Dogma

[TumshieX]

I know it's old by now, but it's the first time I've seen the video. This is a very good and informative video. It gave me some concrete and easily understandable ways to link Religion and other instances of "genocidal stupidity". It's nice to have the links and commonalities laid out like this. I think a lot of people understand roughly how, say, Catholicism and Stalin's version of Communism are related, but it's hard to really express it in a precise manner like you just did. Good work!

[gobblox38]

awesome video

[ArrogantAtheist]

Atheists FTW!!

[squirrly001]

@Ray Squirrel, Adonai means Lord whereas Jehovah is the english form of the word YHWH - since they don't use vowels it would be impossible to pronounce without putting some in the word hence Yahweh or Jehovah.

Really enjoyed the video - very concise analysis.

[RaySquirrel]

Good video.

Except (and this may be irrelevant), Jehovah is a mispronunciation of the Hebrew word Adonai.

[TheLogicalTheist]

Great video.

[ctfchris]

Very well presented comparisons.

[KillcrazeWoW]

This is seriously the best video ever. I wish i could rate higher than 5 stars.

=')

[DeletedDelusion]

An absolutely brilliant video.

[NonStampCollector]

Absolutely fucking AWESOME

[Akatam0t0ma]

I hope you don't mind if I reupload this video ;-)

[DarkPractitioner]

Genocidal stupidity is really a stupid concept, all those genocides you describe were made for defined political purpose.

5 Stars anyway.

[Greywyn7]

"all those genocides you describe were made for defined political purpose."

Exactly, religion got in the way of indoctrination where the government is god.

[pirbird14]

You have it backwards. Dogma is the product of dogmatic attitudes towards fundamental truths alledged to form the basis of a belief system. Genocidal stupidity arises when the dogma is provided as an explanation about human character which allegedly allows us to sort out who is an enemy of humankind - an agent of Satan, an enemy of the State, etc. - and who is authentically human, without taking the trouble to get to know the individuals personally. It cannot be enforced without secular power.

[kuzuboshii]

That redhead was hot as FUCK

[2bsirius]

The argument in this video is so intelligent and so well argued. It is particularly cogent because it focuses on DOGMA...NOT on the ridiculous premises that all manifestations of atheism are white hat beliefs.

What matters is the application [i.e., Stalin's collectivism, Catholic Crusades, radical Muslim jihads etc.]

BUT it is important to remember the levels of irrational belief in the Christian belief that judgment can't & must not be used to reason about the 'divine'.

[realadriatikus]

Firstly you should not base your argumentation on dictionaries. If you really wanna be smart, try to reason beyond common categories, and use definitions and dictionaries only when communicating your thoughts to the others. You're heavily biased because of that. One example only: confounding religious and ideological dogma. Usually they're not the same. Because they talk about different things. Though they may be alike when a religion is legalistic (eg Islam).

[DYkurama]

WHY WON'T YOU RESPOND TO MY REPLIES?

[PimmesNL]

Stunning. Just from thinking for ourselves we drew the EXACTLY the same conclusion. Whereas dogma works the other way: forcing a conclusion onto the collective. That is very comforting.

[ladymimi101]

beautifully stated

[TheBigLebbowski]

Still, at the very least, you seem a smart guy,and thats a compliment coming from me, I'm hoping we can make an agreement on what we agree on, and agree to disagree on what we don't. And bear in mind what I said about common ground. Only when we fight on the same idealogical battlefield, as equal opponents of the same type, can we truly see the better.

[TheModestAgnostic]

The key point is that dogma is the problem. Insisting without evidence that X or Y is true. Very few atheists hold to their atheism in this way, they merely expect evidence for all claims. Be they for God, the FSM or leprechauns. In short, atheism is a religion, like bald is a hair colour:-)

Catholics, communists or the worshipers of Emperor Hirohito, all equally subscribe to an irrational belief system. Some of them are atheists, some christians and others buddhists.

[TheModestAgnostic]

The religious don't have a monopoly on delusion, and this is exactly what illustrates that ALL religions are nonsense, none of them deliver and none of them CAN deliver. There is one system of thought that DOES deliver though, and this is a dogma I subscribe to. Question everything, be relentlessly skeptical, never take "because" as an answer:-) This mode of thinking will neutralise the catholics, the communists and the rabid capitalists alike:-)

[Awwa1]

The Modest Agnostic's words above, are at the center of the argument. And I totally agree, that one should question everything! Obviously we go on "faith" for some things at some times. We'd never get anything done if everything was always in question. But to never question something, is to blindly yet knowingly, accept a possible error or fault into the foundation of your beliefs. No good architech, religious or otherwise would ever make that mistake!

[DYkurama]

To me religious wars are people starting wars for their own reason and saying "its for god" to gain helpers.not all moderates defend fundies, and there is a seperation, being a moderate is ok. If it was a religon to worship the emperor in WW2, why would japanese troops kidnap the emperor instead of obeying his orders?hes suposed to be the son of god?what kind of person would try to overthrow a person seen as a living god?so again i say, it was some of the people that were doing evil, not religon

[DYkurama]

Also if you blame religion for bad then how about all of the good things religion did?. MLK did what he did because he beleaved it was right and because of his religous teachings that told him everyone was equal in gods eyes.

as for sacrificing humans. There have been non-religous sacrifices because while being good natured, people are also blood thursty and the gladieators braught in much coin for the roman empire.

[TheSandreGuy]

All good deeds done by religious, could just as easily have been done by atheists.

[TheBigLebbowski]

In fact to an objective outsider, both I , as a catholic, and you as an Atheist appear dogmatic to someone who could care less about either of these 2 things. If you want to debate Atheisms status as such , feel free to do so, but for my purposes, we are both Dogmas. I can go down the list why. Now, both of our groups overlap others, and both of ours are easily capable of "Genocidal stupidity" yes?

[TheBigLebbowski]

For our purposes Atheism takes a subservient role as part of communism, a place where we over lap. Now, to make it fair, the same could be said about the KKK or to go further the Inquisition. These are not purely religious things, they are secular in cause and purpose. I think we can agree on that. We can also agree that the Atheism in the communist dogma aggressively attacks the Theistic Dogma surrounding it.

[TheBigLebbowski]

So MA, am I correct in saying that was a false statement on your part, and your objective was completed. Now, very well done and all that, and sure it counts as a point for you, but please bear in mind that this is in response to years, if not decades of Atheists rolling out the Violent theism line. Besides, if your video is not a joke, you seem to be putting atheists outside of a group that includes Communism and Christianity so as to discredit both.

[TheBigLebbowski]

Now this is silly because you seem to fail to realize that at the ultimate point there is a group, a general one, which holds both Atheists and Theists in a single classification.Knowing this is in the interest of all, because (Unless you want to see Religion wiped off the face of the earth through any means) we need to find common ground before we can have a reasonable debate.

[TheBigLebbowski]

Well, considering the Big bang theory was though up by a Priest/Professor of Physics... I don't see why the Fundamentalists are hollering and the Atheists are crying sweet victory.

[wildbestia]

BTW, Stalin's only education was Georgian Orthodox Seminary. Stalin himself never mentioned of being Atheist.

[TheBigLebbowski]

Haha, XD, regarding stalin,while he was a seminary, (Who was heavily disliked by his tutors) he read Darwin and became an Atheist.

[TheModestAgnostic]

Nonetheless, his primary influences were Christian, as were Hitlers, Mussolinis and Francos. Every christian is a potential genocidal maniac, the evidence is overwhelming.

[angellicrequiem]

Every human is a potential genocidal maniac. Theists differentiate themselves from the extremists in precisely the same manner that Atheists do. One does not require faith in anything to exercise stupidity in action.

[wildbestia]

Lebbowski, Stalin never read Darwin, he spent his years in jail, revolution, and then ruler. His only influence was Church, and only education was Bible. Just read about him.

Where do you think he got the idea of mass murder for "sins"? I didn't read that in Darwin. Mass murder is not how evolution works, but it's the way biblical sky daddy works.

[TheBigLebbowski]

"Lebbowski, Stalin never read Darwin, he spent his years in jail, revolution, and then ruler"

Wow dude, I'm inclined to disagree with someone who has such a simplistic view.

"Every Christian is a potential genocidal maniac, the evidence is overwhelming"

M'kay. I spend half my time talking about Atheist atrocities and even I don't say you are all ticking time bombs of mass murderer. Most of you, are by and large morale. C'mon man this isn't the 18th century. Most of us do not stereotype wrongly

[TheBigLebbowski]

You guys seriously gave me a chuckle there ;) and get this, theres this other atheist yelling at me for over generalizing a group of people :0. With stuff like this coming from a guy named a modest agnostic, I do not expect anything more than a verbal punching bag to practice my arguing.

Still keep it civil :)

[TheModestAgnostic]

Bingo! You are of course quite right, my observation was absurd, and your reaction is exactly how we feel when we read the relentlessly repeated trope about Stalin et al. People like Stalin, Hitler and Pol Pot do what they do because of who they are, not because they are atheists or christians. Next time you feel the urge to repeat this crap, remember how absurd my comment seemed, and realise that this is what you look like when you spout your absurdity. Thus endeth the lesson:-)

[wildbestia]

"I'm inclined to disagree with someone who has such a simplistic view. "

If you talk about Stalin - first read about Stalin. If you don't wanna get laughed at after saying "he read Darwin and became an Atheist.". He never read Darwin, he was uneducated criminal thug. Right hand of Lenin, doing dirty job for him. For God's sake, read some history book... please..

[ggcage]

If Jesus Christ is not the Son of God than how is it that all the prophecies concerning Him in the books like Isaiah came true?

[TheModestAgnostic]

The books of the bible where retrospectivley chosen by the council of Nicea for just such "prophetic" purposes. One of the funniest ones must be the quote from the book of Isaiah, which is actually a greek-latin-hebrew translation snafu, they of course didn't know this at the time. The original text refers to a "young woman", not a virgin at all. Nothwithstanding careful efforts to present a "prophetic" air, any clear thinking person can see it's transparent humbug.

[ggcage]

Council of Nicea? The Bible was written Thousands of years ago and hasn't changed since then. The Dead Sea Scrolls prove this.

[TheModestAgnostic]

Yeah .. back to school for you.

[ggcage]

If there is no God than how did the world get here?

[TheModestAgnostic]

The Earth formed from a disc of gas and dust orbiting the sun after gravity had kick started the nuclear fusion that powers it.

[Hmsheen10]

yes, but think back b4 the big bang....

When there was nothing, how did the big bang happen

GOD EXISTS

[mjhacker]

Read a few books on the subject... there is certainly a library near where you live...

[GustafSjoblom]

I love this video, and have it as a favorite.

That beeing said, haven't dogmatic beliefs sometimes done good things?

Early democratic revolutions for example fall under that category, just because a belief happen to be correct doesn't make it not dogmatic. They were a success where communism was a failiure.

Overall attacking dogma is probably a good thing, but I'd like someone to disprove my hypothesis that it can be good at times, or perhaps even necessary, atleast to fight other dogmas.

[Hot0Water0Heater]

Even the crimes of atheism are blamed under religion

You're making religion the main culprit when in reality land and glory are the ones that are making all of the wars

And even when relgion is violent it's not so violent. Take the an shi rebellion as an example, 36 million died from it( 2/3 the population of china at the time)

[Hot0Water0Heater]

and it happened at the time when guns didn't exist

Even secular sources say that the witch trials killed only thousands, even when reoligion is violent it's not so violent

[lanc4268]

he's not directly faulting religon. It's the human inclination to dogmatic thought (secular or theistic) that is identified as the problem. A little rationality in any of these cases might have saved alot of lifes. Thats all.

[Hot0Water0Heater]

many atheists here argue that religion is the 1# mass murderer when in reality all of religion combined didn't kill as much as Stalin&Mao. OK, fine, assume their atheism was irrelevant, this still doesn't debunk the main argument. The most horrible wars infact had no religion at all

[GustafSjoblom]

"The most horrible wars infact had no religion at all"

Exactly. Dogmaticly held beliefs however had everything to do with it.

Requesting evidence to belive as the agnostic/atheist does is not a sign of dogma, but is the exact opposite.

[Hot0Water0Heater]

What dogma did the two world wars have?

[MilitantKafir2]

good video!

[Eiketsu3000]

what kind of dogma does a mother that commits infanticide has?, what kind of dogma does a criminal has?, what kind of dogma did the taiping rebellion or the napolean wars have?

[TheModestAgnostic]

Who knows? I'm not suggesting that people don't do bad things. That would be absurd. Merely that ideologies (such as religion or nationalism) that specifically target and undermine critical thinking are very dangerous. It's really not that hard to follow.

[Eiketsu3000]

But you said that this is the oot of all evil, if not dogma, then what is the root of all evil?, human nature?, then why are you a humanist?, humans did bad things yet trusting in god will be of no harm

[TheModestAgnostic]

There is no "root of all evil". Humans do bad things for a range of reasons, upbringing, resource shortages or simply malfunctioning cognitive software or hardware. We are a complex of interlocking and frequently conflicting drives and impulses, out of this emerges the devil and the angel, but it's all just us. No God required.

[TheModestAgnostic]

The answer is to continue to understand how the brain works. I suspect if we ever fully understand human motivations, there will be no prisons only "time out" centres for people to find themselves.

[BayerLexan]

This is a good video. I think I might also include some type of ritualistic ceremony that enforces the point of focus as absolute. Dogmas to me always seem to have this air of being an absolute state, where change or alterartion is impossible. I think a quick way to sum up dogma is unjustified. Everything about dogmas seems to lack any reasonable justification for thier foundings.

[TheModestAgnostic]

You need a little study in statistics. Firstly, the technology to kill millions has only been around recently, secondly even professed atheists have killed per capita of population, far fewer then theists, and thirdly atheism is generally incidental to the killing, not it's primary engine as in religious Dogma. Finally, irrational ideologies, of which religion is merely a subset are the problem, not atheism per se. Rational behaviour what not lead you to worship God or Stalin.

[Eiketsu3000]

Never mind that Stalin and Mao didn't use any of those weapons. They relied on primitive techniques of murder, such as forced relocation, forced labor, and forced starvation. Besides, the caveats of our humanist colleague hardly change the overall calculus. The best estimates are that 350 thousand were killed in the Spanish Inquisition. That's compared with 100 million who were killed in the atheist purges of the twentieth century. The 100 million is actually a low figure,

[Eiketsu3000]

since it uses very modest estimates for how many people Stalin and Mao killed, and it leaves out a host of lesser atheist tyrants such as Pol Pot and Enver Hoxha. Even so, using this conservative estimate, a quick calculation reveals that atheist regimes killed thousand times more people in the space of a few decades than the Spanish Inquisition managed to kill over a period of more than two centuries.

[Eiketsu3000]

"secondly even professed atheists have killed per capita of population, far fewer then theists"

Really?, prove it then

Why didn't the mongol conquest have a problem despite lacking this technology?, what about the an shi rebellion?, Atlantic slave trade between the 1600 to 1900

Each of those killed at least 25 million people BEFORE John dalton even made his discovery

[Eiketsu3000]

"and thirdly atheism is generally incidental to the killing, not it's primary engine as in religious Dogma"

Then why did enver hoxha ban religion?, why did mao zedong say "religion is poison", why did stalin say "all this talk about god is sheer nonsense"

Stalin and Mao, Pol Pot and a host of others, committed atrocities in the name of a Communist ideology that was atheistic. They did their bloody deeds by claiming to be establishing a religion-free utopia.

[TheModestAgnostic]

No, I'm afraid you genuinely incapable of seperating those that kill for power who happen to be atheists, and those that kill for religion because of their religion. In principle, both actions are the same, both are killing those that resist an ideology. Religion is core to religion (obviously), but atheism is not core to state ideologies. Franco, Hitler and Mussolini being prime examples.

[TheModestAgnostic]

Both belong under the umbrella of dogma. Religious, communist or free market. Anything taken to excess and championed as unquestionable truth always ends up the same way, because of human cognition and neurology. Religion has been the dominant method of hijacking the rational centres of the brain, now we have a few secular ideologies that do the same thing. The antidote is critical thinking. Take a swig:-)

[Eiketsu3000]

why can't anti-theism be considered a dogma?

[Eiketsu3000]

what you're basically saying is that god was replaced by a human, statism...so much for the solution of the problem of religion. If Stalin was a christian he might have not done what he did. athough there are others such as vjocys(.)blogspot(.)com who argue for a religious stalin, stalin is the kind of person nobody wants to be intact with

[TheModestAgnostic]

Surely this is not a serious question? Comparing what happens in a 300 year time frame, with WWI (4 years) for example or WWII (5 years). The question is obviously absurd.

[Eiketsu3000]

well the an shi rebellion only took 10 years and it killed 0 million people

[Eiketsu3000]

i mean 30 million people, sorry

[Eiketsu3000]

why can't stalin/mao anti-theism be considered a dogma?(which was inspired by atheism)

when i read Dawkins' challenge of finding a single case of specifically atheism-inspired violence, at least one instance does come to mind:

The year 1967 saw Enver Hoxha, Albania's leader, declared the country to be the world's first atheist state -- and proudly so. In fact, Hoxha decreed a ban on religion, religious names being given to newborns,

[Eiketsu3000]

ordered the demolishing of places of worship and imprisoned those found in possession of holy texts.

Needless to say, his human rights record drew widespread international condemnation. Critics of this example will attempt to tie it in with the communist ideology shackling eastern European states at the time, but it is clear that Hoxha was determined to carry out his anti-religious campaign specifically for atheism's sake.

[TheModestAgnostic]

Well done. Thats 1 against every religious atrocity in the name of every God since records began. We atheists certainly have some catching up to do:-)

[Eiketsu3000]

Well yes. There are very little atheist tyrants because atheism is a very recent idea, regardless. People have been killed in the name of anti-theism more than all christian atrocities combined, even the spanish inquisition only killed 350 thousand people, not millions, not the inquisition, and not the witch trials. Although the taiping rebellion was religious and killed millions, it was considered as heresey by christian so they had no support

[IaintNoGood]

Eiketsu, "There are very little atheist tyrants because atheism is a very recent idea," Ummm, huh? Atheism is not a very recent idea. Atheism has been around longer than theism. Theism is in an invention and is taught or indoctrinated. Atheism is a natural state and is "unlearned" through said indoctrination or teaching. As for what an atheist leader says or does, he or she cannot enforce what one thinks or believes in. Yes perhaps there was an attempt to make a

[Eiketsu3000]

well, could you give an event that managed to get close to killing as much as Mao did?. Mao relied on primitive methods and killed 20 million people by just forced labor. The best example atheists have is the inquisition(their favorite), however it wasn't as horrible as they would want you to think, it has only killed 5 thousand

[Eiketsu3000]

I suggest that the read Edward Peter's Inquisition for the most up to date analysis of the topic, including the myths that have arisen surrounding the inquisitions. Another example are the crusades, however they didn't do it in the name of christianity as this proves: socrates58(.)blogspot(.)com(/)­2006(/)11(/)inquisition-crusad­es-catholic-scandals(.)html

what credible evidence do you have that say.. enver hoxha didn't officially ban religion in the name of atheism

[IaintNoGood]

religious free nation by outlawing religion or god beliefs. But laws do not dictate what I think or believe. If Bush decided to make America an atheist nation, it would not make a spit of difference to those who were theistic. People do not throw away core beliefs or world views just because their leader says, "Simon says no more god."

[Eiketsu3000]

but state atheism opposed religious groups because they wanted totalarian power, this idea could not be introduced during the 15th century or less because back then atheism was a capital offence. How could there be a state atheism during say the 7th century?

[maarakailet1]

Do you mind if I use the phrase, "Atheism is a religion, like bald is a hair color" on my personal webpages? If yes, how should I quote it?

[TheModestAgnostic]

No idea where it came from, but it's not original. Feel free:-)

[ThatOneQuestion]

Well done!!!

[Deadman3913]

This is thus far the most sublime video I have seen yet. It brings all the pieces together & presents a clear picture of what all free thinkers must recognize as the most significant source of danger in this world. Thank you for posting this.

[7Gods7Shinobi7]

i accually just posted a video series about the people responsible for the inquisitions

[discoverngc]

under "genocidal stupidity" you forgot to mention the holy inquisition.

[bluemustangxxxgt]

excellent!

[gritmafia]

It's probabally should be mentioned that the Soviet Union was an atheist state esspecially during the late 20s-early to the early 40s. It was in this time that The Forced Famine of Ukraine (32-33) which killed 7-10 million. Atheism, Islam, and Christianity are all harmless though. It's extreme Anti-theism, Islamic Extremism and Christian Extremism (or what ever would be the correct term).

[ChristMarx]

What sort of atheism? Humanism, Marxism, Buddhism, Confucianism, Toaism or Jainism? We define what sort of theism we are talking about such as Judaism, Christianity or Islam, therefore you should define what sort of atheism you are talking about.

[TheModestAgnostic]

Atheism is not a faith, it's an absence of faith. Try the video again, it explains this. All irrational dogma, regardless of the object of worship are dangerous thats the point. Atheism is just the default state of humans, claiming it's a faith is like claiming that a book with blank pages is a "novel".

[ChristMarx]

Oh so if atheism is a faith, does that mean it is a fact then? A fact that there is no God? NO!! It is a faith just like theism.

[TheModestAgnostic]

Its the default assumption. One doesn't randomly posit the existence of say .... an invisible little green man that lives in your ear, and then stubbornly assert that is so. If I were to suggest this to you, you would, at a minimum require evidence. Or think me mad, and that is fairly reasonable. So it is with God. The burden of proof is on the one <i>making the assertion</I>, not the a-littlegreenmaninyourear-ist, we are just in the skeptical default state of unbelief pending evidence.

[tWistYbrain]

i think that that this video considers marxism, Buddhism, and Jainism dogmas.

[d0nquix]

Did you not even bother to watch the video? The whole point of the video was to demonstrate the difference between dogma (irrational religious or pseudo-religious statist beliefs) and true atheism (the lack of all beliefs that are not supported by evidence). He even used Stalin's pseudo-religious personality cult as an example. Why is it so hard for fundies to comprehend that atheism is the LACK of belief in ANYTHING that has no evidence to support it. It's not a faith.

[ChristMarx]

Atheism is a faith so shut up! Retard! By the way, you were criticising theism and atheism. Theism: Christianity and Islam; Atheism:Communism

[TheModestAgnostic]

Boy, did you ever miss the point:-(

[doford]

Atheism takes only a tiny bit of faith. Everything about theism is faith. There is a big difference between the two.

[ultranordic]

Atheism is communism? 90% of Swedes are atheists, wonder why they still are a democracy.

[TheModestAgnostic]

Hey I live in Sweden, and it is not true that 90% of Swedes are atheists. I think it's 87.5%.

[gritmafia]

Wikipedia says that according to a 2005 Eurostat poll says that only 23% are atheists.

[bobinrobinbarabek]

Exellent. 5 stars. Thank you.

[lookingforananswer]

thank you for this very thoughtful vid. It has given me much to ponder. I appreciate your effort.

Again, thank you

[steve19683]

Maybe I don't think about religion very much: For me, the first two definitions pop to mind long before the religious definition. And in those definitions, valid, tested tenets are just as likely to be dogma as untested tenets.

Still, a very interesting video to watch. I know so much more about these things than most people, but you keep knowing more than me! Harumph. Had I just forgotten Lysenko? Argh.

[TheModestAgnostic]

Hey thanks for watching so many of my videos!!! Damn you've got a tough constitution sitting through all that!!

[steve19683]

Merriam-Webster's first two definitions of Dogma are: 1 a : something held as an established opinion; especially : one or more definite and authoritative tenets b : a code or systematized formulation of such tenets (as by a theoretician or a school of art or philosophy) c : matches your exactly and 2 : a doctrine or body of doctrines of theology and religion formally stated and authoritatively proclaimed by a church. (continued)

[jrixyzle5]

Bad Dogma! Bad.

[Mjhavok]

5 stars

[Logicel]

Continued from the review: "Like the latter (i.e. Early Christians), he says, communists enjoyed a feeling of certainty blessed by omniscience, with the deity in their case being 'the march of history'."

[Logicel]

This week's issue of the Economist reviewed "Comrades! A History of World Communism by Robert Service. A telling excerpt from the review: "He compares communists both to fascists, with whom he sees ideological differences but practical similarities, and TO EARLY CHRISTIANS.

[StefanoBrasil]

USA

True believers:White House

Irrational beliefs:freedom and democracy

powerful point of state:bush,uncle sam,dollar,oil

heretics:Iran,N.Korea,Cuba,Ven­ezuela and others "enemies of freedom".

Genocidal stupidity:U.S.Natives holocaust,racism,vietnam war,irak war and other crimes

[KingHeathen]

very good THOROUGH job.

[TheModestAgnostic]

Thanks:-) Appreciate the feedback, love your stuff too, especially mini heathens recent clips:-)

[TheModestAgnostic]

Crap. Nothing can be proven so that no doubt whatever exists. All we can hope for are probabilities. Does God exist? I don't know, but it seems pretty fucking improbable.

[stankinlincoln]

-assertions must be proven(in the other vid you said you don't need to prove anything) in order to get to the bottom of an existence we need to prove both, that there is a god and that there isn't a god. than and only than we have an understanding of what is going on. you guys have just as much to prove as us.

[stankinlincoln]

Genocidal stupidity: a ban on contraception would stop ways of stopping the creation of life, that means creation of life is not being restricted(how is that genocidal?) and I don't get the aids thing either, if we educate people how not to get aids that means more people wouldn't get it -> less people would die(how is that genocidal?) the witch thing doesn't apply, there is no such thing as a witch

[TheModestAgnostic]

Unless you are confusing sperm with people, and I have a horrible sense that you are, restricting or confusing people about the use of contraceptives with regard to AIDS is criminal. Your own clear ignorance about the subject is a traffic stopping example of the problem.

[stankinlincoln]

would you like to expand on this because I must not understand what your talking about

[TheModestAgnostic]

The catholic church prevents condom use in Africa. Thus ensuring the accelerated spread of AIDS. This is genocidal stupidity. That fact that you've no idea about this particular problem is horrifying ignorance.

[stankinlincoln]

oh, i thought you were talking about a conspiracy theory.

preaching abstinence and actually preventing condom use is 2 different things. but I don't think you can call this genocidal stupidity

[stankinlincoln]

continued...

catholicism is voluntary, it's not forced on anyone. there fore no one in africa is forced to not use condoms. the problem is not the church's policy(it's actually superior to condoms) it's the people in africa. they choose to partake in very risky behavior, I don't preach abstinence but if you do have sex you have to know your parnter(this is whats missing)

[TheModestAgnostic]

If you really beleive that you are an idiot.

[stankinlincoln]

what the conspiracy theory or the genocidal stupidity?

[TheModestAgnostic]

You are certainly wrong about that:-(

[stankinlincoln]

how so?

[TheModestAgnostic]

It is human nature to engage in risky behaviour. If simple steps such as distributing condoms, or education can be taken to ameloriate that, they should be taken. An obsession with religious morality, decoupled from human suffering, has clouded your judgement. You think the way you do, for the same reason the inqusition burnt witches. Fairytales resulting in real world suffering.

[stankinlincoln]

not coming from a religious standpoint(just using logic), I don't think condom distribution is the smartest way to go on aids. education would be 200x better.

I don't like religion. so saying my obsession is screwing with my judgement is wrong. continued...

[stankinlincoln]

think logically about this. a condom is like driving a armored hummer through iraq, there is still a large chance you will get hurt. educating is like telling that driver where the bad parts of iraq is and where the safe parts are. abstinence is like that driver saying screw it and not going to iraq at all.

I say the most efficient way is thru education. while pointing out that the superior way to not get aides is through abstinence. I'm disconnected from reality?

[TheModestAgnostic]

You are disconnected from reality if you think telling people to abstain from a primary urge. As I've said, preach the abstinence, but provide the condoms and family planning.

[stankinlincoln]

that's exactly what our government schools are doing, they teach not to have sex and than give them condoms. this doesn't work, children are first having sex in elementary school and some have regular sex in middle school. teenage pregancy is up, std's are up among children/teenagers,...

it's not working here how is it gonna work over there?

[TheModestAgnostic]

For someone who doesn't like religion, you have some seriously messed up priorities.

[stankinlincoln]

could you explain 2 things: 1 how the church is forcefully stopping the use of condoms and resulting in an increase in aids cases, and 2 how abstinence is a fairtale, as in how it does not stop on from acquiring aids?

no one is being forced, if you believe in personal responsibility than there is no one else to blame but that person. I give a little sympathy to those who can't understand but for everyone else it's their own fault. why blame everything on religion?

[TheModestAgnostic]

The church in Africa is frequently the only source of information. They advise people to abstain from sex. This is largely pointless, because people don't abstain. So plan B. Condoms. Condoms prevent pregnancy, the transmission of STD's, and the big one, AIDS. If you want to really help people, provide them with all the condoms you can find, then preach the abstinence.Besides there is nothing wrong with sex per se, it's the STD's and the pregnancy that is the problem not the sex.

[stankinlincoln]

sex is a prelude to std's/pregnancy.

you still haven't shown how the church is stopping the use or availibility(SP?) of condoms. prove this and you can properly apply genocidal stupidity, until than you can't.

[TheModestAgnostic]

Actually I have, repeatedly. Any objective observer can see this clearly. Let me give you a tip. Simply asserting that a person has said or done a thing, when they have clearly and expicitedly refuted you, simply makes you look like a fool. It is a peculiar habit of the religious, something to do with the cognitive corrosion caused by the constant action of faith bumping up against reality I think. Please stop it, you're becoming a bit of a troll.

[TheModestAgnostic]

Preaching "personal responsibility" to people who have nothing, coming from a citizen of the most pampered populace on earth is a bit rich, don't you think?

[stankinlincoln]

so only people from rich countries can make responsible choices?

If a poor african makes the choice to not have sex with someone until he/she finds out if that partner has a std or not is personal responsibility. The rich who came from poverty are responsible(and this can apply in any country)... you don't understand the concept of personal repsonsibility.

[TheModestAgnostic]

I understand it all right. I'm just not a self righteous prig when it comes to its application to others. It sounds to me like you have a lot of work to do on yourself before you start worrying about the sex lives of others. I'd suggest you focus on that.

[Lunchbox7]

I think it should be pointed out that the Church uses its position as the sole source of information to spread the lie that condoms have tiny holes in them that allow the AIDS virus to pass through the condom. This means that when a doctor or other person comes and tells them about condoms, they have already had their church tell them that it is a lie and a conspiracy of the West to help spread AIDS. This is the most harmful legacy of the Catholic Church's position.

[NShimaru]

Your voice is perfect for "informatic" videos, I love you

(good choice on using that girl as "atheist representative")

[Humanist12345]

Excellent!

[advancedatheist]

Christians want it both ways: They blame atheism for the violence and deprivation in 20th Century communist states, and they blame atheism for the current pacifism and social provisions for an easy life in the European Union.

[ekabe]

wow! extremely well done, more people need to see this.

[iqguy001]

well done!