 9 videos on my channel and click on Atheism vs Communism.

[chrisman737]

Exactly, BeatBuddy. Atheism creates a vacuum, and that vacuum needs to be filled. Atheism, especially militant atheism, fills it with the things of this world, whether that "god" be power, beliefs on class struggle, etc... Currently, atheism embraces science as its god. Atheists will always point out that Stalinism was "just like religion" as if they are making a great point, but actually they are showing the limitations and horrible destructiveness of atheism run wild.

[BeatBuddy]

Go to the Barna Study, which was initiated and conducted by a Christian who set out to prove that Christians are morally superior to atheism. To his complete surprise, he discovered that the exact opposite is true. In fact, atheist inmates comprise less than one-half of one per cent.

Atheists generally favor rationalism and free thought. They know after death it's eternal nothingness. They have the strenght to handle this hard reality. Xians don't. Don't fill your void with fairy tales.

[mikeinverizon]

Excellent!

[eruagnostic]

He missed the full joke.

It's:

- "You're all individuals".

- "We're all individuals".

.. and a single voice is heard:

- "I'm not!"

[godlessally]

Great movie! Now, if I can get my closed minded family to see it.

[MetaMaestro]

Good luck with that lmao.

[gipper10]

The movie was awesome! i believe everyone should see it!

[kravens001]

lol, the presenter ends the interview by thanking god ;)

[dominicthewise8]

someone tell larry to take those fuckin crocs off b4 i shove them up his ass!

PS: the movie was awesome.:)