as a follower,of jesus,A CHRISTIAN,i do not believe in the old testament,jesus himself said "keep the ten commandments of moses,for they are good,i am the new way,the light"CHRISTIANS HERE KNOW THIS PHRASE is better interpreted than i did ,but it is in the bible.the same book where they rail against homosexuals,leviticus allows FEMALE AND MALE SLAVERY TO THE JEWS,YES,yet they railed against being "slaves" under pharoh.we learned life,begins ""in the nostrils,the breath,in exodus,first page
@alezander666 do we sacrifice bulls,animals now,as old test.,NO,do we kill people who work on the sabbathexodus35:2,KILL THEM?,DOES GOD KILL MASTURBATORS LIKE onan,who masturbated,NO eaten a shrimp,lobster,crab,IT'S A ABOMINATIONLEV11:1, YOU PICK OUT THE "GAY STUFF",IGNORE THE REST? CHRISTIANS KNOW CHRIST "DESTROYED" JUDIASM,AND WAS KILLED FOR IT,NOT ONE DISCIPLE(MORTALS),STEPPED IN TO SAVE HIM,AND COULD HAVE,WHY BASICALLY PUT THEM ON JESUS'S LEVEL,EITHER JESUS THE NEW OR YOUR JEW WITH THE OLD
I wonder how much reason a man has these days then, since new translation was a man's idea, then why do they not admit they the man had changed it without God's intervention? If someone changes something due to the inaccuracies then I expect to be told. I know however my ex religion had done the change of theirs I found out because some family member of mine same religion had the old version. In the end it was disturbingly different all throughout the scriptures
A murderer is a murderer is a murderer. If its not in the interest of self-defense, its never okay, especially when it is done in the name of God and religion.
As for abortion...its should be the woman's choice since the unborn child is technically apart of the woman's body. I have no problem with abortion before the third trimester (Or whatever it is). It all comes down to people trying to use their beliefs to censore and take away the rights and freedoms of other people.
What does it matter whether people are born gay or become gay?! Its really a non-issue, unless of course you're a religios a-hole intent on taking away other people's rights and freedoms based on your irrational beliefs. We let them believe in any God they want and don't try to take away their right to do so, so what makes it right to take away someone elses rights because the way they live their life doesn't conform with THEIR beliefs? Its not right and people should know better.
@GoongalaGoongala being sexually and genetically modified without your permission does matter, for a lot of reasons. You brought God into this, not me.
All i asked is whether putting Bi-sphenol A into baby bottles is a good idea. Perhaps you like being a victim?
@Diatonic135 I brought religion into the matter for what i would assume are obvious reasons. Its the theist folks who are the ones who are against gay marriage and basically want to "fix" all the homosexuals. Now I don't know anything about gays being genetically/sexually modified or anything like that. You might want to explain what you are talking about a little bit further as far as that is concerned. I think this is a case of me not totally following what you are saying.
@GoongalaGoongala BPA, or Bi-Sphenol A, is known to cause gender dymorphism in nearly every creature that is exposed to it. male frogs that eat it turn into female. male salmon that eat it turn into half male/half female. females that are exposed to too much estrogen get tumors, cancer and other hormonal dysfunction.
in humans, very little is known because it's taboo to overtly do experiments on human babies. but because BPA is in most plastics and it leaks out we are all inan experiment.
@Diatonic135 Sounds pretty interesting actually and definitely something that should be looked into. But either way, it doesn't change the fact that homosexuals are people too and aren't hurting anyone else by living the lifestyle they do. They should have all the rights and freedoms everyone else does.
But, thinking about it, BPA doesn't account for homosexuality throughout history. Its well known that Spartans in ancient Greece took young boys as lovers. And there are other examples as well.
@Diatonic135 'BPA, or Bi-Sphenol A, is known to cause gender dymorphism in nearly every creature that is exposed to it.' This has nothing to do with homosexuality. Many homosexual people are not gender confused or identify in any way with being female.
@thomaseshuis you seem to be suggesting that estrogen has nothing to do with gender, or sexuality, or sexual preference - good luck making that argument!
@Diatonic135 I'm trying to explain to you it's to simplistic to say all homosexuals are homosexual because of BPA. I admit I did not phrase my thoughts correctly.'This has nothing to do with' should have been phrased as 'is not the only cause of'.
@Diatonic135 'only richard dawkins and yourself deal in absolutes, not me.' I just stated I don't see the world in black and white. Don't try to put words in my mouth. There many people who do see the world that way, biblical literalists for example. 'you defended the idea that BPA is the cause of all homosexuality.' I did not, i stated that even if it were to have influence, it is not the only cause for homosexuality.
@Diatonic135 'I only said that BPA is an essential and often overlooked (and rarely understood) part of the homosexual lifestyle.' Then I misunderstood your comment as you clearly have mine, my apologies.
@Diatonic135 I did not say BPA is the only cause of homosexuality, actually the opposite. Even if BPA is a factor that influences homosexuality, it is not the only one. Which I wrongly understood you were trying to point out. O and one thing homosexuality is a sexual orientation, not a lifestyle.
@Diatonic135 Also, as far as I'm concerened, anyone who has their rights and freedoms taken away by someone else because the way they live their life offends the other group or goes against their belief system IS in fact, a victim.
@GoongalaGoongala being gay matters. gay men especially have tremendous health problems due to the unsolvable problems with gay sex.
for instance: male sperm suppresses the immune system and since most of the immune system functions inside the colon, gay sex SEVERELY suppresses the immune system and may be linked to HIV and AIDS.
furthermore, gays have high instances of STD's, rectal bleeding, rectal leakage and rectal and colonic cancers for obvious reasons. the vagina>rectum for sex.
@Diatonic135 Thats fair, but if knowing these dangers gay men still choose to live that lifestyle, then people need to respect that. Its their choice, and they aren't hurting anyone else (but themselves potentially). Hey, I don't necessarily approve of the lifestyle, but they aren't hurting me so it is really none of my business. I have enough crap to worry about in my own life. I don't have time to worry about how other people live their lives and try to make them conform to my beliefs.
@Diatonic135 'being gay matters. gay men especially have tremendous health problems due to the unsolvable problems with gay sex.' This is nonsense, it's all a matter of safe sex, not homosexuality or same-gender sex acts.
'gay sex SEVERELY suppresses the immune system and may be linked to HIV and AIDS.' No, unprotected anal sex can be linked to hiv an aids. Not all homosexuals have unprotected sex.
@Diatonic135 'gays have high instances of STD's, rectal bleeding, rectal leakage' Also applicable to straight people who have unsafe anal sex. By the way, you do know that 'lesbian' sex carries the least risk of stds and hiv/aids?
I like how Dawkins willingly goes to meet religious extremists and advocates and hear their opinions, their side of the argument, without censoring their good points, only making his own points against them. Noting that most religious people would refuse to listen to the other side at all and remain secure in their delusions.
People who argue that people are "born" gay rather than becoming so by choice should study phthalates and Bisphenol -A. it might lend some hefty weight to their argument.
..to me, religious people are simply delusional lunatics! If you believe in God, the Bible, Allah or wahtever..then you might as well believe in The Lord Of The Rings and shit!
"Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear."
Well done Richard: exposing religion for the nonsense it represents; a delusional crutch for one's actions. Rationalist / Athiest must unite in order to offset the evils that religion represents.
St. Augustine is actually the real father of the doctrine of original sin, in his attempt to understand how evil could exist in a world where God is good and all powerful. St. Paul did have ideas about original sin, but it was St. Augustine who cemented the concept, which would change western thinking forever.
A christan believes it is right to kill a person based on the scriptures regardless of that fact that he committed a crime under the law. So the bible out ranks the law?
This is truly terrifying. American needs to be seen as great a danger to the rest of us as the middle east.
i agree > american taliban > if they figure this out it could be dangerous > or maybe they are waiting for another religion to mess up first .there are many stories where religion is an exuse for murder in the modern world > ie. god told me to do it >> he was a sinner > i did it in the name of god , angels came to me in a dream etc etc . but alot of them still go to prison or psyhciatric wards >lose lose situation >
we aren't their just yet, unlike the middle east we have more people fighting this stupidity, and unlike the middle east we also have the right to do it.
Don't judge all americans by Bush and this lunatic on the show.
now if christians are so fucking scared of killing non living things then maybe they should stop eating meat at all? because that is also living things
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I Feel Sorry for that Priest, In his Own words, He says "the bible Clearly states it is Wrong" Why then, is he trying to twist the word of God, to satisfy the pleasure of Man!!.......That Goes to Show you!! Never Put your Faith in a MAN!! God is not a Man to Change his Mind, to command a regulation, and then change his mind, so not to hurt people's feelings.......Evil is Evil there is no In between, ethier is Right or is Wrong.
Why don't thse stubborn religious people just make a new bible allready representing new morality?!? It has evolved since those times obviously and it is well known that any believer in the bible doesn't accept every part of of it as morally acceptable...Modern times (and trial and error) have depicted a good and clear picture of what is moral, I wouldnt want my child reading the morality of 2,000 year old desert scribbles as their own. PLZ update a newer testament and stop being stubborn apes
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
The funny thing is that Richard Dawkins can't come against these religous people. The call HIM out on most of the videos, even with Richard Dawkins arrogant, confrontational comments and video editing....
oh wow- huge surprise. you teach murder in church, christians kill the innocent. in a sane world, such nonsense would be illegal, but to an idiot biblebeater it is all that matters. somebody ought to check his (brays)childrens orifices. if he would fuck thier minds with that kind of bullshit, why not rape them physically? 70000 catholic priests cant be wrong...
I think Richard Dawkins is an incredible man.I have read his books and agree with his views,although,due to his intelligence he maybe expects others to be as equally forthcoming on the ideas of today.The fact is that most are not as intelligent as he and struggle to come to terms with the issues of the world and so fall victim to false promises.I am an athiest and I believe that the majority of us are,for the most part,in favour ofradical change.This does not mean the rest are idiots.
A grown human is no better than an embryo, but two rights don't make a wrong. Poor Richard Dawkins really can't talk to people though without insulting them.
Who is talking about being "better"? As for Richard Dawkins insulting people, if you find his comments insulting, then you ought to know that it's your religious faith that is insulting you. It's your religous faith that requires you to believe in an invisible magic man who can hear everybody's prayers at the same time and that impoverishes your world view with the kind of solipsism that only religious faith can bring about.
Hey, i'm not religious at all, i don't believe in a god. But that said, Richard Dawkins really can't talk about various religions, because he seems to have no understanding of them.
So you think you need to know the theology of a religion in order to reject it or to debate its claims? That's ridiculous. If you had a religious belief that a man rose from the dead on Jan 22nd 1989 in China and that this man was god, the onus would be on you to produce evidence for it, not for "unbelievers" to disprove your claim. That is one of Dawkins' points.
By the way, have you read The God Delusion or listened closely to any of his debates? I sincerely suggest you do so.
About your first point, i agree absaloutly. You cannot take a religious belief to pieces unless you have at least a basic understanding of it's princeples. You talk about providing evidence for a religious belief. The whole point of faith is that there is no proof. If there was proof, it wouldn't be faith, it would be sciantific theory.
Gotta love the priest who changes his views to reflect society values....after a while hes gonna make up his own religion like somebody did in the bronze age
haha I was just quoting him! very good bit indeed. Also Bill Hicks' part on it "if you're not in my phonebook, you're not a fucking human being" etc :P
We cannot kill anyone as a christian. We are all not worthy. Why do you think that Jesus said "thou who has not sinned shall cast the first stone." NOBODY CAN KILL ANYBODY BECUASE WE ARE ALL SINNERS. The punishment of sin is death but yes jesus came to replace that. This is an interresting video, but he is putrifying the word of God to the people that dont know it. So they think this is all the truth.
for an institution against sex before marriage and sex in general the catholic church in particular opes dei have a very kinky(although dangerous) side
I can name a whole lot of atheist kids that shot up school kids and teachers too Dawkins! Starting with the Columbine massacre!Pekka-Eric Auvinen Jokela school and a lot more!When is Dawkins gonna get evil doesn't hide behind religion..it lurks anywhere there is a door open!
Yes but those atheists kids didn't start shooting in the name of atheism. This video illustrates how there are raving lunatics that honestly think shooting a doctor doing his job is righteous in the name of Jesus. Aside from the fact that most zygotes are ABORTED NATURALLY! (i.e. God aborts most zygotes by your beliefs) there's the issue that shooting doctors won't stop abortions from continuing - he just killed a doctor, a husband, a friend, etc because scripture says abortions are wrong.
those kids didn't shoot in the name of atheism, they did it because of their atheism.
Stop hiding behind the A Because the rest of the alphabet is very clear to everyone, but you and others like you. You guys are digging your own grave. The real world is sitting up and taking notice.
Oh so atheism causes people to commit crimes, does it? Is that why 3/4 of the U.S. and 3/4 of the prison population in U.S. are christian while 1/10 of the U.S. are atheists but only 1/500 of the prison population are atheists? 'Cause you know, if atheism causes people to commit crimes, then crime rates associated with atheists should be ABOVE theists, not massively BELOW.
The real world IS sitting up and taking notice. Richard Dawkins is just the beginning. A catalyst for positive change.
Here we go with this crap again. It would only be logical that there is more people that believe in God in jail then atheist, because there is more of them then you by a long shot. Also alot of these prisons believe in a god, but are not practicing Christian's. They should send someone in to take the census the right and HONEST way.
We're not talking about numbers, we're talking about percentages. And the ratio of % of christians in prison to % of christians in gen pop is roughly 1:1, whereas the ratio of % atheists in prison to % atheists in gen pop is 1:50. If what you claim is true, that atheism leads people to crime, these figures should be reversed.
Once again, labelling all abortion advocates of wanting to do terrible things.
If abortion is acceptable immediately after conception, then there must be a certain period of time in which it is acceptable; be it a minute, a day, week, few months etc. And in fact, legal abortions DO have such a cutoff.
And lastly, things aren't simply evil or good. "Most evil" even... sheesh, expand your thinking a bit.
And please do not mention "argument" about disabilities, I am severely disable and I live a fine life.
And why I belive animal life is less valuable than human's?Because we must care about our fellow human beings more than some animals.Thats the natural behaviour.
If we were parasitic organisms would you treehuggers tell us that we shall stop parasitism and die because it hurts the hosts?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Perhaps "Adam" and "Eve" really did exist. Perhaps God imbued a pair of Cro-Magnons with his spirit which gave them a sense of self and a sense of morality; instinct became governed by a sense of right and wrong. Sure, this scenario may be totally wrong, but there is a reasonable possibility of it being correct. The Bible just puts it in metaphorical form as the story of the "Garden of Eden."
i know, it's sad just how far people will go and how they'll suspend common sense just to think that god loves them and has a plan for them, and to avoid reality.
and children of adam and eve comitted incest so we all are debils from incest ? or they made sex with apes ? or daughter with father and son with mother ?
I think that Bishop seems like a reasonable guy. Still self-deluded like the rest, but reasonable. I agree with Dawkins's comment about fence-sitting. It appears to me that holds these progressive views at the expense of scriptural integrity. However, I can't help but feel that the world would be a better place if more people of faith were like him.
The sad part, which is indisputable, is that the early settlers of the New World, had the same level of "faith" in their conquering of lands and killing and exploiting of its inhabitants.
im reading richard dawkin's god delusion book but im pretty frustrated with documentaries these days, i mean they turn the sound off right when someone's about to say something
Does anybody notice the overwhelming amount of atheists watching and supporting these videos? that's fantastic. But the problem is religion seems to have its eyes closed.
Hey, I would call myself a christian and I'd find it nauseating to talk to them too. The people he interviewed were idiotic sheep, with either their own agendas to set forth, or no brains to think intelligently for themselves. Don't think that all Christians are like that, just because Dawkins chose some of the most nauseatingly unchristian and unintelligent people there are to serve as the example of all Christianity.
Godisnotareligion - "Well I'm good with it if you've read the bible and thought about it enough to form your own opinion. That's the best anyone can do when deciding what they believe. I was just getting a little pissed at the sycophants who worship the ground dawkins spits on, without actually having read the book he's commenting on... because some of the things he says are outright false. But if you know what you're talking about, then that's great, and way farther than alot of people get!"
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Well... first of all, the Bible contains tremendous amounts of verifiable fact, and is considered to be the most, if not THE most historically accurate documents of all time. It's about people, emotions, wars, love, hate, and pretty well every component of human nature there is. So, the whole "dancing fairies" thing doesn't apply realistcally anyway, no matter how good a comeback it sounded when you wrote it.
I do not believe in the bible. No, I believe in Narnia. That book CANNOT be wrong. It has Queens, and Man-Children, and Lions, and snow, and wardrobes, and small people, ALL of which we see today in the world. I pray to Aslam every Sunday. That's normal, isn't it?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Erm, yes. Narnia (lol) is a metaphor for the Bible and Christian life as it happens. C.S. Lewis wrote it that way. In a way, you're almost contradicing yourself. And there are scientific truths in the bible. The bible states that the earth is round and is suspended in nothing. It also describes a dinosaur (behemoth in the book of Job).
And second, if millions upon millions of people had, since the beginning of recorded history, believed this, studied it, written about it, lived their lives accordingly, and still wholeheartedly consider it life-changing and worthy of belief thousands of years later... then, Yes. I would have to examine this. If a prominent view point is relevant to your opinion, and you have not personally read/heard/seen it, you have no logical right to form an opinion either for or against it.
this defender of the doctor murdered is so shaky and nervous in his answers, its clear he knows he is wrong, that his faith is wrong and that he has made a mistake. and I guess, that's all we can hope for!
No he is not dangerous. The bible is. religion is. self-destructive faith is. Dawkins is like the man who escaped from the cave in platos work. read it and learn something for once
Is it not obvious to everyone else that this guy does not believe, for even a second, the crap thats coming out of his mouth. By "this guy", I mean the reverend Dawkins is talking too.
Whatever people. If you want a real opinon about this, read the Bible for yourself. Or at least the first four books of the new testament. And then decide whether you still agree.
After King David sleeps with another man's wife and then sends that man off to battle to die, God is not pleased, so he kills the innocent baby.
(2 Sam 12:14 NRSV) Nevertheless, because by this deed you have utterly scorned the LORD, the child that is born to you shall die."
Hosea 13:16 Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.
Okay so if we don't judge the value of life in that criteria, how come most of us are okay eating meat - you know, chopped up corpses of dead animals?
That's not a vegetarian argument I'm proposing, I'm saying we eat creatures who have a much more fully developed life, and seem to have emotions, every day. Embryos are nothing by comparison - a chicken or a duck has a better case for not being terminated.
Denying abortion is just about reinforcing yet more misogyny - religion loves sexism.
Well you'll fit right in here. You've got the shouty YouTube headless chicken thing down already.
Everybody has the right to live... once they - are - somebody. An embryo is not somebody In fact a pig is more psychologically and emotionally developed than a collection of cells, and most of us eat those every week without a moment's thought.
You're talking about potential human life or 'pre-life'. A group of cells should not have more rights than the person carrying them.
The fundamental disagreement here is do you think potential life is as important as actual life.
NO. I don't. The mother carrying the embryo IS a person, and their rights take precedence over the cells. The cells are no more human than a plant - living, yes; emotions and rights, no.
If you think potential human life is sacred then would you pass legislation forcing all heterosexual couples to conceive? If there were no STDs, would you ban condoms? Why draw the arbitrary line at the embryo?
Every cell in your body that got a nucleus would grow into a human beeing, given right conditions. oh and btw the majority of all fertilised eggs are aborted naturaly.
By whacking off or using protection, you are taking the right to live from a human being. It's no different unless you believe "God's plan begins at conception". Each individual sperm/egg correspond to a different potential human being. Even abstinance is robbing the "right" to live from a potential human being.
"fuck you"
I wish you were ejaculated into a condom. I don't actually wish that, but it shows how absurd your stance is.
Sperm and egg are living organisms; when they fuse, they form a unique zygote corresponding to a unique human being. Destroy the egg/sperm, and you destroy a potential human being.
There is nothing morally special about conception. If abortion is wrong, then there needs to be a cutoff.
birth controls prevent fertalization (coception) from occuring at all...wacking off doesnt fuse with anything...its not until the sperm and egg are fused that it can be called the aspect of human life...that means you havent killed anything, and if you just mean prevent a life...thats strictly your own religious belief because its no murder of any sort because a sperm is not human life, same for the egg, thus it is not morally wrong but only religious opinion
it would be like destroying a plant which has many living cells and living organisms....if you think it is morally wrong to kill a plant (which has life and living organisms),,,then i guess you can starve
Why is it only an aspect of human life after fusion? Aside from the religious notion that God's plan for a human being begins at conception (which is a bit odd, since I'd think his plan would exist eternally seeing as he exists outside of time), what's so special about conception? The sperm/egg uniquely correspond to a potential human's life just as a zygote.
i just saw your comment on the page before on how you were responding to someone who believes in life with conception and all this bs...i thought u took a stance w/ that person since i just saw u said "fuck you" and didnt notice until now....yes i agree w/ what you say, i was just merely writing from the perspective of a religios person believing in conception and proving that birth controls indeed prevent that process altogether, meaning any other stance is trictly religious and ignorant
"Destroy the egg/sperm, and you destroy a potential human being."
Only one sperm can join with the egg, so by having sex we are committing mass murder in the millions according to your moral stance, so what's one extra life taken by whacking off going to do?
My point precisely - if aborting a zygote is morally wrong because it prevents a potential human being from coming into existence, then the destruction of sperm/eggs must also be wrong for it accomplishes the exact same goal.
I do not believe there's anything wrong with a zygote, sperm cell or ovum being destroyed; just following anti-abortion reasoning to come up with absurd conclusions.
Not only that. An embryo without a nervous system or a brain feels no pain. A grown fly has a fully developed brain and nervous system and does feel pain, so more pain is inflicted upon the fly by killing it than you could do by killing an infinite amount of embryos before their nervous system is developed.
And yet, not one amongst those who call themselves "pro-life" would hesitate to kill a fly.
I am against abortion and I am an atheist. To draw the line between the born and the unborn is arbitrary and ridiculous; just as ridiculous as believing in the bullshit otherwise known as God.
I don't think it is common to draw the line there to be honest with you. In my country, Norway, abortion is legal when done prior to the 12th week after conception. I think that is the international standard but I'm not 100% sure.
What do you think about the embryo who feels no pain versus the killing of a fly though?
First let me clarify, I never said abortion should be illegal, I just said I am very much against it (I believe in the eviction principle, look up Walter Bock). Most people who claim to be pro-choice, at least in America, are actually just pro-abortion.
Now with that clarified, I do not base my morality on pain perception. So yes I do fell killing an embryo is wrong. In America there is no 12-week rule.
Ok, so you don't think it should be illegal, but you are against abortion? Right, I find that somewhat hard to "compute".
On pain perception: What do you base your morality on?
By the way, if you want an egg cell and a sperm cell that have just merged to be given the rights of an individual capable of living outside the womb (born or unborn), then what do you have to say about other animals? Surely you are aware of evolution and that humanity is just one among many species?
As for the legality, its too complicated to discuss here, again search Walter Block and eviction.
I base my morals on logical deduction. I ask what avoids contradiction. No moral should contradict another. I am not a secular humanist, I am a rationalist.
From a moral standpoint I couldn't give a damn about pain; if I did I would have to take a stance against all the meat I eat. Pain perception is not at all objective. What if some one likes pain? Pain cannot be used as a basis for morality.
Trust me the amount of meat I eat causes a prodigious amount of animal suffering. And no, I don't give any rights to animals, because to do so is to take them away from humans. Iterspecies ethics is bunk, this is obvious from reductio ad absurdum, aka animals don't respect the rights of other species.
As for evolution, I have incisors in my mouth specifically for the purpose of tearing animal flesh. As with all predators, my eyes are arranged to give me depth perception.
Back to abortion, as I said I base my morality on reason. This brings us to the logical law of "The excluded middle"
X can be A, or X can be B; however, X cannot be in between A and B. Either something is a human or they are not. I cannot think of a more objective standard then possessing a complete set of human chromosomes. I challenge you to draw a non-arbitrary line that does not violate the non exclusive middle. If we base morality on pain it is ok to kill an unknown hermit in his sleep...
Pain is part of life. It is inescapable; thus those who base their morality on pain have no choice but to be immoral. Nature is quite cruel; it has no qualms with pain and suffering.
umm yeah u have to be 9 weeks to qaulify for an abortion in my state and it has to be done prior to the 12th week and that is law for most the country so get your facts straight!
It is time for people to stop pretending to make them selves feel better. Stop pretending there is a God, and stop that certain classes of people we want to abuse are inhuman; whether they be blacks, jews, middle eastern people, gays, or unborn is irrelevant to me. All these groups of people have been or are dehumanized, in America at least, and it's time for the bullshit to stop.
listen to that preacher.... i uhhhh think that uhhh we uhhh.....uhh uhh...lol he knnows that there are big gaps in his balony logic and that dawkins has a point
as a follower,of jesus,A CHRISTIAN,i do not believe in the old testament,jesus himself said "keep the ten commandments of moses,for they are good,i am the new way,the light"CHRISTIANS HERE KNOW THIS PHRASE is better interpreted than i did ,but it is in the bible.the same book where they rail against homosexuals,leviticus allows FEMALE AND MALE SLAVERY TO THE JEWS,YES,yet they railed against being "slaves" under pharoh.we learned life,begins ""in the nostrils,the breath,in exodus,first page
alezander666 1 month ago
@alezander666 do we sacrifice bulls,animals now,as old test.,NO,do we kill people who work on the sabbathexodus35:2,KILL THEM?,DOES GOD KILL MASTURBATORS LIKE onan,who masturbated,NO eaten a shrimp,lobster,crab,IT'S A ABOMINATIONLEV11:1, YOU PICK OUT THE "GAY STUFF",IGNORE THE REST? CHRISTIANS KNOW CHRIST "DESTROYED" JUDIASM,AND WAS KILLED FOR IT,NOT ONE DISCIPLE(MORTALS),STEPPED IN TO SAVE HIM,AND COULD HAVE,WHY BASICALLY PUT THEM ON JESUS'S LEVEL,EITHER JESUS THE NEW OR YOUR JEW WITH THE OLD
alezander666 1 month ago
I wonder how much reason a man has these days then, since new translation was a man's idea, then why do they not admit they the man had changed it without God's intervention? If someone changes something due to the inaccuracies then I expect to be told. I know however my ex religion had done the change of theirs I found out because some family member of mine same religion had the old version. In the end it was disturbingly different all throughout the scriptures
lezhotty83 5 months ago
A murderer is a murderer is a murderer. If its not in the interest of self-defense, its never okay, especially when it is done in the name of God and religion.
As for abortion...its should be the woman's choice since the unborn child is technically apart of the woman's body. I have no problem with abortion before the third trimester (Or whatever it is). It all comes down to people trying to use their beliefs to censore and take away the rights and freedoms of other people.
GoongalaGoongala 6 months ago
What does it matter whether people are born gay or become gay?! Its really a non-issue, unless of course you're a religios a-hole intent on taking away other people's rights and freedoms based on your irrational beliefs. We let them believe in any God they want and don't try to take away their right to do so, so what makes it right to take away someone elses rights because the way they live their life doesn't conform with THEIR beliefs? Its not right and people should know better.
GoongalaGoongala 6 months ago
@GoongalaGoongala being sexually and genetically modified without your permission does matter, for a lot of reasons. You brought God into this, not me.
All i asked is whether putting Bi-sphenol A into baby bottles is a good idea. Perhaps you like being a victim?
Being a victim is not my idea of freedom.
Diatonic135 6 months ago
@Diatonic135 I brought religion into the matter for what i would assume are obvious reasons. Its the theist folks who are the ones who are against gay marriage and basically want to "fix" all the homosexuals. Now I don't know anything about gays being genetically/sexually modified or anything like that. You might want to explain what you are talking about a little bit further as far as that is concerned. I think this is a case of me not totally following what you are saying.
GoongalaGoongala 6 months ago
@GoongalaGoongala BPA, or Bi-Sphenol A, is known to cause gender dymorphism in nearly every creature that is exposed to it. male frogs that eat it turn into female. male salmon that eat it turn into half male/half female. females that are exposed to too much estrogen get tumors, cancer and other hormonal dysfunction.
in humans, very little is known because it's taboo to overtly do experiments on human babies. but because BPA is in most plastics and it leaks out we are all inan experiment.
Diatonic135 6 months ago
@Diatonic135 Sounds pretty interesting actually and definitely something that should be looked into. But either way, it doesn't change the fact that homosexuals are people too and aren't hurting anyone else by living the lifestyle they do. They should have all the rights and freedoms everyone else does.
But, thinking about it, BPA doesn't account for homosexuality throughout history. Its well known that Spartans in ancient Greece took young boys as lovers. And there are other examples as well.
GoongalaGoongala 6 months ago
@GoongalaGoongala I appreciate your support for LGBT, but their not lifestyles, they're attractions.
thomaseshuis 6 months ago
@Diatonic135 'BPA, or Bi-Sphenol A, is known to cause gender dymorphism in nearly every creature that is exposed to it.' This has nothing to do with homosexuality. Many homosexual people are not gender confused or identify in any way with being female.
thomaseshuis 6 months ago
@thomaseshuis you seem to be suggesting that estrogen has nothing to do with gender, or sexuality, or sexual preference - good luck making that argument!
Diatonic135 6 months ago
@Diatonic135 I'm trying to explain to you it's to simplistic to say all homosexuals are homosexual because of BPA. I admit I did not phrase my thoughts correctly.'This has nothing to do with' should have been phrased as 'is not the only cause of'.
thomaseshuis 6 months ago
@thomaseshuis only richard dawkins and yourself deal in absolutes, not me.
Richard implies that religion is the root of all evil.
you defended the idea that BPA is the cause of all homosexuality.
I only said that BPA is an essential and often overlooked (and rarely understood) part of the homosexual lifestyle.
Diatonic135 6 months ago
@Diatonic135 'only richard dawkins and yourself deal in absolutes, not me.' I just stated I don't see the world in black and white. Don't try to put words in my mouth. There many people who do see the world that way, biblical literalists for example. 'you defended the idea that BPA is the cause of all homosexuality.' I did not, i stated that even if it were to have influence, it is not the only cause for homosexuality.
thomaseshuis 6 months ago
@Diatonic135 'I only said that BPA is an essential and often overlooked (and rarely understood) part of the homosexual lifestyle.' Then I misunderstood your comment as you clearly have mine, my apologies.
thomaseshuis 6 months ago
@thomaseshuis what did i not understand, exactly?
Diatonic135 6 months ago
@Diatonic135 I did not say BPA is the only cause of homosexuality, actually the opposite. Even if BPA is a factor that influences homosexuality, it is not the only one. Which I wrongly understood you were trying to point out. O and one thing homosexuality is a sexual orientation, not a lifestyle.
thomaseshuis 6 months ago
@Diatonic135 Also, as far as I'm concerened, anyone who has their rights and freedoms taken away by someone else because the way they live their life offends the other group or goes against their belief system IS in fact, a victim.
GoongalaGoongala 6 months ago
@GoongalaGoongala being gay matters. gay men especially have tremendous health problems due to the unsolvable problems with gay sex.
for instance: male sperm suppresses the immune system and since most of the immune system functions inside the colon, gay sex SEVERELY suppresses the immune system and may be linked to HIV and AIDS.
furthermore, gays have high instances of STD's, rectal bleeding, rectal leakage and rectal and colonic cancers for obvious reasons. the vagina>rectum for sex.
Diatonic135 6 months ago
@Diatonic135 Thats fair, but if knowing these dangers gay men still choose to live that lifestyle, then people need to respect that. Its their choice, and they aren't hurting anyone else (but themselves potentially). Hey, I don't necessarily approve of the lifestyle, but they aren't hurting me so it is really none of my business. I have enough crap to worry about in my own life. I don't have time to worry about how other people live their lives and try to make them conform to my beliefs.
GoongalaGoongala 6 months ago
@Diatonic135 'being gay matters. gay men especially have tremendous health problems due to the unsolvable problems with gay sex.' This is nonsense, it's all a matter of safe sex, not homosexuality or same-gender sex acts.
'gay sex SEVERELY suppresses the immune system and may be linked to HIV and AIDS.' No, unprotected anal sex can be linked to hiv an aids. Not all homosexuals have unprotected sex.
thomaseshuis 6 months ago
@Diatonic135 'gays have high instances of STD's, rectal bleeding, rectal leakage' Also applicable to straight people who have unsafe anal sex. By the way, you do know that 'lesbian' sex carries the least risk of stds and hiv/aids?
thomaseshuis 6 months ago
@GoongalaGoongala agreed
Diatonic135 6 months ago
Dawkins is a joke to reporting......who believes him
snorkelvideo 6 months ago
@snorkelvideo Anybody who has even an ounce of common sense and is a rational person.
GoongalaGoongala 6 months ago
Also, because he manipulates he looks intelligent....a real fake, I find him interesting
snorkelvideo 6 months ago
Lacking in intelligence and improvisational skills is where I would put him
snorkelvideo 6 months ago
I like how Dawkins willingly goes to meet religious extremists and advocates and hear their opinions, their side of the argument, without censoring their good points, only making his own points against them. Noting that most religious people would refuse to listen to the other side at all and remain secure in their delusions.
SovietRei 9 months ago 2
5:10
"I hope he's doing well" *smiles stupidly*
.
"You think he's in heaven?"
.
"uh... yes"
.
"You think Jesus approves of murdering doctors?"
.
hahahaha. Friggin' awesome!
Joe22c 10 months ago 3
Dawkins is so fucking brave to meet up with these people.
PeachFuzzPop 1 year ago 2
FUCK JESUS
fatfatat444 1 year ago
jesus is dead and gone...hooray
VoyageThruTurbulence 1 year ago
People who argue that people are "born" gay rather than becoming so by choice should study phthalates and Bisphenol -A. it might lend some hefty weight to their argument.
Diatonic135 1 year ago
Comment removed
GoongalaGoongala 6 months ago
..to me, religious people are simply delusional lunatics! If you believe in God, the Bible, Allah or wahtever..then you might as well believe in The Lord Of The Rings and shit!
lezgirlste 1 year ago 6
"Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear."
~Thomas Jefferson
atchisrj1 1 year ago 4
Thanks for posting this nethius!
Meef1701 1 year ago
Well done Richard: exposing religion for the nonsense it represents; a delusional crutch for one's actions. Rationalist / Athiest must unite in order to offset the evils that religion represents.
triplejudy 1 year ago 5
This has been flagged as spam show
"I'm an atheist with respect to the Judeo-Christian God, because there is not a shred of EVIDENCE in favor of the Judeo-Christian God."
~ Richard Dawkins
...Dawkins, that's because you have not visited my channel.
Eye2EyeIIIV 2 years ago
St. Augustine is actually the real father of the doctrine of original sin, in his attempt to understand how evil could exist in a world where God is good and all powerful. St. Paul did have ideas about original sin, but it was St. Augustine who cemented the concept, which would change western thinking forever.
GMorganis 2 years ago
A christan believes it is right to kill a person based on the scriptures regardless of that fact that he committed a crime under the law. So the bible out ranks the law?
This is truly terrifying. American needs to be seen as great a danger to the rest of us as the middle east.
sarah67act 2 years ago 5
i agree > american taliban > if they figure this out it could be dangerous > or maybe they are waiting for another religion to mess up first .there are many stories where religion is an exuse for murder in the modern world > ie. god told me to do it >> he was a sinner > i did it in the name of god , angels came to me in a dream etc etc . but alot of them still go to prison or psyhciatric wards >lose lose situation >
siliconchipped 2 years ago
we aren't their just yet, unlike the middle east we have more people fighting this stupidity, and unlike the middle east we also have the right to do it.
Don't judge all americans by Bush and this lunatic on the show.
gb696 2 years ago 2
now if christians are so fucking scared of killing non living things then maybe they should stop eating meat at all? because that is also living things
Danovio 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I Feel Sorry for that Priest, In his Own words, He says "the bible Clearly states it is Wrong" Why then, is he trying to twist the word of God, to satisfy the pleasure of Man!!.......That Goes to Show you!! Never Put your Faith in a MAN!! God is not a Man to Change his Mind, to command a regulation, and then change his mind, so not to hurt people's feelings.......Evil is Evil there is no In between, ethier is Right or is Wrong.
vipsamsam 2 years ago
Why don't thse stubborn religious people just make a new bible allready representing new morality?!? It has evolved since those times obviously and it is well known that any believer in the bible doesn't accept every part of of it as morally acceptable...Modern times (and trial and error) have depicted a good and clear picture of what is moral, I wouldnt want my child reading the morality of 2,000 year old desert scribbles as their own. PLZ update a newer testament and stop being stubborn apes
MadMAn12gauge 2 years ago
Origional sin? God commands Adam not to eat of the forbidden fruit before he had eve created Eve! How can the poor lass be responsible?
GeorgesBarras 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The funny thing is that Richard Dawkins can't come against these religous people. The call HIM out on most of the videos, even with Richard Dawkins arrogant, confrontational comments and video editing....
mlinkenauger 2 years ago
...I feel really uneasy when christians approach me and say a complete stranger has been mutillated for my "origional sickness."
evilnomad111 2 years ago 6
oh wow- huge surprise. you teach murder in church, christians kill the innocent. in a sane world, such nonsense would be illegal, but to an idiot biblebeater it is all that matters. somebody ought to check his (brays)childrens orifices. if he would fuck thier minds with that kind of bullshit, why not rape them physically? 70000 catholic priests cant be wrong...
DocReason13 2 years ago 26
Why does Richard Dawkins look down up on Michael Bray's hands after they shake hands ?
hereisthankappan 2 years ago
It looked like Michael Bray was grasping his hand really hard.... or he was looking at his glasses?
tenyrsgone 2 years ago
His glasses me thinks.
MauricXe 2 years ago
I think that what we saw there was doubt.
NewColdness 2 years ago
I think Richard Dawkins is an incredible man.I have read his books and agree with his views,although,due to his intelligence he maybe expects others to be as equally forthcoming on the ideas of today.The fact is that most are not as intelligent as he and struggle to come to terms with the issues of the world and so fall victim to false promises.I am an athiest and I believe that the majority of us are,for the most part,in favour ofradical change.This does not mean the rest are idiots.
daddyrizla 3 years ago 35
true just ignorant, not stupid(well some are both x3 )
AshNekoBoy 3 years ago
@daddyrizla i gree except with his views on abortion
pavelmdify 1 year ago
To deny the development between the conception and reaching the stage of survivability is ridiculous.
You have also made the unfounded claim of elevating humankind above all other species. This is irrational.
This fine with me, but it is anything but reason.
Also amazing that now that I've raised you a question about legality, it's suddenly "too big to talk about here".
You haven't answered the question as to why you are against abortion in the first place. Not about suffering? Then what?
Sleipnirrr 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Atheist and their failed morph version, communism are the deadly Immoral virus of mankind and society!!
fuuunnnn 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
God loves you and wants you to believe.
You can prove God by;
The laws of physics, in under a minute;
watch?v=pRhgQSMOgVQ
His miracles
watch?v=dHM_5MrgSL0
The scientific foreknowledge of the Bible;
watch?v=C-qa_Pgs3qw
Repent!
residentevilfan374 3 years ago
Kathie Lee Gifford dated that Bray psycho in highschool.
TAKENnameARGH 3 years ago
Yeah, is masturbation mass murder, in one bit of cum theres like, a million sperm.
Xtremecinephile 3 years ago 5
Richard Harris has probs got it right.
cunttt43 3 years ago
A grown human is no better than an embryo, but two rights don't make a wrong. Poor Richard Dawkins really can't talk to people though without insulting them.
cunttt43 3 years ago
Who is talking about being "better"? As for Richard Dawkins insulting people, if you find his comments insulting, then you ought to know that it's your religious faith that is insulting you. It's your religous faith that requires you to believe in an invisible magic man who can hear everybody's prayers at the same time and that impoverishes your world view with the kind of solipsism that only religious faith can bring about.
Sleipnirrr 3 years ago 2
Hey, i'm not religious at all, i don't believe in a god. But that said, Richard Dawkins really can't talk about various religions, because he seems to have no understanding of them.
cunttt43 3 years ago
So you think you need to know the theology of a religion in order to reject it or to debate its claims? That's ridiculous. If you had a religious belief that a man rose from the dead on Jan 22nd 1989 in China and that this man was god, the onus would be on you to produce evidence for it, not for "unbelievers" to disprove your claim. That is one of Dawkins' points.
By the way, have you read The God Delusion or listened closely to any of his debates? I sincerely suggest you do so.
Sleipnirrr 3 years ago 3
About your first point, i agree absaloutly. You cannot take a religious belief to pieces unless you have at least a basic understanding of it's princeples. You talk about providing evidence for a religious belief. The whole point of faith is that there is no proof. If there was proof, it wouldn't be faith, it would be sciantific theory.
cunttt43 3 years ago
What a hopeless reason to believe something to be true.
Sleipnirrr 3 years ago 2
Gotta love the priest who changes his views to reflect society values....after a while hes gonna make up his own religion like somebody did in the bronze age
markprice25cavs 3 years ago
Regarding that lunatic Michael Bray, I have rarely heard such utter nonsense and hypocrisy spouted from a human mouth before in my life.
telboy1966manu 3 years ago
'So they'll do anything they can to save a foetus, but if it grows up to be a doctor they just might have to kill it?'
George Carlin - RIP
haydencantact 3 years ago 4
haha I was just quoting him! very good bit indeed. Also Bill Hicks' part on it "if you're not in my phonebook, you're not a fucking human being" etc :P
dennoow 3 years ago
We cannot kill anyone as a christian. We are all not worthy. Why do you think that Jesus said "thou who has not sinned shall cast the first stone." NOBODY CAN KILL ANYBODY BECUASE WE ARE ALL SINNERS. The punishment of sin is death but yes jesus came to replace that. This is an interresting video, but he is putrifying the word of God to the people that dont know it. So they think this is all the truth.
xchampx 3 years ago
for an institution against sex before marriage and sex in general the catholic church in particular opes dei have a very kinky(although dangerous) side
oreolvrs1987 3 years ago
lol pigs are actually incredibly intelligent, just to say so. Much more so than dogs.
theveganamedchaze 3 years ago
I can name a whole lot of atheist kids that shot up school kids and teachers too Dawkins! Starting with the Columbine massacre!Pekka-Eric Auvinen Jokela school and a lot more!When is Dawkins gonna get evil doesn't hide behind religion..it lurks anywhere there is a door open!
jesusrules2012 3 years ago
Yes but those atheists kids didn't start shooting in the name of atheism. This video illustrates how there are raving lunatics that honestly think shooting a doctor doing his job is righteous in the name of Jesus. Aside from the fact that most zygotes are ABORTED NATURALLY! (i.e. God aborts most zygotes by your beliefs) there's the issue that shooting doctors won't stop abortions from continuing - he just killed a doctor, a husband, a friend, etc because scripture says abortions are wrong.
AKPhilosopher 3 years ago
those kids didn't shoot in the name of atheism, they did it because of their atheism.
Stop hiding behind the A Because the rest of the alphabet is very clear to everyone, but you and others like you. You guys are digging your own grave. The real world is sitting up and taking notice.
jesusrules2012 3 years ago
Oh so atheism causes people to commit crimes, does it? Is that why 3/4 of the U.S. and 3/4 of the prison population in U.S. are christian while 1/10 of the U.S. are atheists but only 1/500 of the prison population are atheists? 'Cause you know, if atheism causes people to commit crimes, then crime rates associated with atheists should be ABOVE theists, not massively BELOW.
The real world IS sitting up and taking notice. Richard Dawkins is just the beginning. A catalyst for positive change.
AKPhilosopher 3 years ago
Here we go with this crap again. It would only be logical that there is more people that believe in God in jail then atheist, because there is more of them then you by a long shot. Also alot of these prisons believe in a god, but are not practicing Christian's. They should send someone in to take the census the right and HONEST way.
jesusrules2012 3 years ago
We're not talking about numbers, we're talking about percentages. And the ratio of % of christians in prison to % of christians in gen pop is roughly 1:1, whereas the ratio of % atheists in prison to % atheists in gen pop is 1:50. If what you claim is true, that atheism leads people to crime, these figures should be reversed.
AKPhilosopher 3 years ago 3
maybe we need to train homosexuals to be snipers, send them out to kill fundamentalists, and call it self defence! It could work !? =D
jimrbsn 3 years ago
Abortion is evil, because the "group of cells" is a developing future human being.
And late abortion is most evil, abortion right after conception?Maybe.Late term abortion when the embryo has a developed body and brain?NO.
Of course you wanna abortions to fuck w/o protection and then conviently kill your future kids if they are not perfect.
AgainstMadness 3 years ago
Once again, labelling all abortion advocates of wanting to do terrible things.
If abortion is acceptable immediately after conception, then there must be a certain period of time in which it is acceptable; be it a minute, a day, week, few months etc. And in fact, legal abortions DO have such a cutoff.
And lastly, things aren't simply evil or good. "Most evil" even... sheesh, expand your thinking a bit.
AKPhilosopher 3 years ago
I does not matter "it cannot think or feel"
It would be able to if you did not killed it.
And please do not mention "argument" about disabilities, I am severely disable and I live a fine life.
And why I belive animal life is less valuable than human's?Because we must care about our fellow human beings more than some animals.Thats the natural behaviour.
If we were parasitic organisms would you treehuggers tell us that we shall stop parasitism and die because it hurts the hosts?
AgainstMadness 3 years ago
Life is sacred!
Save the tumores!
Lihinel 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Perhaps "Adam" and "Eve" really did exist. Perhaps God imbued a pair of Cro-Magnons with his spirit which gave them a sense of self and a sense of morality; instinct became governed by a sense of right and wrong. Sure, this scenario may be totally wrong, but there is a reasonable possibility of it being correct. The Bible just puts it in metaphorical form as the story of the "Garden of Eden."
truthformeandyou 3 years ago
perhaps you should stop trying to convince yourself of fairy tales and imaginary friends in the sky in order to make sense of the world.
karlsmith00 3 years ago 4
rofl
idk52 3 years ago
Agreed...I think that that is the definition of reaching by virtue of throwing reason to the wind.
swham1 3 years ago 3
i know, it's sad just how far people will go and how they'll suspend common sense just to think that god loves them and has a plan for them, and to avoid reality.
karlsmith00 3 years ago 3
and children of adam and eve comitted incest so we all are debils from incest ? or they made sex with apes ? or daughter with father and son with mother ?
JJaroslavv 3 years ago 2
Dawkins should sit down with John Polkinghorne, Joan Roughgarden, and Francis Collins and discuss "religion, science, reality, and truth."
These examples Dawkins uses contributes nothing to his claims and his efforts. Isolated examples can be cited to support any point of view.
truthformeandyou 3 years ago
I think that Bishop seems like a reasonable guy. Still self-deluded like the rest, but reasonable. I agree with Dawkins's comment about fence-sitting. It appears to me that holds these progressive views at the expense of scriptural integrity. However, I can't help but feel that the world would be a better place if more people of faith were like him.
JBRHC78 3 years ago
The sad part, which is indisputable, is that the early settlers of the New World, had the same level of "faith" in their conquering of lands and killing and exploiting of its inhabitants.
TheAuthorityHHE 3 years ago 7
3.05: nope, didn't go to law school...
Quickspear 3 years ago
This Bray guy is just not registering. This is your brain on religion...lol
whiff1962 3 years ago 9
He doesn't value people in regards to their feelings and yet he submits to a way of living that requires a lot of feeling, sensing and guessing
qw2b 3 years ago
im reading richard dawkin's god delusion book but im pretty frustrated with documentaries these days, i mean they turn the sound off right when someone's about to say something
parkersmiles 3 years ago
Does anybody notice the overwhelming amount of atheists watching and supporting these videos? that's fantastic. But the problem is religion seems to have its eyes closed.
martinfletcher1987 3 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
my opinion is that militant religion is on the rise because of consumerism.
Consumerism is easy ...BUT it leaves you feeling empty.
Religion makes you feel good AND its easy...but it leaves you a bigot.
Science makes you smart....BUT its hard.
Fighting laziness must become a global jihad.
darkganesh 3 years ago
Richard Dawkins is god. Supernatural power is not real.
ZDWmiamicane 3 years ago 2
Dawkins must have found it absolutley nauseating to talk to these religeous nut jobs.
The bible is a disgusting book, ever read dueteronomy, its horrible.
3377WSB 3 years ago 4
Hey, I would call myself a christian and I'd find it nauseating to talk to them too. The people he interviewed were idiotic sheep, with either their own agendas to set forth, or no brains to think intelligently for themselves. Don't think that all Christians are like that, just because Dawkins chose some of the most nauseatingly unchristian and unintelligent people there are to serve as the example of all Christianity.
Godisnotareligion 3 years ago
I accidently deleted your other post... i will add it bac as reply to this one...
nethius 3 years ago
Godisnotareligion - "Well I'm good with it if you've read the bible and thought about it enough to form your own opinion. That's the best anyone can do when deciding what they believe. I was just getting a little pissed at the sycophants who worship the ground dawkins spits on, without actually having read the book he's commenting on... because some of the things he says are outright false. But if you know what you're talking about, then that's great, and way farther than alot of people get!"
nethius 3 years ago
*above post by me was a repost of a post I deleted accidently by Godisnotareligion*
I meant to reply and ask for you to point out any falasies.
If I wrote a book on dancing fairies that created the universe, would you need to read it to know it's BS?
nethius 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Well... first of all, the Bible contains tremendous amounts of verifiable fact, and is considered to be the most, if not THE most historically accurate documents of all time. It's about people, emotions, wars, love, hate, and pretty well every component of human nature there is. So, the whole "dancing fairies" thing doesn't apply realistcally anyway, no matter how good a comeback it sounded when you wrote it.
Godisnotareligion 3 years ago
Sorry, in my first reply, I meant to type "... is considered to be *one of* the most, if not THE most...".
Godisnotareligion 3 years ago
"Tremendous amounts of verifiable fact". Erm, no.
I do not believe in the bible. No, I believe in Narnia. That book CANNOT be wrong. It has Queens, and Man-Children, and Lions, and snow, and wardrobes, and small people, ALL of which we see today in the world. I pray to Aslam every Sunday. That's normal, isn't it?
bithot2nite 3 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Erm, yes. Narnia (lol) is a metaphor for the Bible and Christian life as it happens. C.S. Lewis wrote it that way. In a way, you're almost contradicing yourself. And there are scientific truths in the bible. The bible states that the earth is round and is suspended in nothing. It also describes a dinosaur (behemoth in the book of Job).
Kaos77Kisame 3 years ago
Well, dude, each to his own. You can't be too bad anyway because you like satire and comedies, same as me, lol. Peace.
bithot2nite 3 years ago
And second, if millions upon millions of people had, since the beginning of recorded history, believed this, studied it, written about it, lived their lives accordingly, and still wholeheartedly consider it life-changing and worthy of belief thousands of years later... then, Yes. I would have to examine this. If a prominent view point is relevant to your opinion, and you have not personally read/heard/seen it, you have no logical right to form an opinion either for or against it.
Godisnotareligion 3 years ago
"Nobody not brought up in the faith could reach any verdict other than barking mad"
scaryflakybiscuits 3 years ago 3
this defender of the doctor murdered is so shaky and nervous in his answers, its clear he knows he is wrong, that his faith is wrong and that he has made a mistake. and I guess, that's all we can hope for!
wakingchild 3 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Dawkins is a dangerous fantasist.
Strawmanning the bible, openly lying about scientific data.
warriorprince1010 3 years ago
care to back up your claims?
nethius 3 years ago
No he is not dangerous. The bible is. religion is. self-destructive faith is. Dawkins is like the man who escaped from the cave in platos work. read it and learn something for once
wakingchild 3 years ago 6
Openly lying about scientific data???
Can you show us the prove?
If there is a video game called The Old Testament, it will be much more violence than Grand Theft Auto
espms290 3 years ago 3
"If there is a video game called The Old Testament, it will be much more violence than Grand Theft Auto."
Dude, that's the fucking truth. The bible is unfit for a child to read.
Jeremyguru 3 years ago 2
Fantastic comparison.
martinfletcher1987 3 years ago 2
HaHa, dick.
bithot2nite 3 years ago
Is it not obvious to everyone else that this guy does not believe, for even a second, the crap thats coming out of his mouth. By "this guy", I mean the reverend Dawkins is talking too.
Einstein2119 3 years ago
Excellent Documentary... Dawkins is Brilliant!
PopeJohnEdgarIV 3 years ago 10
Whatever people. If you want a real opinon about this, read the Bible for yourself. Or at least the first four books of the new testament. And then decide whether you still agree.
Godisnotareligion 3 years ago
done that! science is the answer. the way to peace and a way to become elevated beeings.
Dawsin is my hero :)
jinxeybaby 3 years ago 2
darn TYPE-O DAWKINS!!
forgive me i just learned about this man :)
jinxeybaby 3 years ago
Had to read the bible in school and it was no where near as good as the hungry caterpillar
333222777888 3 years ago 3
Great documentary!!!! 5 stars!!!
Psychedalien 3 years ago 8
After King David sleeps with another man's wife and then sends that man off to battle to die, God is not pleased, so he kills the innocent baby.
(2 Sam 12:14 NRSV) Nevertheless, because by this deed you have utterly scorned the LORD, the child that is born to you shall die."
Hosea 13:16 Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.
jamesrobertdobbs 3 years ago
Okay so if we don't judge the value of life in that criteria, how come most of us are okay eating meat - you know, chopped up corpses of dead animals?
That's not a vegetarian argument I'm proposing, I'm saying we eat creatures who have a much more fully developed life, and seem to have emotions, every day. Embryos are nothing by comparison - a chicken or a duck has a better case for not being terminated.
Denying abortion is just about reinforcing yet more misogyny - religion loves sexism.
TheConciseStatement 3 years ago 7
i love atheism and agree with dawkins but you are just a misanthrope
everybody has the right to live
but human life is more valuable, FACE IT YOU MISANTHROPIC TREE HUGGERS
by abortion you are taking the right to live from a human being
fuck you
i wish YOU WERE ABORTED
AgainstMadness 3 years ago
"Joined August 15."
Well you'll fit right in here. You've got the shouty YouTube headless chicken thing down already.
Everybody has the right to live... once they - are - somebody. An embryo is not somebody In fact a pig is more psychologically and emotionally developed than a collection of cells, and most of us eat those every week without a moment's thought.
You're talking about potential human life or 'pre-life'. A group of cells should not have more rights than the person carrying them.
TheConciseStatement 3 years ago
That "group of cells" would grow into a human if you will not kill it.
And is embryo in the last stage "group of cells" to you too, even it it is moving?
And stop this "pig is more developed"...humans are more important, period.
It does not matter whatever I am killing a concsious being or its precursor, it is the same.
Of course you do not mind destroying a chance to live.
Everyone has only one live, and you are taking the right to live from a human being.
AgainstMadness 3 years ago
The fundamental disagreement here is do you think potential life is as important as actual life.
NO. I don't. The mother carrying the embryo IS a person, and their rights take precedence over the cells. The cells are no more human than a plant - living, yes; emotions and rights, no.
If you think potential human life is sacred then would you pass legislation forcing all heterosexual couples to conceive? If there were no STDs, would you ban condoms? Why draw the arbitrary line at the embryo?
TheConciseStatement 3 years ago
Every cell in your body that got a nucleus would grow into a human beeing, given right conditions. oh and btw the majority of all fertilised eggs are aborted naturaly.
Lihinel 3 years ago
By whacking off or using protection, you are taking the right to live from a human being. It's no different unless you believe "God's plan begins at conception". Each individual sperm/egg correspond to a different potential human being. Even abstinance is robbing the "right" to live from a potential human being.
"fuck you"
I wish you were ejaculated into a condom. I don't actually wish that, but it shows how absurd your stance is.
AKPhilosopher 3 years ago
how are you taking the life from a human being when that life has not even come into existance??? by wacking off?
craigdavid00 3 years ago
Sperm and egg are living organisms; when they fuse, they form a unique zygote corresponding to a unique human being. Destroy the egg/sperm, and you destroy a potential human being.
There is nothing morally special about conception. If abortion is wrong, then there needs to be a cutoff.
AKPhilosopher 3 years ago
birth controls prevent fertalization (coception) from occuring at all...wacking off doesnt fuse with anything...its not until the sperm and egg are fused that it can be called the aspect of human life...that means you havent killed anything, and if you just mean prevent a life...thats strictly your own religious belief because its no murder of any sort because a sperm is not human life, same for the egg, thus it is not morally wrong but only religious opinion
craigdavid00 3 years ago
*conception
craigdavid00 3 years ago
it would be like destroying a plant which has many living cells and living organisms....if you think it is morally wrong to kill a plant (which has life and living organisms),,,then i guess you can starve
craigdavid00 3 years ago
Why is it only an aspect of human life after fusion? Aside from the religious notion that God's plan for a human being begins at conception (which is a bit odd, since I'd think his plan would exist eternally seeing as he exists outside of time), what's so special about conception? The sperm/egg uniquely correspond to a potential human's life just as a zygote.
AKPhilosopher 3 years ago
i just saw your comment on the page before on how you were responding to someone who believes in life with conception and all this bs...i thought u took a stance w/ that person since i just saw u said "fuck you" and didnt notice until now....yes i agree w/ what you say, i was just merely writing from the perspective of a religios person believing in conception and proving that birth controls indeed prevent that process altogether, meaning any other stance is trictly religious and ignorant
craigdavid00 3 years ago
"Destroy the egg/sperm, and you destroy a potential human being."
Only one sperm can join with the egg, so by having sex we are committing mass murder in the millions according to your moral stance, so what's one extra life taken by whacking off going to do?
califoniania 3 years ago 7
My point precisely - if aborting a zygote is morally wrong because it prevents a potential human being from coming into existence, then the destruction of sperm/eggs must also be wrong for it accomplishes the exact same goal.
I do not believe there's anything wrong with a zygote, sperm cell or ovum being destroyed; just following anti-abortion reasoning to come up with absurd conclusions.
AKPhilosopher 3 years ago
'so by having sex we are committing mass murder' lmao great line. if you wear a condom would that be genocide as well? 2 thumbs way up
broomball98 3 years ago
Not only that. An embryo without a nervous system or a brain feels no pain. A grown fly has a fully developed brain and nervous system and does feel pain, so more pain is inflicted upon the fly by killing it than you could do by killing an infinite amount of embryos before their nervous system is developed.
And yet, not one amongst those who call themselves "pro-life" would hesitate to kill a fly.
Sleipnirrr 3 years ago 4
I am against abortion and I am an atheist. To draw the line between the born and the unborn is arbitrary and ridiculous; just as ridiculous as believing in the bullshit otherwise known as God.
ModelAnarchist 3 years ago
I don't think it is common to draw the line there to be honest with you. In my country, Norway, abortion is legal when done prior to the 12th week after conception. I think that is the international standard but I'm not 100% sure.
What do you think about the embryo who feels no pain versus the killing of a fly though?
Sleipnirrr 3 years ago
First let me clarify, I never said abortion should be illegal, I just said I am very much against it (I believe in the eviction principle, look up Walter Bock). Most people who claim to be pro-choice, at least in America, are actually just pro-abortion.
Now with that clarified, I do not base my morality on pain perception. So yes I do fell killing an embryo is wrong. In America there is no 12-week rule.
ModelAnarchist 3 years ago
Ok, so you don't think it should be illegal, but you are against abortion? Right, I find that somewhat hard to "compute".
On pain perception: What do you base your morality on?
By the way, if you want an egg cell and a sperm cell that have just merged to be given the rights of an individual capable of living outside the womb (born or unborn), then what do you have to say about other animals? Surely you are aware of evolution and that humanity is just one among many species?
Sleipnirrr 3 years ago 2
As for the legality, its too complicated to discuss here, again search Walter Block and eviction.
I base my morals on logical deduction. I ask what avoids contradiction. No moral should contradict another. I am not a secular humanist, I am a rationalist.
From a moral standpoint I couldn't give a damn about pain; if I did I would have to take a stance against all the meat I eat. Pain perception is not at all objective. What if some one likes pain? Pain cannot be used as a basis for morality.
ModelAnarchist 3 years ago
Trust me the amount of meat I eat causes a prodigious amount of animal suffering. And no, I don't give any rights to animals, because to do so is to take them away from humans. Iterspecies ethics is bunk, this is obvious from reductio ad absurdum, aka animals don't respect the rights of other species.
As for evolution, I have incisors in my mouth specifically for the purpose of tearing animal flesh. As with all predators, my eyes are arranged to give me depth perception.
ModelAnarchist 3 years ago
Back to abortion, as I said I base my morality on reason. This brings us to the logical law of "The excluded middle"
X can be A, or X can be B; however, X cannot be in between A and B. Either something is a human or they are not. I cannot think of a more objective standard then possessing a complete set of human chromosomes. I challenge you to draw a non-arbitrary line that does not violate the non exclusive middle. If we base morality on pain it is ok to kill an unknown hermit in his sleep...
ModelAnarchist 3 years ago
Pain is part of life. It is inescapable; thus those who base their morality on pain have no choice but to be immoral. Nature is quite cruel; it has no qualms with pain and suffering.
ModelAnarchist 3 years ago
If you are a sane human, you want to avoid pain, its that simple.
Otherwise you are a masochist.
Please explain your point more clearly, it doesn't make sense as it is now.
Unknnnnn 2 years ago 2
umm yeah u have to be 9 weeks to qaulify for an abortion in my state and it has to be done prior to the 12th week and that is law for most the country so get your facts straight!
sexyYTuser 2 years ago
How does that have any bearing to anything I said?
ModelAnarchist 2 years ago 2
because you stated that "we dont have a twelve week rule" as if it's fact which it isnt
sexyYTuser 2 years ago
It is time for people to stop pretending to make them selves feel better. Stop pretending there is a God, and stop that certain classes of people we want to abuse are inhuman; whether they be blacks, jews, middle eastern people, gays, or unborn is irrelevant to me. All these groups of people have been or are dehumanized, in America at least, and it's time for the bullshit to stop.
ModelAnarchist 3 years ago
You are equating racism with distinguishing between a sperm cell and egg cell that merged 1 minute ago and a fully grown human baby? Seriously?
Sleipnirrr 3 years ago
and if we dont wack off it happens on its own (wetdream) lol
wulfsragar 3 years ago
That means all adult women kill a baby every month when not pregnant - murdering serial-killing bastards!
jazzx251 2 years ago 3
listen to that preacher.... i uhhhh think that uhhh we uhhh.....uhh uhh...lol he knnows that there are big gaps in his balony logic and that dawkins has a point
bcv789 3 years ago 3
i masturbate to celebrate atheism.
ogapadoga 3 years ago 5
Dawkins meets that guy out in the open, with plenty of potential eye witnesses...
georg1984 3 years ago 10
LOL! Wouldn't you?
ThePortugueseAtheist 3 years ago 3