Then my question is this: How can you separate the religion from the people who are transporting this "infection" on to other people? What is the cure if not to "vaccinate" them one by one until this disease has been exterminated in its entirety? I really do not see how the religion can exist as separate entity, detached from every individual who is carrying the information in their minds. There cannot ALWAYS be "somebody else" who is responsible.

Please read the third Satanic sin again.

HS!

A loser is as loser, regardless of what label he or she adapts.

"I am of the mind that every man and woman who is naming themselves "Christian" have to answer for every atrocity ever committed under the banner of this religion."

This is handy for interviews and debates---as a rhetorical response. I've used a similar tact many times, ye olde "Gee, Mr. Larson....if you are allowed to distance yourself from the actions of Jim & Tammy Faye who claim to be Christian, surely you must see there are those who call themselves Satanists and are not acting in a Satanic manner!?"

The stammer and jaw drop are a lot of fun, but it really means very little.

And, yes, I actually do say GEE.

Y~

There's varying types and levels of accountability here.

What I would like Christians to do is to take responsibility for the moral and practical implications and applications of their beliefs. So, for example, if somebody believes in Hell, I fully believe that they need to confront the fact that, according to their beliefs, Buddhist children, kindly Pagans, and the heathens they know and love in life are going to be tortured for all eternity. If a Christian says he believes and worships every word of the Bible, he needs to be asked if he also loves and obeys the gory and sick parts of the Old Testament.

So, people should not be "let off the hook" and allowed to dribble and drool whatever comes to mind, without having to somehow explore and explain how such a belief or view plays out in reality, or performs in the face of ethical standards.

I think Christians should be aware of their history. Once again, if some of their morals or beliefs match up too closely to those of famous Christian oppressors or inquisitors, they should have to confront this somehow.

But, I don't believe in treating every Christian like Torquemada, or even Torquemada's grandson. I don't believe in prematurely convicting people for crimes they didn't commit, nor making them pay reparations for what happened in the past. I also realize that Christians are diverse, so one size or one accusation does not fit all.

You seem a little... troubled?



Give it a few more decades, Christianity has a head start.

let me ask you a question if you had the power to destroy all religious people would you?

If you read Richard Dawkins' "The Selfish Gene", you will find the term "meme" coined, for the first time, in that book. ("The least amount of information that is needed to transport an idea from one person to another" - acting along an evolutionary path somewhat similar to that of genes.) Since then, memetics has developed into a nonlinear science which is a sort of circus side show at most Universities of any stature in this world, dealing with precisely that which I mentioned, which is how and why a complex of ideas is acting as a "superstructure" whuch is ruling the destiny of individuals and influencing the course of history.

While we're at it, I would also recommend "Ominous Parallels" by Leonard Peikoff, Ayn Rand's apprentice, where he is making a quit thorough analysis of how and why "selflessness" is a disguise and a transporting vessel for the principles of tyranny, for the reasons that I mentioned in my text. Through a systematic denial of the greed of the self, replacing it with a phoney willingness to serve a religious or political ideal, we are opening the backdoor for this greed to return with a vengeance in the form of tyranny and genocide. (He is of course using nazi Germany as an example, before moving on to explain why the US of A is (was) at the same peril as was Germany in the 20's, for much of the same reasons.)

As a general principle, we are in agreement on STUDY.

What I am accusing these "innocent, law abiding people" of isn't murder and atrocities, it is for making themselves available as transporting vessels of the philosophical and ideal structures that are permitting such things to happen - with a side note to Ray Bradbury's "Fahrenheit 451" and how people made themselves into "living books". The "cure" I am proposing is enlightenment, i.e. making these people aware of their mental disease and providing a cure.

That is not the point here. I am not out to destroy "people" but rather the ideas that are making them do crazy things while they BELIEVE that they are doing "God's will". If there was some way to press the Ctrl+Alt+Del button of the entire idea complex of social submission to ideologies such as Nazism, Communism, Islam and Christianity, I would do this, very likely, as it is not probable that any of these idea complexes could be restored in today's human society.

A completely different issue is the fact that this world is massively overpopulated by "people". But that is a different topic and luckily not something I have to make any kind of choice about.

That would be highly unreasonable - and in fact it would make you no better than the bastard himself. This is not a question of "vengeance" but of working to remove the ideology foundations that have permitted such people as Torquemada to perform their sadistic petty tyranny inn environment protected by the law of their times. The fact that Torquemada and his likes are now long dead and gone is a small comfort when you look at how the same ideas that made THEM happen and they did and do what they did, are still being hailed as "the truth" by ecstatic masses in today's world.

Quite so... but you ARE doing it - and who is to say that this very debate at that very time is not inspiring one or two more people to THINK? This is precisely what I am suggesting, to keep on hammering in this message of responsibility in all available contexts, at all available times.

And humour can be a wonderful weapon against bigotry.

You can't expect Christians to approach their religions with the same careful and responsible and intelligent manner that Satanists do. Do you think a preacher demands understanding from his listeners? No, they are not required to understand, only agree.

Hehe... I will take your advice, Sir.

I think I have said what I wanted on this issue.

Now, let's move on.

Are there ever any other kinds?

I must apologise for assuming you were a male.

Very few of the one gender will take it as a compliment to be referred to as the other. This will however not repeat itself.

Other than that, I have nothing more to add, as this discussion seems to be quite pointless beyond that of sowing a seed, which is already done.

As was mentioned by Machiavelli in "The Prince", the appropriate way to get a message through to "the masses" is by way of fear, to which I would add that "guilt" is also an open avenue in the case of Christianity, because manipulation of this emotion is one of the cornerstones of that religion. However, there are many ways to play that game, and one of them is to use the guilt complex as a way to get "inside" and detonate more bombs.

The only existing limitations are the ones we create.

Ich verstehe. Yes, people, Max is right. Try re-reading his post and you'll grasp it as it were your own words written down. We got off on this topic on wrong (and hasty) interpretations of his words. Yes, people are indeed prone to acts of violence and bloodshed when surviving on the remains of their own faiths. Current Christians had also better not take the history of their institutions lightly, what with the short fuse and shit for brains (although I do believe he has quite the witful old grampa) of the new Pope. People can be influenced quite easily and carried away by the masses. And not to mention that the average Christian doesn't even read his holy book and therefore can't (or accepts not to) perceive that their spiritual leader, the pope, is both a complete pseudo-christian invention, and a pathological cretin.

Excuse me, but I don't happen to see your REQUIRED introduction in the introduction forum. Please do so. Thank you.