Diary of Anne Frank

[geo]

You may call it a new "Age of Enlightenment", or the replacing of superstition with reality which could never fully reach it's stride until science became the dominant factor in civilization.

Over the past 18 yrs non-belief has grown by 80% in the US to 14%, while those calling themselves Christian declined 10 perentage points to 76% of the population. While not nearly comparabe to the European Unions 52% non-beliebvers, the implies that in 80 years or so believers in supernaturalism will be in the small minority here.

Welcome it.

Regards,
Bart
aka Dromedary Hump

Thanks Bart, I like the idea of a "new age of enlightenment." It give me hope.

[geo]

The ugly face of religion . . . teaching children how to hate.

http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-343325

[stahrwe]

In a nut shell it comes down to : "She gets what she deserves in Hell, but at least she wasn't naked in her last moments on earth."

So much for the christian claim to holding the high ground on morality, ethics, or loving kindness. I'm disgusted.

Granted, this is probably the view of only a small minority of Christians, right? Let's not generalize based on what a YEC says.

It has nothing to do with YEC.
It has nothing to do with you, or me.
Why do you suppose Jesus died on that cross? To amuse us?
Why do you suppose that thousands of people joined the church when it was just starting and did not have 2,000 years of history? When it went against everything they had been taught? When it probably would cost them their family, job, and possibly their lives.

You're offended by what I said about Anne Frank.
God is offended by what you say about His Son.
I can live with offending you.
You cannot live with offending Him.

[Interbane]

Stah: "It has nothing to do with YEC.
It has nothing to do with you, or me."

Actually, it certainly does. Everything after these two sentences are your false beliefs. The false beliefs of a fundamentalist. Such an observation on the state of Anne Frank may seem to be simply an objective observation to you, but it's not. It is entirely contained within your belief system. When you proclaim what you wrongly believe to be true, you're being a hateful bigot. There's no way around this Stah, you're guilty as charged by the definitions of the words. You don't even need to be trapped into using reason for me to make this point! Bart could easily point all this out to you, but he's a bit wiser than myself and realizes the futility of talking to bigots. Your position isn't even worth a reply. Yet I can't stand to see such stupidity sitting idly on the pages of a website that I enjoy.

[stahrwe]

The fact that The Atheist Camel is totally confused on his blog as to how to quote someone is hardly a surprise.

[Interbane]

Stah: "The fact that The Atheist Camel is totally confused on his blog as to how to quote someone is hardly a surprise."

You blame him for being intellectually dishonest. Didn't you gripe about his use of the word "celebrate"? Then you hypocritically claim he is "totally confused"? Where's the mirror I handed you about seeing yourself as a deciever?

In any case, that's an equivocation. I show that you're a bigot, and you reply with a comment about Bart's blog. Accusing him of anything, regardless of whether or not it's true does not detract from the fact that you're a bigot. Or were you trying to avoid it by changing the subject? This is intellectual dishonesty at it's finest. To be honest, you should either offer a counter argument to my claim that you're a bigot, or admit that you're a bigot. Changing the subtopic does not make you innocent. You equivocate and change points of topic all the time. By pointing this out, am I creating a "trap" that you see a need to avoid? Perhaps it is a trap, a trap of reasoning. Why are you so desperate to avoid using reasoning? The inexorable end point is that your entire worldview is a sham. You should embrace reasoning, not run from it.

[stahrwe]

I have neglected to engage in much of the way of dialogue with you so far stahrwe because, I thought to myself, is there much to be gained by exchanging ideas with a man who believes in the most fantastical ideas?

Your mention of Anne Frank has inspired me to write however. As an iconic symbol of innocence brutalized, persecuted, and eventually killed by a fascist philosophy, your writing her off as “condemned” strikes me as amazing. A teenage girl casually stricken off the register because….what? She was a Jew? She didn’t acknowledge Jesus Christ before she was gassed to death in the concentration camp?

But maybe I shouldn’t be so amazed. Fear is a great motivator in human behavior. The fear of death, the fear of depredation, the fear of ridicule, the fear of impotence, fear of meaninglessness………the list goes on. The flip side of fear is anger. It is the attempt to dig our claws in, to hold on, and to make ourselves safe- to remove us from these threats. Fear can generate corresponding levels assertiveness.

All religions are fear-based. There mass appeal stems from their exploitation of the existential angst of their adherents. All of us have questions about the meaning of life, and the purpose of the universe. Religion answers those questions. And it does it in a way that frees its adherents from fear. Death? There is no death, we will live forever. Meaning? It’s all in the book- only one book, which makes it easy even for the semi-illiterate. Those that are fearful will look for solidity. If they feel themselves in a chaotic stream, they will reach for a solid rock. This is only human nature, but for some, stability is worth more than truth.

Science it the opposite of religion. It is based on courage, to the extent that it says this: We don’t know what is out there, but we are willing to thrust into the darkness, and will take what comes. Truth is worth risk. It is better to take some chances, and better understand the universe, than it is to take refuge in what is safe, easy, comfortable, familiar, and reinforcing.

If you read this, and are tempted to reply, as you hold on to your crucifix, or perhaps leaf through your copy of the bible to find an appropriate rebuttal, I urge you to consider this: What is your real motivation? Is it the foolish infidels at BT? Or is this about you?

I can remember seeing the Buddhist monks going about their business in Thailand and Laos. These are societies that seem to take their spiritual beliefs very seriously. They are ingrained in the life of the people, to a vastly larger extent than such ideas are in this part of the world. But something interesting occurred to me about Buddhists as apposed to Christians. Many less than respectful tourists would often make light of the local religious shrines, having their photo taken with a can of beer in front of a Buddha statue, gawking and intruding on a Buddhist watt. The reaction was inevitably this: the locals didn’t really give a rat’s a**. In other words, they knew what they knew, and didn’t need others acceptance or support. They were unshakable. They no more needed to push Buddhism on me, than I needed to jam Canadian maple syrup down their throat.

What need are you fulfilling strahrwe? If there is an omnipotent God in the universe, He must surly have these matters in hand. Are you trying to second guess Him? There is nothing like convincing others to reinforce one’s own belief system. There is strength in numbers.

Buddhism is not a religion, not my opion, see below links.

http://www.buddhanet.net/nutshell03.htm
http://buddhist-beliefs.suite101.com/ar ... a_religion

As for my motives. I am not required to have a 2 year period riding a bicycle. I am not trying to get one up on a fellow Jehovah's Witness so I can be one of the 144,000. I am not motivated to upset anyone and frankly find it amazing that 'free thinkers' get so worked up when someone says that the Bible is true or takes a stand in defense of Jesus.

[stahrwe]

Your attacks on me were expected.
Your denials of the Bible were expected.
Neither changes the circumstances.

It is unfortunate that you are not willing to listen to or respect other people's ideas.

I don't shout down anyone, and don't confuse disagreement with disrespect. I am not the one who uses profanity and unsult instead of argument.

[stahrwe]

The ugly face of religion . . . teaching children how to hate.

http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-343325

Teaching children about love. The family in the clip you posted are favorites of the media. Their criticism of the Jews, et al are misguided, but their sentiments about the United States and the Church within the United States may be true. We are the richest country in the world but on our doorstep are some of the poorest. In Haiti people sometimes eat cookies made of mud. When I go to church and see someone park a new cadillac or Lexus, it just burns me. Sometimes I look around my home and feel guilty about all the stuff I have. I think it makes God angry. In the first picture below, the man on the right is the brother of one of the women in my church. I help to support this ministry. Also, I have a friend whose father runs another ministry that provides water purification systems to disaster areas, and I am on the board of a ministry which provides clothing, eyeglasses, and medicine to people in India. Funny, the media have never interviewed me.

October 15, 2008
Even though you do not hear much about Haiti right now, life is still very unsettled in the country. MFI received a donation of 1800 tents that are being transported to a grass strip in Pignon, Haiti, and given to the flooded families. These small tents will provide a little protection until they can build another mud hut. In the pictures below you can see some of the tents being delivered and erected. Also, notice a family trying to wash their dishes in muddy water. Your prayers and your "On Line" giving will allow MFI to continue our life sustaining efforts to help the people in Haiti.

[stahrwe]

Stah: "It has nothing to do with YEC.
It has nothing to do with you, or me."

Actually, it certainly does. Everything after these two sentences are your false beliefs. The false beliefs of a fundamentalist. Such an observation on the state of Anne Frank may seem to be simply an objective observation to you, but it's not. It is entirely contained within your belief system. When you proclaim what you wrongly believe to be true, you're being a hateful bigot. There's no way around this Stah, you're guilty as charged by the definitions of the words. You don't even need to be trapped into using reason for me to make this point! Bart could easily point all this out to you, but he's a bit wiser than myself and realizes the futility of talking to bigots. Your position isn't even worth a reply. Yet I can't stand to see such stupidity sitting idly on the pages of a website that I enjoy.

Bart knows that his blog is full of quotes out of context and deliberate misinformation. His defense is to dismiss me and pretend I don't exist. Nice, but that is typical of atheists, Gould, Dawkins, et al.