[Ronin Lore]

  When I first found the subject “Vampires v. Christianity,” started by Raziel, I thought, great, both sides of  who I am are going to be discussed.”  I was appalled by  the results.  The whole thread can be summed up by the four words, "I'm Better Than You.”

  One fallacy  brought forward is “Religion is responsible for more deaths than any other cause on Earth.” This is usually put forward by Atheists. In the atheistic point of view, the only true humanitarians are atheists.  After all, who can hear the names Joseph Stalin, and Mao Zedong with out thinking about all good they have done. And let's not forget the angel of Cambodia, Saloth Sar, better known as Pol Pot.

  Consider  religious personalities. Now who was more power hungry than Mahatma Gandhi, and Mother Teresa was only in it for the money.

  In my humble opinion, “Politics” is the cause  of the vast majority of preventable deaths. In most wars, religion is just used as an excuse. An example of this is the wars in the Middle East. It is claimed that the Arabs fight for Islam, but the truth is they fight for tribalism. Tribalism is the code that preceded Islam, and still is practiced today. Tribalism includes vendettas, and honor killings, (and belly dancing too.) If cornered on the subject, they will admit that such acts are condemned by Islam, but they must do them, or loose face.

  A tradition of political conflict is pointing out the failings of the opposition. This comes from the idea that if you expose the evil in another, you purge it from yourself. This is why evangelical preachers are always finding evil in almost everything, but they are not the only ones. When was the last time you heard a Republican say anything nice about  President Obama.

  Once you strip away the rhetoric, both sides of a conflict appear to be identical. You get the same types of people, doing the same kind of activities, all in the name of supremacy.

  On a more spiritual note, why does almost every religion treat life as an endless survivor episode? The only purpose is to prove that you are more worthy than another to reach heaven. As if the finish line was the only thing of importance. What if there was something more.

  According to the Tibetan Book O The Dead, the soul of the departed have a choice. If one wishes, they can become a god, but the Book advises against this. The best advise is for the soul to be reborn as a human. Fore it is only as a human that the soul has a chance to learn, and grow.

  The Odenists are preparing for Ragnarök, the battle at the end of the world. Each conducts themselves in a manner to improve their skills, and abilities, marshal and otherwise, until they are worthy to be taken at the end of their lives by the Valkyrie to Valhalla to wait the sound of Gjallarhorn.

  The concept of a purpose after death is a new to most religions, but consider the universe. There is purpose within purposes, and reasons within reasons. As a Christian, I can’t see my ultimate purpose being chanting “Yea God” for all eternity. There has to be more.

[KubeSix]

  When I first found the subject “Vampires v. Christianity,” started by Raziel, I thought, great, both sides of  who I am are going to be discussed.”  I was appalled by  the results.  The whole thread can be summed up by the four words, "I'm Better Than You.”

  One fallacy  brought forward is “Religion is responsible for more deaths than any other cause on Earth.” This is usually put forward by Atheists. In the atheistic point of view, the only true humanitarians are atheists.  After all, who can hear the names Joseph Stalin, and Mao Zedong with out thinking about all good they have done. And let's not forget the angel of Cambodia, Saloth Sar, better known as Pol Pot.

  Consider  religious personalities. Now who was more power hungry than Mahatma Gandhi, and Mother Teresa was only in it for the money.

I laughed. I really did. First you say you're "appalled" by Christians and vampires arguing over who's better, then you defend religion and attack atheism using isolated cases of HUMAN stupidity. You named 3 horrible cases of massacre, yet ignored the fact that people have been killing over religion for millions of years. Because of course, how can we mention the Vatican or any other religious governing group without thinking that they don't have the blood of millions of innocents on their hands. How hypocritical...

Basically, you were butthurt because your religion got attacked and decided to make a thread of equal idiocy. Good job. No, seriously, good job. (You also decided to mention you were part of both parties, yet never mentioned the second one in your argumentation.)

  In my humble opinion, “Politics” is the cause  of the vast majority of preventable deaths. In most wars, religion is just used as an excuse. An example of this is the wars in the Middle East. It is claimed that the Arabs fight for Islam, but the truth is they fight for tribalism. Tribalism is the code that preceded Islam, and still is practiced today. Tribalism includes vendettas, and honor killings, (and belly dancing too.) If cornered on the subject, they will admit that such acts are condemned by Islam, but they must do them, or loose face.

Really now? Alright, let's conveniently ignore the genocides, wars, crusades, inquisitions and murders caused by religion over the years, some not even a century old, and let's also conveniently forget the aforementioned fact that humans have been killing each other over religion since prehistorical times. Let's only consider the most recent large-scale religion-related act of war, shall we?

Tell me, why do the extremists fight? Oh, I dunno, their leader probably told them he wanted to screw the world over to become powerful. NO! They fight because they firmly believe what their leaders tell them, that they'll go to heaven and all that if they strap a bomb to themselves and go blow up a few people. Without religion as a cover, those leaders would have nearly no followers.

You also said somewhere up there that according to the "atheistic point of view", "the only true humanitarians are atheists." Atheistic point of view? What? You're making a mistake most religious folk make: you're talking about atheism as if it were some sort of organized, uniform group. There is NO point of view common to all atheists other than that there is no such thing as a greater power. That is the definition of atheism and the only way atheists are related. If you want to talk about antireligion, then that's another subject. It's funny how many religious people i meet who think this way. They need to get a clue.

-

If you want to discuss religion vs. atheism, stop having such a narrow-minded point of view and think a little. Not to mention narrow-mindedness is usually the reason behind religious conflicts. There are s**theads on both sides and heroes too.

[Ronin Lore]

  I finally figured out why you made me angry, you argue like my mother. You only use the points that support your point of view, and ignore the rest. I come down pretty hard on Christians, and I also point out positive aspects about other unchristian religions.

  When I first read the Vampires v. Christian thread, it seemed to me to degenerate to a argument between Atheists, and Christians. After rereading it, I find not so much, but the statement "religion is responsible for more deaths than any other cause on Earth" was used. Therefore the example of the three "Angles" was appropriate because religion was not a reason behind of those conflicts. If you go back in history, you will find that the vast majority started with political motives.

  If you don't believe that atheists are not as annoying as Christians, than I invite you to go to this site, and do a search for the word "Atheist"

                            http://www.motivatedphotos.com/home.aspx?src=nav

Actually..... Religions have been political tools too......

Now, I'm not debating which is better, atheism, religion, politics, ninja's or pirates.

Think about it. Each of these have the potential for great good or great evil.

Religion whether there really are gods, spirits,angels, demons, asuras, devas, the AEsir, Frost giants, rules,  and raptures a coming. They were merely created as children stories which give out the values and characteristics that were held in esteem by said culture/society.
A way to teach by inspiration rather than by dictation.(irregardless about whether they actually happened.)

However........... Society is headed by leaders yes? And as such leaders are still human beings who have needs and wants of their own.
The alpha dog, chieftain, king, high priest of a social order pretty much dictates what and how things are done........ with regard to laws set down by their peers, bosses, ancestors whatever.

Everyone has an agenda. Whether they truly believe the teachings or whether it is in someway advantageous to them, they do it because it is beneficial to them. Jihad Suicide bombers want their black eyed virgins/crystal clear raisins, and Daddy wants a new pair o shoes.

Everything is political. Whether your motives help the many, or just yourself. You do things because you believe they will be advantageous to you in someway. Whether they fulfill your need to be loyal to your country and your creed, to save mothers from ignorance and hardship (momma Theresa wrote about how she couldn't feel god no more btw..... maybe it had something to do with her decision to disallow abortions for those special cases), or even acting out because in your youth your paintings got rejected ya crazy austrian nutjob!(yes i know that that isn't the real reason but it is seriously entertaining to poke fun at for me.)

People are people because of the mistakes they make, not in spite of them.

Btw? Hitler wanted to make allies of the british and gave his suggestion they should kill ghandi......... His approach while inhumane, would be accepted by societies at war simply because you can't have rebellion of whatever kind during a war. You end it as swiftly as you can, and damn the  consequences, lest it be exploited by the enemy.
 Irregardless of the moral implications, had ghandi been killed early, his followers would not have a leader as charismatic as him and thus his pacifist ways would have been rendered moot....... Then there's the fact that some idiots would go nuts over his death and do things anathema to his teachings causing what was a very tense situation to deteriorate into something rather messy.

 


Alright i guess this tangent of mine is simply saying, that though every cloud has a silver lining, its still a cloud.   And rainbows no matter how pretty are still rain.
(no they're not! a rainbow an arc of light separated into bands of color that appears when the Sun's rays are refracted and reflected by drops of mist or rain. Not the water itself.)

FiNE! Rainbows are only possible because it rained! Are you happy now you Pedantic little nitpicker!??

(no. Buy me a flower.)


GAHHHH!H!!!!!!

[KubeSix]

  I finally figured out why you made me angry, you argue like my mother. You only use the points that support your point of view, and ignore the rest.

Oi, dude... That's what you did.

You pointed out three examples of horrible acts caused by atheists, then pointed out two highly spiritual people who gave all they had to helping others. You never, NOT EVEN ONCE, mentioned the fact that there are as many atheist people capable of such deeds as religious people and you never, again NOT EVEN ONCE, mentioned the fact that there have been as many horrible acts caused by religion as there have been by atheists. Ergo, your arguments were those of an ignorant.

I simply pointed out the things you conveniently forgot to mention; I never once said your arguments were wrong. Yes, Stalin was an asshole and caused millions of death and Mao was a pretty big douche too. Yes, Gandhi was a cool bro and Mother Theresa helped lots of people. When the fark did I say the contrary? Reading comprehension, Ronin.

I forgot to add, your last argument is completely invalid, not just because it doesn't pertain to the main subject, but also because I was not arguing about religion vs. atheism. In fact, my thesis was not "Atheists are the best humanists," or anything of the sort; my thesis was "Your arguments are ignoring a major part of the facts in this case and you've only given half-truths as arguments," to which i could add "You, having a sentimental connection to the group you are defending, cannot give fully objective arguments as it would be necessary in a proper argument and so, arguing against a third party in the subject only makes you look bad."

P.S. It's too bad, but I probably don't like your mother; she argues like you.

............... We could probably cut out most of the the crap here and just get both of you to say


Ronin: You sound like my mother!

Kube: No U!
 
 


And it  wouldn't make a difference.

Look both of you have valid points.
In fact, Religion is often blamed to be a negative influence. However, though only its proponents & members sing its praises. They have done many many good things in the world too.
Uniting people in war, feeding the hungry, giving people an alternative to violent/backwards cultural practices...... Though it does have some of its own like self flagelation....XD
And Atheism is often frowned upon because it has produced such intelligently brutal people, despite the fact that it doesn't take atheism to produce such megalomaniacs.......

Do things for yourself, for god, or for country. It doesn't change the fact that you did things.


so calm down and tone down the hostility will ya? Its getting me all excited and i might say something completely illogical as a result.

[jordyn]

I'm still lost on the christian vampire, but i've never understood the claim of people being supernatural creatures, half or whole.

God gives me more proof.

........................... this thread confuses me.

[Muerte]

........................... this thread confuses me.

  Not that hard to do.

  What I wounder is what His fellowChristians think about having a Vampire amongst them.  Or if they even are aware of it.

ur crazy vampires arent real grow up!!

and blow me

[Muerte]

ur crazy vampires arent real grow up!!

and blow me

  First warning.  We respect others here.  If you wish to express your opinion then by all means do so HOWEVER you need to do so in a professional manner.  If you had bothered to read the rules you would have knoticed this.

  6.  Abusive behaviour: Do not be rude, insulting, offensive, snide, obnoxious or abusive towards other members.


  I suggest you read the rules before you make another post.  This is a public warning and I will also be P.M.ing you a warning along with a CC to the Guardian.

ur crazy vampires arent real grow up!!

and blow me

He is off to a real bad start M


werewolfman, I would chose your words wisely from now on if I were you

ur crazy vampires arent real grow up!!

and blow me

You want a person with fangs to give you a BJ? ............. I think you gonna need to put a band aid on that, man. *shakes head*

Maybe some alcohol to disinfect it. Who knows what kinda diseases vamps carry...... but that would hurt wouldn't it.

 

[KubeSix]

so calm down and tone down the hostility will ya? Its getting me all excited and i might say something completely illogical as a result.

But that just makes me want to keep going and get really hostile D:

In all seriousness, though. I admit I might have been slightly out of line. I refuse to back down, though.

I'll try more politely now:

Ronin: The reason I replied to your rant was because you viewed the problem only from religion's perspective and refused to acknowledge there is a second side to the coin. You used isolated cases of violence against atheists, then provided isolated cases of beneficial religious people. What I did was point out the fact that religion has committed atrocities and atheism has also brought great things to the world. You then said I was the one who was seeing only one side of the issue, yet you refused to acknowledge the wrongs of religion. What I did was not argue that atheism was better; in fact I merely provided the other side of the medal to demonstrate how both religious and atheist people can be equally horrible or beneficial.

I also said you obviously had an emotional connection to religion and that made your arguments invalid. That, I won't take back. You see, religious and atheist folks alike tend to dislike each other for some foolish reason. When they argue with one another, they usually ignore the wrongs of the side they defend and the rights of the other. See, I never said Stalin wasn't a murderer; in fact I acknowledged that. That's why religious people, like you, should really leave atheists do their little thing and atheists should do exactly the same. In the meantime, us who just don't give a fark, will keep on not giving a fark. (Unless, like me, they like showing people how much their vision of reality is warped. Those pesky little bastards are just gonna keep doing it.)

You can't view the world as black and white. There is no black and there is no white. Right or wrong, good or evil. Those things, they don't exist. In his way, Stalin was the good guy, just as for some, Gandhi was the villain. Everything is shades of grey, constantly shifting to fit one's point of view. So saying one is more of a humanist than the other is foolish in the end. Take a soldier on the battlefield, for example. He killed to protect many other lives, yes? Yet, he killed brothers, sisters, fathers, mothers, sons, daughters and cousins to achieve his ideal. In doing so, he took a life and ruined many others. That guy he just shot, maybe he had a newborn son waiting for him at home, yes? So who's the bad guy now? If a country attacks another for, say, its natural resources. Most people would say the leader of that country is evil and so are the soldiers aiding the cause. They'll say the other country is in the right. Yet, without those resources, the first country's population will perish, victim to famine, sickness and poverty. So the leaders are both protecting their people against a different enemy.

Who's the protagonist, who's the antagonist? Nobody; there's no rule dictating those things down on this chunk of earth, just people justifying their actions with insane little mind games. Belief, or lack thereof, in a higher power, often takes the role of the mind game. It doesn't matter what mask you wear; one way or another you're wrong in someone's eyes and that makes you the villain. And the more you believe yourself to be the hero, the more you seem villainous to that other person.

I'm tired of writing long replies; I'll stop now.

[jordyn]

i just fail to understand why people insist on forcing to entirely different and contrary concepts into a harmonious  contradictory mix of personal belief outraged when those with less confusing beliefs fail to understand.

vampirism to me is human condition, in which case i suppose a christian vampire could make sense...but then are they really a vampire or just anemic with a sensitivity to light and making it a lifestyle?

now i'm curious as to what denomination would be most supportive of a vampire among their flock?

my vote would go to universalists, in their quirky sort of way.