Gwazi Magnum

An Old Veteran's Past

I remember... Storming the forums, Bronies bombing us from everywhere.
My brothers and sisters dying left and right.

Who else here remembers the days of the Brony war?

I made a religion (still working on a name)

ASTA said Boerd doesn't 'win' any debates. His tried-and-true tactic of bringing up irelevant points and his persistent use of backwards logic only helps to reinforce his established title as an excellent arguer. A debater he is not.

I know. :P
I didn't mean to suggest even that he had won debates before. Just that he wasn't going to be starting anytime soon if he keeps up his current tactics.

Protagonist said
1. I like to think of Atheism as a type of belief system. For example, Polytheism, Monotheism, Atheism. It has its own groups that can be divided as Christianity and Islam. I wouldn't say that Atheism itself is a lack of beliefs per say. That would make one an agnostic, not an Atheist. An Atheist has to actively believe in no God. The common counter-argument is that Stamp Collecting isn't a hobby. However, what you do instead of collecting stamps is. If all you do in your free time is lay on the couch, then you still have a hobby that amounts to doing as little as possible. Atheism refers to an umbrella of things that can be called religions that lack a central deity.

1. This is a point that many (if not the majority) of atheists and christians alike tend to get confused.
Agnostic and Atheist are not separate lack of belief systems. They are separate scales on the same table.

Example

There is a similliar 'table' in a game called D&D, the alignment system. Feel free to skip this first paragraph btw if you're already familiar with it. If not this first paragraph while explain it quickly.
In D&D your alignment is dependant on two different scales, one being Good/Evil (Yes, Morality is subjective in IRL. But this example is strictly to highlight the table system) essentially addressing one's moral values. The other scale is Chaotic/Lawful, addressing one's own discipline, respect for rules, laws and authority. So you can get cases such as Batman (Lawful Good) because he fights for the good of Gotham city (Good), but always takes them in to the police, and has hard codes/guidelines in never killing people (Lawful. Debatebly this can be knocked to Neutral since he is essentially a renegade). Then you get someone like the Joker, clearly evil and messed up (evil) and completely unpredictable and wild (Chaotic). But Lawful =/= Good cause you get cases like Hitler who although seen as the most evil man in history had a system, he followed codes, he didn't kill simply to kill. All deaths were for a purpose, twisted purpose mind you, but there was always cause and reason. And Chaotic =/= Evil cause you can get cases like Robin Hood, good cause he always tries to help the poor, but chaotic in that he does it by outright opposing and rebelling the rich and authority.

Now, why did I just go D&D there? Because Agnostic and Atheist work on a similliar scaling system. But instead of being one's morality and obedience the scales are one's beliefs, and how firm one is in those beliefs.
Starting with the belief scale, in this case the two ends in question will be Atheist and Theist. Both I'm assuming are fairly obvious by now, one is a lack of a religion/belief in terms of organized worships, church, specific gods etc (atheists are still able to believe in stuff such as ghosts, dragons, mermaids, UFO probing aliens etc) and the other being a set belief/practice of a god, may it be Christian, Muslim etc.

Then we have the scale of how firm one is. Now in the simplest form one side of Agnostic and the other is Gnostic. But in truth there are more inbetweens and variance in this. But we only need the simple version here to get my point across. Agnostic is where one is casual, relaxed and/or questioning. You can have both Agnostic Atheists and Agnostic Theist. The Agnostic Atheism will tend to be like "I don't know if there's a god or not. But I don't really believe one currently" and is far more likely to avoid religious debates than take part in them, unless if their objective is purely to learn and try to understand both God and a lack of god better. While an Agnostic Theist is basically your casual religious person, they're the kinds who may pray at night but never bring their religion into day to day life. They might not even see the bible was a legitimate source, but they do have a belief in a God regardless of the fact. But it plays a rather small/insignificant role in their lives.

Then there's Gnostic, this is your extremes (which I would probably fall under on the atheist side). Your Gnostic Atheists are going to be your Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Carl Sagans, Neil Tysons, Bill Nye's etc. You not only don't believe in God but have some sort of problem or issue with it, and will go out of there way to debate it, prove it wrong and try to get it removed from places such as schools. They not only don't believe in a God, they are very sure, firm and vocal about it. While your Gnostic Theists will be those ISIS, Westboro Baptists, Door to door Jehovah witnesses, Or any parent who threatened their child with Hell and/or going to church. These are the ones who try to preach and force their religion on others. Try to declare a "War on God" is taking place, strongly fight for "In God we trust" to stay on the bill. And in more extreme cases, picket funerals and cut off the heads of little children.

Note: Like I said earlier, the table is in fact more complex than this. So cases such as Jehovah Witnesses and ISIS are in fact separated and not treated at the same level of extremism.

So in regards to when you said:

Protagonist said An Atheist has to actively believe in no God.

That would be the case for a Gnostic Atheist, but not an Agnostic Atheist.

Protagonist said 2. I'm misusing the term Communist somewhat, I should be using the term "Marxist". Whatever anyone else tells you, it would likely not be heretical to support an economic system where all wealth is controlled by the state, though it might not be intuitive, either. However, being being a Christian is impossible, for similar reasons that one cannot be a Christian Objectivist. It's an axiom of Marxism that God does not exist,

2. There are cases of Christians who completely dismiss the Bible mind you. So although Christianity and Marxism may be a contradiction, there are contradictions in religion all the time. It's not going to stop someone to adopt a political view that conflicts with their religion. Though granted these are in most cases the Agnostic Theists I described above, this is far less likely to happen with a Gnostic.

Neobullseye said Actually, I'm a he, but thanks for the support anyway :P

Ah, sorry.
The avatar threw me off. :P

1 2 111 2 2

code gary said
man. i bet i love doctor who much more than you fucking do.

Maybe, but I still beat you to Gallifrey.

Random bitching about the games industry

darkwolf687 said
Nah man, bitching gets us everywhere :DIt sucks. Its like the big companies have decided that the players get to be quality assurance :( indie developers cant get away with it, I bet that has something to do with it lol

True. But Indies also don't need to deal with publishers like EA.

Do you keep RPing a secret? Is it safe?

Kidd said Yeah, I agree. Though it doesn't generally come up with a lot of my friends because I'm just not interested in talking about it with people who just don't get it? I think a majority of my friends know I role play, but talking to them about it is probably the biggest waste of breath, lol. So for a lot of people it might not be "I'm worried about getting judged." It could be "this is a hobby that isn't fun to talk to people about who don't do it." And I think that goes for most hobbies and interests: you can really only have in depth an engaging conversations about them with people who get it. Case and point: sports go over my head so my friends who like them don't talk about it with me. And they shouldn't because I won't be able to follow so I won't care and it'd be so one sided. Only time this is an exception is when someone seems interested in trying it out themselves, at least for me.

Oh I get that completely, sometimes it's just not relevant or no mutual interest.

Maybe it's just the people I've been exposed to, because normally when I see someone go "I don't tell people I RP" they don't mean it in a "It's just not relevant" manner like you mean but they mean it in a "If I say so, people will think I'm weird. And make fun of people! I can't let the outside world now! It will end me!" sort of way.

Rica said Then again I've been roleplaying since my Habbo/Yahoo! chat days when I was just a kid so it's nothing new to them at this point.

Which habbo?
If it was Habbo.ca I might have ran into you, I was known as Uzamaki.
I had a reputation for pissing off the heads of both the Naruto and Star Wars RP communities.

I made a religion (still working on a name)

So Boerd said Fine then. If you are allowed to "No True Scotsman" an atheistic ideology,

No one is pulling a "No True Scotsman" of anything. The issue is you're making the assumption that atheism and communism is the same thing, which it isn't.
You're taking the actions of a government system and then claiming that applies to anyone without a religion, two unrelated thing.

So Boerd said If Atheists murdered people explicitly for believing God, what caused them to do it?

I've already told you, the Communist Heads killed people for holding loyalty to something other than them.
That's what caused the killings, not some sort of "Abolish Religion in the name of there not being a god!".

So Boerd said Let me dodge these semantics by instead proposing that lack of religion makes you more violent. Now, there is no way around Communism's crimes. Let's do an approximate deaths per capita since the Enlightenment, when there began to be more than a few atheists, and you will find those without religion are responsible for more deaths in absolute terms, to say nothing of proportional.

Once against Communism =/= Atheism.
So approximate death per capita between Atheism and Religion is rather one sided.

However, if we were to use your reasoning then Fascism sounds as Christian/Religious.
If you're allowed to claim Communism is Atheist because Stalin and Mao were atheists (Even though Communism could easily have a Christian head since nothing in it requires a lack of a religion) then I in turn should (wrongfully) be allowed to claim that Facism is Christian because Hitler was a Christian.

So add up the deaths by Hitler with every Crusade, Inquisition, Raid/Murder/Slavery justified with religion, all the Religious terrorist groups etc?
The numbers are still not in your favor, so even with your flawed reasoning the numbers are against you.

Protagonist said 1. It depends on the religion. Atheism doesn't state there is a god, but it does mean there's no competition, either. However, in a monotheistic religion, there's a finite number of spots open. Christianity itself actually tends to invert the cult of personality, as they tend to be paranoid about the whole Antichrist thing.

2. You still have to address what people follow INSTEAD of religion, and if following that would be truly better. In the example of Communism, the answer is decidedly not. Sure, religious people have done awful things, too. However, using Bin Laden to make judgements about religion in general is basically the same as using Stalin to make judgements about Atheism. The problem isn't religion itself, it's that there's multiple competing worldviews that can't stand each other. Sure, everyone being Atheists would end most problems associated with religion, but so would everyone being Catholic.And one more thing: Atheists often claim moral superiority to Theists on the grounds that they don't commit the same crimes they do. Even if we were to assume this is true, that might not be enough. While people do bad things in the name of their religions, they also do lots of good. There's a reason why lots of hospitals are named after saints. Has anyone ever done anything good in the name of there not being a God?

1. Oh yea, Atheism is facing division (Oddly enough, considering atheism simply means without religion. So it should be impossible to divide a non-existent) as a result of Atheism+.
Apparently feminism has learned the secret's of dividing 0. :/

2. Though once again, one can be Christian and still a communist. Which granted is suicidal if Stalin or Mao is in charge, could be completely different if a Christian were to made head. The difference between Stalin and Osama is that Stalin did it in the name of Communism/Personal power and authority, political motivation. Osama did it in the same of his religion and anger at America for getting involved in their business. A combination of political and religious motivation. Now, Stalin being an atheist and being responsible for so many deaths does beyond a doubt prove that atheists are capable of great violent crimes (which I was never arguing against btw). But it does not prove that him being an atheist was the reasoning or cause for it, especially considering many atheists were also killed by him.

Though everyone being Catholic would not quite solve most problems with religion. Cause people will get personal interpretations of it all the time, which would eventually evolve into a religion of it's own against and then we'd be back where we started.

Also I will admit that there are many atheists who claim moral superiority simply on the fact they are atheist, but I am not one of those atheist. I might agree that on average atheists may be more moral simply because their values come from themselves, and not out of a fear in God. But there is nothing that automatically makes one more immoral for being religious, you can be religious and still be one of the most kind, caring and wonderful people in the world. It's like saying "Atheists on average have a higher IQ. Therefore I, an atheists are automatically smarter than you a Christian". An average is strictly that, an average. Not an absolute guarantee/law that holds true 100% of the time.

And to answer "Why do people do good things in the name of Religion but not in the name of atheism?". That's because atheism is the lack of a religion, there is nothing to praise, nothing to do anything in the name of. For example, let's take a church and a group of people who all happen to be atheist. But groups see a high amount of homeless people in the area, both groups want to help. The atheist group then goes ahead, makes a charity and works to help feed and shelter the poor. The Church, also being good peoples does the same. But the Church believes in good, part of their religion is spreading Gods word through good deeds, so while they are helping the poor they make sure to advertise their God and Religion. Something the atheists are not doing, because they have no God or Religion to be advertising. It's not a matter of there are no atheist charities because atheists don't volunteer. It's a matter of atheists have no need to spread the word of "I lack a religion" around, so they simply go out and help without bringing religion into it.

So Boerd said As there is nothing innate in the simple belief in God that says kill the unbelievers. I take it this means you agred with me and repudiate Magic's blanket condemnation of religion?

Dude, you ignored practically everything she said there.
You're not going to win many debates by ignoring the majority of a person's point, only to pull out a single sentence and try to twist it to turn people against one another.

Random bitching about the games industry

Gaming has been doing pretty poorly as far as triple A studios are concerned.

Telltale, Rockstar and Bethesda being a few exceptions.
A lot more of gaming now is looking towards Indie developers, that's where you gotta be looking for most good games.

And it's also probably why consoles (Other than Nintendo) are just doing worse and worse while PC seems basically unaffected.

I made a religion (still working on a name)

So Boerd said
1. Let me posit an alternate explanation.Raw, unadulterated military predation has been, up until recently, perfectly acceptable. The Romans killed you and took your stuff without any qualm nor issue. Barbarian tribes across Europe quibbled with and slaughtered each other. Genghis Khan. The Persians in Greece, Alexander in Persia and India. The Vikings raided with no aims to spread their faith.Enter Christianity to Europe, whose prime teacher is Jesus Christ and whose Council of Jerusalem nullifies the argument you are indubitably about to make with the OT. Christ preaches nonviolence, and loving thy neighbor. While predation does not end, it now has to resolve the cognitive dissonance certainly in the minds of rulers and soldiers, Christianity's adherents, on the contrast between this predation and their religion. Get the Pope to sanction it, (Crusades and Norman Invasion), claim the guys whose stuff you want is perverting the faith or you have rights to his land, whatever. You had to have SOME form of justification. Rather than SPARK conflict, religion helped neutralize it. 2. So religion is by and large a bulwark against totalitarianism? Glowing endorsemen by Mao and Stalin, that they felt thr religious a threat to their rule.3. Just as saying "There is no God" is Atheistic. If "You die for Christianity!" Is killing for religion, "You die for Communism!" Is killing for Atheism.

1. So... Religion organized killings and slaughter? That's the argument? :/
Well yes this may have served for the killing to be less random/undiscriminating, it does organize it.
Which means better management, resources, larger forces, more concentrated killing grounds.
Sure it may have prevented a few towns by being seized as a result, but at the cost of making killings and murders as a whole far more numerous and brutal.

And once again, I am not arguing that only religion causes violence. I am arguing that religion acts as an enhancer to violence.

2. They felt anything that doesn't go along with what they say as a threat to their rule.

3. Dying for Christianity is dying for Christianity. Dying for Communism is dying for Communism. Dying for atheism is dying for atheism.
Communism is a political system, Atheism is the lack of a religion. These are two different things.

PETA to make a MC server

Larfleeze said
My ancestors are smiling at me, PeTA. Can you say the same?

Death to the furcloaks!

Img= No Words, Only pictures

Darog the Badger God said
You guys, this should be in the spam section, not OT.

[2]
You'd get more activity and traffic in spam anyways.