Atheists destroy churches, attack the faithful

[Aridas]

There are whole books written about what metaphysical naturalists should do. See moral naturalism for example.

And that would be a far more specific subdivision(s) that is far better dealt with on its own terms, rather than with the excessively general terms you've been using. If you want to discuss those directly, refer to them directly and discuss them directly. It'll be overwhelmingly more productive if you're actually presenting something that can validly be worked with on its own terms, instead of something that one cannot do so with and requires grasping around to outside factors to be able to say anything even remotely of relevance. If I honestly wanted to discuss the beliefs of the Jains and their effects, I would definitely not start off by making wild over-generalizations about theists and persistently refuse to make it clear what, specifically, I was asking, even after rightly being criticized about the misuse of what theism actually means (yes, in some things, overgeneralizations are allowed to pass, especially when context provides sufficient information to determine something more specific being referred to, but even then such overgeneralizations are quite open to challenge). Only further clarifying it to a general subset of religions that Jainism is included in would rightly continue to draw criticism, for that matter. Of course, then there is the whole other issue of "Is that version of moral naturalism what's actually being employed by those choosing to repress other religions and free thought?" to answer when it comes to how directly relevant it would be for both that and a more specific version of it for the China discussion here.

Looks like people are talking past my point.

If they are, it looks to be entirely your fault for choosing to present your point in a way that cannot validly communicate it without invoking distinct fallacies, yet which also happens to be quite in line with some of the really dumb strains of anti-atheist propaganda... which, to be fair, is most of the actual strains of anti-atheist propaganda.

I'll make this my last post on this thread. Thanks everyone for your time!

Whether it's your last post or not, have a wonderful day!

 

[arthwollipot]

Yeah, actually you did.

No, I didn't. You're lying again. Do you never stop lying?

 

[The Big Dog]

Yeah, it is. But the idea that you think that this is characteristic of atheism rather than an activity of the totalitarian government of China is even more appalling.

No, I didn't. You're lying again. Do you never stop lying?

Yes, you did.

 

[arthwollipot]

Yes, you did.

Even quoting my exact words, you can't stop lying. I have shown, very patiently, I might add, exactly how and why your assertion of what I said is false, yet you continue to lie about it. You lie, you continue lying, and you refuse to stop lying.

 

[The Big Dog]

Even quoting my exact words, you can't stop lying. I have shown, very patiently, I might add, exactly how and why your assertion of what I said is false, yet you continue to lie about it. You lie, you continue lying, and you refuse to stop lying.

Yes, I quoted you exact words, and will continue to quote the words from your completely indefensible post again and again. all the gainsaying and accusing me of lying is never going to change that.

Say, you pulled a fairly lame flounce earlier in the thread, shame that didn't stick....

 

[arthwollipot]

Yes, I quoted you exact words, and will continue to quote the words from your completely indefensible post again and again. all the gainsaying and accusing me of lying is never going to change that.

While you continue to lie, indeed nothing will change.

Say, you pulled a fairly lame flounce earlier in the thread, shame that didn't stick....

What can I say? I'm weak against liars.

 

[The Big Dog]

While you continue to lie, indeed nothing will change.

What can I say? I'm weak against liars.

Uh huh.

Say, where do my recent posts fit in on the scale of appalling to even more appalling?

We know that my op was even more appalling than actual pervasive human rights abuse, so I am guessing my latest posts are much more appalling than human rights atrocities?

/Curious tho that you keep resurrecting this subject. I think most people would let one of the worst arguments in the history of this forum sink into obscurity. Oh well, I suspect you will falsely accuse me of being a liar again, because that is helping. Lolz

 

[arthwollipot]

Uh huh.

Say, where do my recent posts fit in on the scale of appalling to even more appalling?

Your most recent lies, you mean?

We know that my op was even more appalling than actual pervasive human rights abuse

This is a lie.

so I am guessing my latest posts are much more appalling than human rights atrocities?

No more or less appalling than continuing to lie.

Curious tho that you keep resurrecting this subject. I think most people would let one of the worst arguments in the history of this forum sink into obscurity.

You'd think your argument would sink, yes, but you keep banging on like a broken record.

Oh well, I suspect you will falsely accuse me of being a liar again, because that is helping. Lolz

You are a demonstrated liar, and this is clearly visible to everyone except you.

One more time for the kiddies at home.

China is cracking down on dissidents, including - but not limited to - "unauthorised" churches, and committing atrocities against its own people. This is indeed appalling.

The Big Dog asserts that China is doing this because of atheism, in the name of atheism, and because they are atheists. This is a lie. The Chinese are persecuting dissidents because the government of China is totalitarian and tyrannical and cannot abide dissent. So-called "unauthorised" churches - along with other non-religious groups - are perceived by this totalitarian government as sources of dissent, and are therefore persecuted.

The Big Dog blames atheism for these atrocities. This is appalling for the following reasons: First, The Big Dog is redirecting blame from the guilty (the Chinese totalitarian government) to the innocent (atheists). Second, The Big Dog is dehumanising and demonising atheism and atheists by blaming them for atrocities that are committed by the Chinese totalitarian government.

That The Big Dog can continue to do this straight-faced and with apparent sincerity is appalling. Furthermore, the fact that this is appalling does not make the atrocities committed by the Chinese totalitarian government on its own people any less appalling.

This is why The Big Dog is a liar. Are there any questions?

 

[The Big Dog]

Your most recent lies, you mean?

This is a lie.

No more or less appalling than continuing to lie.

You'd think your argument would sink, yes, but you keep banging on like a broken record.

You are a demonstrated liar, and this is clearly visible to everyone except you.

One more time for the kiddies at home.

China is cracking down on dissidents, including - but not limited to - "unauthorised" churches, and committing atrocities against its own people. This is indeed appalling.

The Big Dog asserts that China is doing this because of atheism, in the name of atheism, and because they are atheists. This is a lie. The Chinese are persecuting dissidents because the government of China is totalitarian and tyrannical and cannot abide dissent. So-called "unauthorised" churches - along with other non-religious groups - are perceived by this totalitarian government as sources of dissent, and are therefore persecuted.

The Big Dog blames atheism for these atrocities. This is appalling for the following reasons: First, The Big Dog is redirecting blame from the guilty (the Chinese totalitarian government) to the innocent (atheists). Second, The Big Dog is dehumanising and demonising atheism and atheists by blaming them for atrocities that are committed by the Chinese totalitarian government.

That The Big Dog can continue to do this straight-faced and with apparent sincerity is appalling. Furthermore, the fact that this is appalling does not make the atrocities committed by the Chinese totalitarian government on its own people any less appalling.

This is why The Big Dog is a liar. Are there any questions?

Oh, more than a few, but let’s start with the claim that blaming it on atheism practiced by unyielding atheists is a “lie” simply because one can not fathom that there are multiple causes, and that the same people that make up the leadership of the CCP are also atheist! So you are accusing the same people who are guilty (your word) are also “innocent” because they are atheist. Xi cannot be both guilty while wearing his authoritarian hat and innocent while wearing his atheist hat, and even if you disagree, that does not make my analysis a lie.

Next, you said that my analysis was “even more” appalling than the actual atrocities. “Even more”. Your words, not mine. By saying a post on the internet was “even more” appalling than the actual atrocities does diminish the seriousness of the actual atrocities.

“Even more appalling,” folks, gaze upon the desperate attempt to rewrite the actual argument, and judge for oneself who is telling the truth.

QED

 

[BadBoy]

I suspect, that if large groups of humanists, atheists and free thinkers started to get organized in a big way in China, started having rallies and marches and regular meetings across the country, they would be outlawed by the Chinese government too.

Your argument fails.

It is obviously biased and full of lambast and bluster and phony outrage.

Whoever sacrifices to any god other than the Lord must be destroyed.
Exodus 22:20. "Holy War" of the Crusades, Papal Inquisitions, the Puritans, Thought Crimes and the condemnation of Homosexuals

CHRISTIAN TOTALITARIANISM

FFS, the Chinese communist government is not much different from many large religions when we consider their history and development.

 

[The Big Dog]

I suspect, that if large groups of humanists, atheists and free thinkers started to get organized in a big way in China, started having rallies and marches and regular meetings across the country, they would be outlawed by the Chinese government too.

Your argument fails.

It is obviously biased and full of lambast and bluster and phony outrage.

Whoever sacrifices to any god other than the Lord must be destroyed.
Exodus 22:20. "Holy War" of the Crusades, Papal Inquisitions, the Puritans, Thought Crimes and the condemnation of Homosexuals

CHRISTIAN TOTALITARIANISM

FFS, the Chinese communist government is not much different from many large religions when we consider their history and development.

My argument fails because of hypothetical speculation and whataboutism? And then you cite several examples that could easily be characterized as the result of authoritarianism, and then concede that the CCP is not different than many large religions?

ATHEIST TOTALITARIANISM

Fantastic!

 

[arthwollipot]

Oh, more than a few, but let’s start with the claim that blaming it on atheism practiced by unyielding atheists is a “lie” simply because one can not fathom that there are multiple causes, and that the same people that make up the leadership of the CCP are also atheist!

So what? Some totalitarian dictators are Christian! That doesn't mean that they commit atrocities because of their Christianity, or in the name of Christianity.

Okay, bad analogy. There have definitely been Christian dictators who have committed atrocities because of Christianity, and in the name of Christianity. But The Big Dog will dismiss that as "whataboutism", which is a word that he apparently rather likes.

So you are accusing the same people who are guilty (your word) are also “innocent” because they are atheist.

WHOOSH! That was the sound of the point flying by at light speed over your head. Atheism isn't an ideology. People do not do things because of their atheism. The Chinese totalitarian government cracks down on religion because they want to control religion. They want to sinicise the church by making it part of the Chinese nation. There, they believe that they can control it. This is why they are not committing atrocities against the "sinicised" churches. This is why they are not committing atrocities against those Catholic bishops that they approve of.

Xi cannot be both guilty while wearing his authoritarian hat and innocent while wearing his atheist hat, and even if you disagree, that does not make my analysis a lie.

I'm not saying that he's both guilty and innocent. He's definitely 100% guilty. What I am saying is that his is guilty because of his authoritarianism, not because of his atheism. That he is an atheist is utterly irrelevant, as he would behave exactly the same way, and commit the same atrocities, if he were a Christian. And I know this because Christian dictators have always done that.

Next, you said that my analysis was “even more” appalling than the actual atrocities. “Even more”. Your words, not mine. By saying a post on the internet was “even more” appalling than the actual atrocities does diminish the seriousness of the actual atrocities.

“Even more appalling,” folks, gaze upon the desperate attempt to rewrite the actual argument, and judge for oneself who is telling the truth.

Very well, I will grant you this one concession, in the spirit of good faith, with no expectation whatsoever that you will reciprocate:

I withdraw the two words "even more" from my first post in this thread, and replace them with the word "also". My first post was off-the-cuff and at the time I didn't even remotely anticipate that The Big Dog would so desperately fixate on his own misinterpretation of those two words like a cat playing with a mouse. Nor did I expect that this thread would be dragged on for 52 pages. For additional clarity, and in order to correct that misinterpretation, again with no expectation that The Big Dog will cease misrepresenting the things I have been trying to say in this thread, I officially edit my post thus:

Yeah, it is. But the idea that you think that this is characteristic of atheism rather than an activity of the totalitarian government of China is also appalling.

Do I expect that this will placate or mollify The Big Dog? No. Do I expect that this will stop The Big Dog's lies? No. Do I expect that The Big Dog will even begin to understand the argument I have been making now that I have removed this distraction? No. Do I expect that The Big Dog will grant an equal, or even a lesser, concession to his opponents' arguments? No. But there it is.

 

[BadBoy]

My argument fails because of hypothetical speculation and whataboutism? And then you cite several examples that could easily be characterized as the result of authoritarianism, and then concede that the CCP is not different than many large religions?

ATHEIST TOTALITARIANISM

Fantastic!

that's funny. lol

My argument fails because of hypothetical speculation and whataboutism

No your argument fails just because it is stupid. I was using a hypothetical to try to illustrate how your argument sucks.

And then you cite several examples that could easily be characterized as the result of authoritarianism

Not really a very convincing response there. At worst it's word play, at best the difference between the two is small and in this case subjective too. Point is they were/would like to be/are regimes that want to control people and keep power. It's all bad. Not sure I would rather live under Chinese Communism or some kind of strict Orthodox Christian or Muslim regime. Preferably neither.

 

[The Big Dog]

I point out gross false equivalence in post.
Get called a liar.
Points out that the post says even more appalling
Post after post calls me a liar.
Highlights the fact that the post literally says "even more appalling"
Poster "officially" edits the post to make it just an outrageous false equivalence, calls TBD a liar anyway.

Oh well, progress of a sort, I guess

 

[Crossbow]

I point out gross false equivalence in post.
Get called a liar.
Points out that the post says even more appalling
Post after post calls me a liar.
Highlights the fact that the post literally says "even more appalling"
Poster "officially" edits the post to make it just an outrageous false equivalence, calls TBD a liar anyway.

Oh well, progress of a sort, I guess

So do you actually care anything about human rights?

 

[David Mo]

So you are accusing the same people who are guilty (your word) are also “innocent” because they are atheist. Xi cannot be both guilty while wearing his authoritarian hat and innocent while wearing his atheist hat, and even if you disagree, that does not make my analysis a lie.

Oh, my god! Now is a question of hats! He stews it and he eats it. He makes a mess and accuses others of being in a mess.

 

[The Big Dog]

Oh, my god! Now is a question of hats! He stews it and he eats it. He makes a mess and accuses others of being in a mess.

Take it up with your fellow travelers who appears to believe in the dual nature of tyrants like Xi, the mean authoritarian side, and the pure atheist side.

Religious Authoritarianism? You better believe that is about the religion, boo religion!
Atheist Authoritarianism? All about the authoritarianism, shock horror at suggesting that pogroms like those going on today by Unyielding marxist Atheists have anything to do with atheism!

Dream thread

/by the way, remind me to tell the League of Militant Atheists, or Xi's cadre of Unyielding Marxist Atheists or the several Official Atheist States that they don't have an ideology. I read it on the iSkep!

 

[Doubt]

https://thediplomat.com/2018/10/no-place-for-real-marxists-in-communist-china/

Once again we can point out that the current government in China is Marxist in name only.

This has been point out many times in this thread. If the Chinese government is Marxist while pursing a capitalist economy then we must also conclude that North Korea is a democracy because they say so.

Also:

Russia is really a democracy because they say so.
Bill Clinton did not have sex with that woman because he said so.
Donald Trump is still trying to sell steaks because he said so.
All religions are actually true even when they conflict with each other because they claim to be the one true religion.
Charles Mason was really Jesus because he said so.

Or maybe the person claiming that China is Marxist could show us how a country pursing an active capitalist economy is still somehow Marxist other than deliberately acting gullible and show us evidence beyond assertion.

 

[The Big Dog]

https://thediplomat.com/2018/10/no-place-for-real-marxists-in-communist-china/

Once again we can point out that the current government in China is Marxist in name only.

This has been point out many times in this thread. If the Chinese government is Marxist while pursing a capitalist economy then we must also conclude that North Korea is a democracy because they say so.

Also:

Russia is really a democracy because they say so.
Bill Clinton did not have sex with that woman because he said so.
Donald Trump is still trying to sell steaks because he said so.
All religions are actually true even when they conflict with each other because they claim to be the one true religion.
Charles Mason was really Jesus because he said so.

Or maybe the person claiming that China is Marxist could show us how a country pursing an active capitalist economy is still somehow Marxist other than deliberately acting gullible and show us evidence beyond assertion.

Atheists destroy churches, attack the faithful

 

[kellyb]

Atheists destroy churches, attack the faithful

See, that's actually true. No argument from me there.