Re: Pat Robertson: Worst Person Ever (SATIRE)

[shartne]

I worship Jesus and I love him not Pat and Jerry they are an abomination. religious people make me sick. I'm sorry for you if you reject Jesus. Jesus said to look to him for a example not Pat or me or you.

[theanachyofreligion]

@shartne where is your god located?

[TheAthiCon]

You're funny, but the world ending in 2012 comes from the superstitious, not the secular.

[SuperBunyon]

I think I agree with everything you say but I don't understand any of it. Does that make sense? I think youtube overload will hit us before anything else. I'm a 'Distruther' myself like yourself of course. Today I am feeling more natural than ever as a human by the way. You vid got cut off like some of us in the prime of our lives. That has nothing to do with that guy that got his thing cut off during well you know.

[ilikenoodles1]

Bingo. Sure, we christians can't prove with absolute certainty that God exists, but by the same token, atheists can't prove He doesn't exist. Yet we're the stupid ones...

[piratakamrata]

Yes. You are. Sorry.

[ilikenoodles1]

Wow. Witty. Why don't you come up with a realy argument, then you can talk

[piratakamrata]

Just trolling. Couldn't resist it :-)

[ilikenoodles1]

I suppose we all do that  lol

[b0bzm00s3]

Kinda meh-ish. It's not that you don't make some good points, but the US GOV'T shouldn't be the police OR the EMS for the rest of the world. Let private citizens mobilize. $5 says that the private sector aid gets to Haiti before gov't aid and is 5 times more efficient. Anyways, Robertson was a total d-bag when he said that the Haitians brought this upon themselves as 'cause of some deal with the devil. Come on, that's just f***in' stupid; almost as stupid as Glover's opinion on the cause...

[IAMtheNewWorldOrder]

meh...1 star for trying to disguise a sentimental commitment to right wing ideology as an "above-the-false-left/right-pa­radigm" ideology.

sorry if your family was right wing. they may have been good people, but they were wrong, so don't cling to that. science does matter. the modern right wing is retarded. i know you have a brain, use it.

[Intellisecular]

Agreed. The modern right wing is retarded, however, it's changing. The "right" wasn't always this bad. H.L. Mencken and Ayn Rand, spared no quarter for irrational nonsense that existed on both the left and the right. My hope is that, NYFB, will see beyond his partisan myopia. I'm confident he will.

[Intellisecular]

Partisan myopia is too strong, I think it's his sentimentalism for Christianity, and belief in "God" that I hope he'll evolve out of.

[LogSNES]

Lol, good stuff.

[notyourfriendbuddy]

I'm not a "typical right winger". I don't watch Fox. I agree with TJ that Pat and Jerry are douche bags. I don't "hate" anyone, but Pat and Jerry are frauds just like Al Gore and AGW alarmists.

Speaking of punk rock though, check out my Environmentalist Wet Dream video!

[notyourfriendbuddy]

@pashrak

Thank you for proving the point of my video. Leftists such as yourself and TJ feel intellectually superior, yet cannot realize that your FAITH that God doesn't exist is equal to my FAITH that he does. Islam get's a free pass when there are more videos debunking/criticizing/making fun of Christianity than Islam.

"Do people who have hardened their beliefs through logic bother you? It seems so." Not as much as people who criticize such "logic" bothers you.

[Ilikenuman]

@notyourfriendbuddy

there are alot of things you have to have faith not to believe in. but its easier to believe in things people have observed directly.

[notyourfriendbuddy]

@Ilikenuman

So people have directly observed that God does not exists?

The Bible is an account of "things people have observed directly".

None of us were there when the Earth was created nor for the birth of mankind. Scientific Journals and Holy Books do not offer definitive answers to all the mysteries of the Universe. Only insight.

[Ilikenuman]

@notyourfriendbuddy no, we just havent directly observed that he DOES. I dont claim to know for a fact that god doesnt exist. im an agnostic, but the burden of proof has always been on the person making the positive claim

[notyourfriendbuddy]

@Ilikenuman

EXACTLY!

"the burden of proof has always been on the person making the positive claim" But I'm not claiming to have proof. That's my point. NOT having proof God exists does not equal HAVING proof God doesn't exist.

[Ilikenuman]

@notyourfriendbuddy but again, there are lots of things we dont have proof not to exist, but you could just dismiss them out of hand

[notyourfriendbuddy]

Because faith requires no proof. That's my point. People who believe in Bigfoot never say they have "faith" he exists. Instead they offer "proof" that can be scrutinized.

[Intellisecular]

@notyourfriendbuddy, faith isn't a methodology it is the LACK of a methodology. It's like saying something happened by magic which, of course, explains nothing. Advocating faith undercuts your reasoned arguments against leftists. They could reply to you saying that they have faith that Statism is the correct way - what can you say in response given that you endorse faith?

[notyourfriendbuddy]

@Intellisecular

"faith isn't a methodology it is the LACK of a methodology"

That's my point. I don't care what people believe/don't believe. We'll all find out when we die. But it's intellectually dishonest to state that your non belief in something is superior to my belief in something, when neither of us has physical evidence to back up our respective beliefs.

[Intellisecular]

@notyourfriendbuddy, you rail against those who want something for nothing materially, but YOU want the same, spiritually. Asserting the existence of something without evidence invalidates any fidelity you had with rationality. You also steal concepts. "Physical evidence" presupposes the law of identity. Yes, my view IS superior BECAUSE its adherence to reality, the source of intellectual honesty, and the axiomatic fact you must call on in your self-refuting attempt to refute me.

[Intellisecular]

It also matters what people believe. In a free society we can believe what we want but if we're going to move in that direction we need to respect our rational faculty and rationally persuade others. Reason is a unifier, faith is a divider. Any argument for irrationality (e.g.Christian faith) is a justification for the irrationality of others (e.g. Muslim faith).

[notyourfriendbuddy]

@Intellisecular

How do you KNOW there is no God?

[Intellisecular]

I gave a nuanced answer to this already. What do you mean by God? And exactly what did you learn from reading Atlas Shrugged? Did you read Galt's Speech?

[notyourfriendbuddy]

No you didn't. You continue to skirt around the fact that you can no more disprove the existence of a higher power than I can prove that one exists. Adherence to reality? How is the belief in a supreme being unrealistic?

I didn't learn Moral Philosophy from Atlas Shrugged or Galt's Speech, I can tell you that much. And I find it arrogant that you would hope I "evolve" out of my belief in God as I'm sure you take issue with people "praying" for your belief in Him.

[Intellisecular]

@notyourfriendbuddy, you're the one who claims to believe in something called a "higher power". You insult my intelligence by NOT bringing this "entity" into the standards of objective verifiability. What you're saying is you want your emotional assertion of a vague, incoherent, "entity",to be granted as a belief. Take personal responsibility for what you claim to believe and bring that belief into the sphere of human understanding. By not doing so, you refute yourself.

[notyourfriendbuddy]

"standards of objective verifiability"

What standards would that be?

"bring that belief into the sphere of human understanding"

But you don't want to understand. A=A, right? My lack of proof of an "entity" does not equal your proof of a non-"entity".

As I stated before, none of us will KNOW for sure until we die.

[Mauhadeeb28]

Well said. I am no believer of a God/gods, but I will never deny the possibility that one may exist. That would be extremely shallow, single minded, and naive to do so.

You are wrecking this simple minded man. Keep it up. Very fun to read.

[Intellisecular]

It's not shallow, simple minded, and naive, to say that there are laws of logic that govern knowledge. I wouldn't be wreaking the man. I would be liberating him.

[Mauhadeeb28]

Keep thinking that. It is definitely simple minded to through what has not been proven illegitimate out the window. Man has proven itself capable of rendering dreams to life. Until it can be unproven, minds should be kept open.

[Intellisecular]

@Mauhadeeb28. Concepts like proven and unproven, are legitimate when we bring an arbitrary, subjective, "belief" into the realm of objective reality. Then we can say this or that view does or doesn't correspond to reality (the way things are).

Is your claim that there is no truth? And that everything is subjective?

[Mauhadeeb28]

I have no claim. I simply choose to keep my mind open to all things possible. Man has proven time and time again to seemingly make the imaginary come to life, while all along those things existed.

The things that allowed man to clone humans were here before man. Nothing is actually made by man. They existed long before. Man simply found a way to utilize the resources. Perhaps "God" decided to drop communication with us once his word was written. We do not now and may never know the answers.

[Intellisecular]

His word was written? LOL. Where? The Bible? Read, Bart Ehrman. Like NYFB, you want to weasel out of making truth claims. You want your epistemological cake and eat it too. You can't have it both ways. And everything else you wrote I'm not arguing against, but it can't be equated with an incoherent, supernaturalistic, "God". I notice you're also a fan of Rand's Atlas Shrugged. Great. Now, I suggest a re-read.

[Mauhadeeb28]

I am not weaseling out of anything. I simply believe in possibility. I never made a statement that I believed the bible. I believe that I do not have the answer and neither do you. That is definitely a fact. Yes, I enjoy Atlas shrugged as I enjoyed the original writings of Charles Darwin. This does not mean that I believe everything that I've read or choose to follow it simply because I enjoyed it. You are trying to paint a picture of me as a believer in God/gods, which I am not.

[Intellisecular]

You're epistemologically promiscuous entertaining possibility for the impossible. So a married bachelor is possible? A squared circle? An omniscient, omnipotent, omnibenevolent, entity, outside of space and time, that is a pure mind devoid of any matter and can interact within space and time, is of the same category. Keeping an mind open to such NON-sensical, multiple, contradictions is an insult to reason. Btw, you need to think critically at all times while reading anything of substance.

[Mauhadeeb28]

Your argument a squared circle has nothing to do with me. You are digging at nothing trying to find something.

The difference between us is that you have come to the conclusion that you have it all figured out. Which is absurd. This puts you in the same exact category as those who believe through in a God. They think they have it all figured out as you have.

I do think critically when reading, which is why I am not an atheist nor a christian. You are terrible at this debate stuff.

[notyourfriendbuddy]

@Mauhadeeb28

But I would never claim that I KNOW that God exists or that I have it all figured out. Nobody KNOWS, that's the point I've been trying to make.

[Mauhadeeb28]

I was not speaking on your be-half. I don't need to. You know how to speak and think for yourself.

"Nobody KNOWS, that's the point I've been trying to make."

I could not agree more. That was my same point, yet he still is trying to brand me of having claims. You and I may never know, but apparently this guy received some sort of inside look at the inner workings of life and believes he knows all. It is like he is projecting all of himself on everyone else.

[notyourfriendbuddy]

@Intellisecular

"epistemological cake "

There is a wide spectrum of opinion regarding the epistemological validity of faith.

Regarding "truth claims": If something is actually KNOWN, then it categorically cannot be false. Correct?

But it is UNknown and (by your admission of agnosticism) UNknowable whether God does/doesn't exist, until we cease to exist.

[Intellisecular]

"My lack of proof of an "entity" does not equal your proof of a non-"entity".

Yes it definitely does. It must. The entity you've evasively not defined can't exist because it can't, be defined. To be is to be something. I suggest a re-read of Atlas Shrugged, specifically, Galt's speech (the section on existence exists). I also suggest you pick up, Atheism: The Case Against God, by George H Smith. To come to a contradiction is to confess an error. A theistic God is a contradictory entity.

[ilikenoodles1]

Put away the pseudo-intellectual bull. If you really want to seem smarter than everyone else, imagine there's something out there, bigger than us, that we as humans can't detect with our five basic senses. Is it really that hard to believe? Is it really that hard to even imagine? We don't ask you to believe it, just accept that it's a possibility and leave us theists alone. We're not as dumb as you think we are, some of us are pretty smart, believe it or not.

[Intellisecular]

Noodle, read my post where I talk about this. Look before you yammer on like a fool. And, you're being intellectually dishonest. This is NOT the Christian God. You've equivocated, talking about one thing and conflating it into something else. Go ahead and lie to yourself, but that's EXACTLY what you're doing. Btw, I don't think you're stupid, just dishonest.

[ilikenoodles1]

If you're talking about believing in Statism, that is not the same as God. Statism, and any other kind of government, though an nonhuman entity, was nevertheless created BY humans, rendering it a lesser power. We are talking about a HIGHER power. If that's not what you're referring to, let me know, there's a lot of stuff here. As for me being intellectually dishonest, I'd love to hear you explain a bit more. As far as I know, I'm just giving my honest thoughts, but I could be wrong...?

[Intellisecular]

@Ilikenuman, there are agnostic theists and agnostic atheists. An agnostic in the way you're using it is a weasel word. I'm an strong atheist, in that, I believe that a Christian (or any religious) God violates the law of identity and is therefore an impossible entity - it can't exist. Now, I'm agnostic about a naturalistic entity (or entities) that has a super-intelligence that we could call "God".

[Ilikenuman]

@Intellisecular i am an agnostic atheist, possibly even a pantheist. but i am less agnostic about certain religions. f

[Ilikenuman]

@notyourfriendbuddy and furthermore, whats being left wing got to do with believing in a god?

[notyourfriendbuddy]

@Ilikenuman

Nothing, I was only referring to TJ and pashrak.

[notyourfriendbuddy]

"Where is your evidence that I am a leftist?" When you said I was a "typical face fed Fox News right winger".

When someone states they are against ALL religion, but spends more time bashing ONE than all others combined, they are disingenuous hypocrites.

"supported by verifiable evidence"

What evidence would that be? I don't have proof there is a God and you don't have proof that there isn't.

[notyourfriendbuddy]

"This does not mean he must bash them all equally."

Yes, it does. He can't hate all religion equally if he spends an unequal amount of time bashing one over the others.

"There is no proof that there is a God so there is no reason to believe in one except by faith"

EXACTLY! Conversely, there is no proof that God doesn't exist so there is no reason to not believe in one except by faith.

There is no reason to continue to bring up Pat Robertson, as I've made it clear that I agree he's an idiot.

[notyourfriendbuddy]

@pashrak

Where is your proof that I watch Fox News?

[jtboll00]

get a haircut you hippy!

[notyourfriendbuddy]

HAHA I know!

[jtboll00]

haha same here i am too lazy to get my ass to get one

[darksideofthenation]

lol

[ilikenoodles1]

I loved the mention of the flying spaghetti monster lol

[KasparHauser4]

Sorry pal although this is a cute video Bush never said he invaded Iraq to overthrow an oppressive dictator. Besides which the world is full of oppressive dictators that the US feels just fine about. Maybe you should start seeing things for the way they are instead of through your rose colored glasses.

[bannedbyMusloons]

It's a satire of a Darwinist-Absolutist video that this video was in response of...

[fruitikay]

@Kaspar Yeah of course he didn't say, he only spoke and spoke about "the axis of evil" and trying to eliminate that which is killing people in the middle east. -_-'

[ilikenoodles1]

Yeah, it was about stopping an oppressive dictator from launching WMDs. So different... NOT!!

[KasparHauser4]

ilikenoodles1

Ok educate me then to the changes in modern ideas in christianity. assinating political leaders in foreign nations is the "good" thing to do? How is that? Btw the president of venezuela was democratically elected and is much loved by his people. Apparently not by Pat though

[ilikenoodles1]

I didn't say he should have been assassinated. As a Christian, I don't think we have the right to do that to unarmed prisoners (because we don't). However, he SHOULD have been thrown in prison for the rest of his pitiful life for what he did to "his" people. As for Chavez, they like him now, and as far as I know, he's not guilty of any human rights violations... YET. I think it'll change, but until it does, we have no right to interfere

[r3v3ng3ofthef4113n]

"Btw the president of venezuela was democratically elected and is much loved by his people."

So was Adolf Hitler. What's your point?

[Mauhadeeb28]

TJ would definitely send our money to everyone..... as long as it wasn't his. I believe he still lives with his parents..... Isn't he 47?

[yahazif]

We are the worlds EMS. And Al Gore is the worlds PMS. And Islam is George Bush's fault. The whole religion is George Bush's fault. If it wasn't for Bush Chenny hell we wouldn't even have Islam. Stupid Republitards.

[Ilikenuman]

the global warming stuff, ill agree with you on that though

[Ilikenuman]

when did theamazingatheist say anything like this? he hates islam, hes very vocal about it. and pat robertson and jerry falwell are wankers, and i will gladly contest you on that

[notyourfriendbuddy]

You're right. I changed the description. Pat and Jerry ARE scumbags and thier methods are no different than AGW alarmists.

[tyvon2000]

hahahhah awesome!

[ArchetypeX]

First!