Atheists destroy churches, attack the faithful

Dr. Keith said:
That's a bit unfair. I think the agenda is more geared towards protecting the reputation of the church over any individual, no matter how innocent.

It's not the rape that is shocking, there are bad people in every group. It is the systematic cover-up over decades that allowed the bad actors to continue to prey on parishioners and their children so long as they were able to keep it quiet enough. That is what is shocking.
Click to expand...

Well yeah, The point was to make an equally exaggerated and unfounded statement.

I think I needed to add scare quotes and italicised words.
 
TBD: Please answer these questions.

halleyscomet said:
You claim that atheism is responsible for the crimes committed in China. What is it about atheism that, in your opinion, might be giving rise to such behavior?

Why do you believe Chinese atheists are committing such atrocities when atheists in, for example, Norway are not?
Click to expand...
 
Aw, c'mon! It's the brown-suits raping and pillaging! The correlation is almost 100%! Any kind if -ist plus brown suits is almost 100% certain to be a rapist and pillager.

SAD!
 
Dr. Keith said:
I think it speaks volumes that you think that sentence shows a causal connection. It doesn't even assert one.

The party allows religions that are loyal to the party, that seems like a very poor form of militant atheism if you ask me. But its seems a pretty strong authoritarian regime.
Click to expand...

The Big Dog said:
They are cracking down on all religions. I have posted the new internet restrictions, by way of example

At this point, i will just start citing post numbers because the same uniformed arguments that i have destroyed are just getting repeated.
Click to expand...

The Big Dog said:
post 606
Click to expand...

Here's post 606:

The Big Dog said:
As awful as these whataboutism arguments are, I know that are all aware, because I have repeatedly posted articles discussing it, that the Chinese (oops, "racist" lololol) have specifically stated that that this crackdown on religious in China is directly related to its policy officially readopted in 2016 to sinicize religion and bring it under the jackboot of the Official Atehist State.

As noted previously, this is not at all a minor persecution, in fact the internet controls tighten the noose on every single person of religious faith in China.
Click to expand...

Can you see what's missing? Oh yes, it's the links to the new internet restrictions. What we have there is just TBD saying he's right again.
Without being right.
 
The Big Dog said:
Ugh, gish gallops galores!
Click to expand...

No. Three people asking you about the same point, independently, and you not answering them. That's not a Gish Gallop.

The Big Dog said:
Sure you don't know what whataboutim means.
Click to expand...

No, I really do. Others have also pointed out to you that you are misusing this term. Simply repeating that you're right won't change that.
I suggest you look it up, and look up Gish Gallops while you're at it.

The Big Dog said:
And:

"Now, as for the Muslims in detention, I don't know if you're aware of this, but this is not just a religious issue."

I did, and I agree, IN FACT, I cited an expert saying it was because of militant atheism and nationalism.
Click to expand...

Which, as has been said before, is not what your expert said.

The Big Dog said:
HELLLOOOO did you see that HELLLOOOOOOO!!!!
Click to expand...

Oh, don't be such a silly-billy. You ignored all of us because the point was difficult. No need for this huffiness.

The Big Dog said:
Lets take an additional look:

"The problem with Uighur population is not confined to religious beliefs."

"Not confined to."

Jeeoers that sounds just like what TBD explained: "A U.S.-based expert on religion in China on Wednesday attributed the crackdown to Xi’s “atheist ideology” as well as surging nationalism."

GOLLY, it sounds like you are agreeing with me, it is due, at least in part to atheism.
Click to expand...

Alas, no. Nice attempt at cherry-picking, but it won't wash. My point is, as I'm sure you're well aware (because I told you so), there is a marked difference between the way the Chinese government is treating the Uighurs, and the way it is treating the Hui, even though both groups are Muslim.
The difference is their ethnicity. The Uighurs resent being part of China, and the massive Han immigration that has left them a minority in their own land. The Hui are Han, and quite happy to remain in China. For the Uighurs, Islam is a part of their identity (strange: I could swear I said that before somewhere), and a focus for their discontent. Repressing this is a tool for repressing the Uighurs and their drive for independence, freedom and self-expression.
As has been pointed out ad nauseam, what we have here is a totalitarian government cracking down on threats to its control. If those threats are religious, it cracks down on those particular religions- not the non-threatening (in its eyes) ones. If the threats are nationalistic, it cracks down on those: Hong Kong is another example of this. Where religions are not a threat, they are left alone.
So no, we don't agree at all, and it shows the weakness of your arguments that you are having to resort to such feeble and obvious sophistry.

The Big Dog said:
And if y'all can't figure out the difference between the leader of Sweden or Norway or and the head of the ******* Chinese Communist party and the relative difference in power, I ain't gonna be able to help you.
Click to expand...

So the difference is the totalitarian nature of the government, not the atheist nature of the govenrment. Well, finally we agree on sonething!

The Big Dog said:
(although if the atheists in Sweden had the same power, well, take a look at Albania)
Click to expand...

Albania? What's Albania got to do with this? A quick check on Wiki, reveals that, under a totalitarian regime, threats to state power, like religions, were attacked. This is true of the Communist regime but also true of the Ottoman rule. Oppression by both religious and non-religious governments, united by their autocratic nature. Since the end of the USSR, despite being largely atheist or non-religious, no such oppression has occured. Was it your intention to back up the argument we agreed on above? Good job, TBD.

The Big Dog said:
Say, folks read my posts before telling me that I have not explained it in detail.
Click to expand...

I note one partial quotation from my post, and none whatsoever from those of the other two posters. Not what I'd call 'detail', that's for sure.
 
Cosmic Yak said:
Can you see what's missing? Oh yes, it's the links to the new internet restrictions. What we have there is just TBD saying he's right again.
Without being right.
Click to expand...

The links to the article was previously posted in this thread and are trivially easy for anyone who cared and were not just trying to score points.

Let me spoon feed you
 
Surely the answer is simple.

Just pray for God to stop the Chinese Government - and there you go...

After all, isn't there a parallel in the OT?

God had been "hardening Pharoah's heart" for a while, but eventually he got him to release the Israelites.
 
Rincewind said:
Surely the answer is simple.

Just pray for God to stop the Chinese Government - and there you go...

After all, isn't there a parallel in the OT?

God had been "hardening Pharoah's heart" for a while, but eventually he got him to release the Israelites.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but that will not work.

I told 'The Big Dog' some time ago that if his god was really so powerful, then his god would be able to protect his own followers.

And then 'The Big Dog' responded with some inane quote from St. Thomas Aquinas about how oppressed people are blessed by god.

Therefore, this god 'The Big Dog' worships so much will not do anything to help his followers when his followers are being repressed by non-followers, however the followers will still be blessed by his god all the same.

Yes, I know, this line of logic sure does not make any sense to me either.
 
Crossbow said:
Sorry, but that will not work.

I told 'The Big Dog' some time ago that if his god was really so powerful, then his god would be able to protect his own followers.

And then 'The Big Dog' responded with some inane quote from St. Thomas Aquinas about how oppressed people are blessed by god.

Therefore, this god 'The Big Dog' worships so much will not do anything to help his followers when his followers are being repressed by non-followers, however the followers will still be blessed by his god all the same.

Yes, I know, this line of logic sure does not make any sense to me either.
Click to expand...

Or to anyone.

At any rate, I've given this thread way more attention than it merits, have fun.

ETA; The gosateizm tag gave me a bingo.
 
Last edited:
Crossbow said:
Sorry, but that will not work.

I told 'The Big Dog' some time ago that if his god was really so powerful, then his god would be able to protect his own followers.

And then 'The Big Dog' responded with some inane quote from St. Thomas Aquinas about how oppressed people are blessed by god.

Therefore, this god 'The Big Dog' worships so much will not do anything to help his followers when his followers are being repressed by non-followers, however the followers will still be blessed by his god all the same.

Yes, I know, this line of logic sure does not make any sense to me either.
Click to expand...


I think it means that TBD is drowning, and only TBD is to blame:

The Big Dog said:
He already has

Human Rights Watch and others are exposing the wickedness of the Chinese and their apologists.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom