Atheists and sexual libertinism.

[yrreg]

I like to give attention to the matter of rational consistency and guiltless masturbation as the benefit accruing to atheists for their embrace of atheism.


See the line put in bold by me in this post from Foster Zygote who informed me that he was a Christian before.



Originally Posted by yrreg
Anything transcendental there and did you miss anything when you were a non-atheist?

What definition of "transcendental" are you using? There are certainly many things that I regard as greater than myself. I value the lives of my wife and son far more than my own. I also feel the good of the whole of humanity outweighs the good of my individual life.

I'd have to say that the only thing I missed as a theist was rational consistency within my world-view. And maybe guiltless masturbation.


Quote:
What indeed is the new advantage in your life now, missing in your pre-atheist days?

I don't need to resort to irrational mental gymnastics to avoid acknowledging the problems with my old religious beliefs. I know that it is up to me as an individual, and humanity as a whole, to make the world a better place for everyone, rather than waiting for a supernatural spirit to intervene on our behalf. I don't have to reject the true wonders of the universe as revealed by actual investigation simply because they contradict the dogma of my religion. I don't have to worry that loved ones will suffer eternal torment because they don't join my religion.


Quote:
That is not the question whether I am insulting you or not, please just answer my question:


From Yrreg:
Why should atheists be concerned with and about RSLancastr and Randi in their life crisis in the matter of losing life or staying alive longer.

For the same reason that they should be concerned about the health and happiness of anyone else, yourself included. In short, because they are fellow human beings.


Quote:
You don't want to answer my question again, why are you so evasive?

I'm not being evasive, I'm pointing out that your question seems to be irrelevant to the subject at hand. But since you asked, and on the small chance that there is some relevant point you are trying to make: Individuals who commit terrible crimes are still human beings. They must pay the consequences of their actions, but they should not be treated as less than human.


Quote:
I cannot make up my mind aside from feeling some concern for him in regard to his recovery as to resume living a useful life to himself and to his family and friends and the rest of mankind.

Because they don't need anything from me, aside from perhaps knowing that I do feel concern for them as I have said just now in the preceding paragraph.

I'm sorry, are you admonishing others who have not donated money, while admitting yourself that you have not yourself done so?


Quote:
But I notice that you as usual are being evasive, and I believe you should do some soul-searching why.

Evasive? Because I am not playing your game? I am not being evasive, it is simply none of your damned business. You are implying that people who have not sent money to RSL are demonstrating their moral inferiority, yet you yourself have just stated that you have sent none yourself. The charity I contribute to others is not done for show, and I certainly feel no obligation to present it to you as proof of my morality. I feel no need to examine my soul based on anything you have said.


Quote:
And I must commend you for not indulging in foul language which is common with atheists who are angry ones.

In my experience this is a behavior of angry humans. Why do you want to attribute this only to atheists? Is it because it serves your prejudices?

I'm reminded of my racist grandmother, who was railing about "spics" during one of her outbursts. When my mother reminded her that my wife is Puerto Rican she responded by saying, "Well she's raised herself above that". So you'll understand if I say your commendation is not welcome.





I like to ask atheists whether sexual libertinism is the real motivation for embracing atheism, and rational consistency is just an attempt at convenient justification supposedly afforded by the atheism worldview.






Yrreg

[ Please excuse the mistake of posting this message in an earlier thread ( see, http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4283808&postcount=266 ), it is really intended to be the start of the present new thread. ]

[Fiona]

I like to ask atheists whether sexual libertinism is the real motivation for embracing atheism

No. It isn't

[Seismosaurus]

As I have repeatedly told you, and as you have repeatedly chosen to ignore, something like this cannot be a reason for atheism. It is an impossibility.

[AkuManiMani]

I like to ask atheists whether sexual libertinism is the real motivation for embracing atheism

Nope.

edit: And, FYI. I'm pretty sure FosterZygote made that statement as a bit of humor. You're clearly taking it way too seriously.

[Ron_Tomkins]

I like to give attention...

No, you like to "have" other people's attention by opening one nonsense thread after another.

And like any other little game, it's fun... while it lasts.
So enjoy it while it lasts.

[Hokulele]

Wait. Rational consistency is bad?

That certainly explains most of your other threads.

[the PC apeman]

I like to ask atheists whether sexual libertinism is the real motivation for embracing atheism
Nope. I embrace my atheism because I am an atheist. Rejecting my atheism would lead to an unhappy life.

[brodski]

can I ask what sexual libertarianism is? Screwing whilst reading Rand?

oh sorry, I misread...

[bokonon]

I frankly don't see the connection between "guiltless masturbation" and "sexual libertinism." I can recall many instances in which guiltless masturbation made it easier to avoid the temptations of libertines and focus on my studies with rational consistency.

[RoboTimbo]

<snipped for sanity>

I like to ask atheists whether sexual libertinism is the real motivation for embracing atheism, and rational consistency is just an attempt at convenient justification supposedly afforded by the atheism worldview.



Nope. There you have it, another dead end thread.

If there is a god, you won't ignore any of the responses you get. If you do ignore them, you're saying that there is no god.

[Safe-Keeper]

Obvious troll is obvious.

[Lanzy]

If you EVER get a yes answer to this question I would certainly run with it and completely ignore all the other answers.

and, uh..NO!

[yy2bggggs]

I like to ask atheists whether sexual libertinism is the real motivation for embracing atheism, and rational consistency is just an attempt at convenient justification supposedly afforded by the atheism worldview.
Obviously not. The motivation for becoming an atheist, according to Romans chapter 1, is that a person doesn't glorify or thank God enough, leading to darkened hearts. The result is that God himself makes the atheists perverse, gay, etc.

But even more importantly, so-called atheists (so-called, because there aren't really any atheists--according to verse 19, and also assuming Paul is meaning to be comprehensive) will lie about this to cover up this truth. That's just scriptural (see verse 18). Which means, of course, you're going to get the wrong answer out of asking atheists anyway--or at least you'll get a clever deceptive answer designed to hide the truth.

Of course, you're not consulting the bible, but are asking said lying deceptive godless so-called atheists who would cover up the truth anyway.

And since you asked... no.

But this leads to a bigger question. Have you nothing better to do with your time than to flatter yourself on a skeptic forum?

[Lord Emsworth]

I don't see why "God" and sexual liberthing are inherently exclusive. (In fact, fail to see anything inherent about "God" at all). Sooo .... huh?

[Agatha]

Nope.

[Scot C. Trypal]

If I wanted "sexual libertinism" I'd start a religious cult.

[slingblade]

[ Please excuse the mistake of posting this message in an earlier thread ( see, http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4283808&postcount=266 ), it is really intended to be the start of the present new thread. ]

I put my reply in that thread, so you'll need to open it and read it there, as I am sure you are eager to read and reply to all responses to your question.




:dl:

Oh my, sorry, couldn't help myself!

[Dunstan]

Actually, in a Christian-majority society, the wise sexual libertine doesn't identify himself as an atheist. The numbers dictate that he profess himself a Christian, as there are many more "Christians who won't date atheists" than there are "atheists who won't date Christians." (I'm talking in absolute terms, not percentages.)

It's not like Christian teachings about premarital sex will get in the way, as if called on it, you can always fall back on the whole "we're all sinners" thing. "Hey, honey, I'm feeling another moment of weakness! Want to give in to temptation again?"

[drkitten]

I like to ask atheists whether sexual libertinism is the real motivation for embracing atheism,

Ah, now we see why yyreg is angry at atheists.

They're getting some, and he's not.

[Fiona]

I did ask if he is celibate about a million years ago: he didn't answer that either .....

[Hawk one]

By a nice coincidence, I was watching this standup-comedian on the telly tonight (can't rembember the name, as I jumped in about 5 minutes into the act), and he said something I think is at least somewhat relevant to the OP:

"The religious right are trying to conflate sex with morals and values, so that they don't have to talk about -actual- morals and values."

[Mashuna]

Ah, now we see why yyreg is angry at atheists.

They're getting some, and he's not.

And is feeling guilty about his. . .alternative arrangements.

[KingMerv00]

I like to ask atheists whether sexual libertinism is the real motivation for embracing atheism, and rational consistency is just an attempt at convenient justification supposedly afforded by the atheism worldview.

Nope, not the motivation...a perk though.

[Safe-Keeper]

Ah, now we see why yyreg is angry at atheists.

They're getting some, and he's not.In the highly unlikely event that he isn't a troll, we would really be getting at something here. The ridiculous obsession so many Christians have to control the sex life of everything that walks on two legs must be incredibly frustrating to endure. Still, I doubt the feeling he has for the rest of us, who can snuggle up together, masturbate and have sex outside of marriage, isn't jealousy, because he's convinced that we're actually doing something wrong.

It also wouldn't be the first time someone sincerely thought that the rules of religions (pick and choose what to believe based on what feels good) applies to atheism and science, too.

But then again, it's far more likely that he is a troll, so it doesn't really matter.

[Marquis de Carabas]

I like to ask atheists whether sexual libertinism is the real motivation for embracing atheism
It's part of it, but slaughtering puppies and stealing candy from children are more important aspects of the appeal.

[Hokulele]

Damn. Well, at least now I know why the "candy" always tasted like Alpo...

[Safe-Keeper]

But adherents to Yahweh get to slaughter men, women and children and take virgins as sex slaves. Not to mention you often get spectacular support in the form of plagues, brimstone, frogs, bloody rivers, serpents and magic wall-razing horns. You get to stone people who annoy you. You receive the right to control the sex lives of everyone around you. Not even the weakness to iron chariots is a dampener, as no one actually use those antiquated things anymore.

[RandFan]

I like to ask atheists whether sexual libertinism is the real motivation for embracing atheism, and rational consistency is just an attempt at convenient justification supposedly afforded by the atheism worldview.No but then given your unwillingness to enage in a meaninful dialog I kinda get the idea that what you believe is far more important that what the truth is.

[RandFan]

The ridiculous obsession so many Christians have to control the sex life of everything that walks on two legs must be incredibly frustrating to endure.And why? Why would god give a damn? The Christian god is so irrational. How can a perfect being be irrational? Oh, wait...

[Foster Zygote]

But this leads to a bigger question. Have you nothing better to do with your time than to flatter yourself on a skeptic forum?

His behavior seems almost... masturbatory.

[Skeptic Guy]

So we're in agreement the primary appeal of atheism is rational consistancy with fringe benefits.

No, wait, the primary appeal of atheism is rational consistancy with fringe benefits and slaughtering puppies and stealing candy from childrent.

I get confused unless I write this down.

[KingMerv00]

His behavior seems almost... masturbatory.

And he doesn't even feel guilty

[gdnp]

Obviously not. The motivation for becoming an atheist, according to Romans chapter 1, is that a person doesn't glorify or thank God enough, leading to darkened hearts. The result is that God himself makes the atheists perverse, gay, etc.So God can't make us believe in him, because that would interfere with our free will, but he can make us perverse and gay, thus tempting us to sin so that he can punish us for all eternity. What a strange God you have.

But even more importantly, so-called atheists (so-called, because there aren't really any atheists--according to verse 19, and also assuming Paul is meaning to be comprehensive) will lie about this to cover up this truth. That's just scriptural (see verse 18). Which means, of course, you're going to get the wrong answer out of asking atheists anyway--or at least you'll get a clever deceptive answer designed to hide the truth.Yes, and there are no people who don't believe in Tinkerbell. I read it in Peter Pan. :rolleyes:

Of course, you're not consulting the bible, but are asking said lying deceptive godless so-called atheists who would cover up the truth anyway.Clearly it's better to ask lying deceptive godful theists because they have the bible to guide them. And without the bible, how would we know how to properly treat our slaves?

And since you asked... no.
At least we agree on something. After all, one does not need to be an athiest to indulge in guiltless sexual practices. There are religions that allow forcible marriage to minors, raping and plundering one's enemies, polygamy, "free love", etc. These are much more guiltless than atheism, since the atheist has no infallible religious authority to justify their actions.
But this leads to a bigger question. Have you nothing better to do with your time than to flatter yourself on a skeptic forum?
He sure gets a lot of bang for the buck.

[bruto]

Of course, if you actually believe, as the original post implies, that guilt free masturbation is "sexual libertinism" (and, conversely, we must assume, that one ought to feel guilt about it), it's hard to argue rationally over such an utterly stupid and tautological assertion. If that is not what the original post was meant to imply then one must conclude that the original poster is doing a very bad job of saying what he means, and one might perhaps be forgiven, if the forum rules permit it, for concluding that he is as stupid as what he writes.

From the personal standpoint, I can say that my weak and waffling drift from deism to agnosticism to more or less atheism is not connected to guilt-free masturbation. I took up the latter at about the same time I took up church membership, and never felt the conflict. I was vaguely aware that some people attached guilt to the practice but when I examined the pertinent organ I observed that it was attached at only one end.

[The Atheist]

I like to ask atheists whether sexual libertinism is the real motivation for embracing atheism, and rational consistency is just an attempt at convenient justification supposedly afforded by the atheism worldview.

Absolutely correct - please ignore the deniers, because they're just scared to admit the truth.

Atheism is all about anger at god, and yes, most of that anger is plain sexual tension. Easy way out is to deny god, then we can all root like rabbits.

Why do you think Mark Siefert is always complaining about not getting laid? If you're not getting laid by all manner of people and sexes, indulging in as many types of kinky sex as possible, then there's no point being an atheist.

Please note the authority of my opinion, I am not just an atheist, I am The Atheist.

Congratulations on your highly perceptive insight!

[Smackety]

I like to give attention to the matter of rational consistency and guiltless masturbation as the benefit accruing to atheists for their embrace of atheism.


See the line put in bold by me in this post from Foster Zygote who informed me that he was a Christian before.

I like to ask atheists whether sexual libertinism is the real motivation for embracing atheism, and rational consistency is just an attempt at convenient justification supposedly afforded by the atheism worldview.

Yrreg

[ Please excuse the mistake of posting this message in an earlier thread ( see, http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4283808&postcount=266 ), it is really intended to be the start of the present new thread. ]

Do you feel guilty when you masturbate?

[JoeTheJuggler]

yrreg, you are once again making wrong assumptions about atheists and atheism.

Some atheists may be sexual libertines, but many (probably most) are not. Ingersoll definitely was not. I'm not.

My reason for being an atheist was lack of evidence for the existence of a god or gods. (In fact, I also find logical inconsistencies in most definitions of god--meaning it is an impossible concept the same way a 4 sided triangle is impossible or, more accurately, a meaningless term.)

[fullflavormenthol]

I'll go out on a limb here and say that my disbelief in the supernatural is my reason for being an atheist. Shocking I know. Feelings on masturbation and sex have little to do with anything, and were the most irrelevent aspect of my disbelief in the supernatural.

[supercorgi]

Why are you projecting your sexual hang ups on others? Can't you face your own sexuality? Face it. A lot of Christianity is about controlling the sexual behavior of others. It's all about control. If there's only one right way to have sex, that makes all other expressions of sexuality wrong - just another way of differencing us vs. them, in addition demonizing "them." Face it, we're all human beings, we're the product of evolution, and there's nothing wrong with sex regardless of it's expression. Get off you high horse and join the human race. STOP JUDGING PEOPLE! Who gave you a holy writ to judge other people. From reading all the threads you've started, I think most of you problems are with your own preconceptions. (Not that you'll ever acknowledge that).

[lionking]

yrreg, any comments, or are you just happy to act the troll?

[PixyMisa]

I like to give attention to the matter of rational consistency and guiltless masturbation as the benefit accruing to atheists for their embrace of atheism.
Um... Why?

See the line put in bold by me in this post from Foster Zygote who informed me that he was a Christian before.
It's a joke, Joyce.

I like to ask atheists whether sexual libertinism is the real motivation for embracing atheism
No.

and rational consistency is just an attempt at convenient justification supposedly afforded by the atheism worldview.
Rational consistency doesn't seem to be something that worries you a whole lot.

[Hokulele]

Serious question yrreg, why should someone feel guilty about masturbating?

[Miss_Kitt]

yrreg --

I didn't "embrace atheism", I just stopped believing in gods. It's not a moment of conversion or some bolt of cosmic understanding; it's just the realization that believing in a deity doesn't make sense. If the Universe is adequately explained by the principles of physics, chemistry, biology, etc. then it's not necessary to postulate the existance of a god(s). Further, since there is no evidence of any kind concerning the nature of any god(s), only evidence of what people believe their god(s) to be like, the point is amazingly moot.

For me, there were two processes that went on over a period of, oh, call it ten years: Developing an understanding of (what I now know to be) epistemology--what are valid ways of obtaining and validating knowledge--and looking hard at the question of what underpins ethics.

Put very simply, the underlying question of religiously defined ethics is, How do we know what God(s) want us to do? Since lots of different people are claiming that they have knowledge of the True Nature of God and the True Path to Righteousness, you have to have a way of testing the various claims. Even within Christianity; even within Protestant Christianity; even within "evangelical" Protestant Christianity, there are wide divisions in what is considered godly or ungodly conduct. So, how do you tell?

For me, it boiled down to saying, "If Reverend X is telling me something I know to be good is bad; or something I know is bad, is good, then I know he's a false prophet." Thus, someone preaching that marrying 14-year-old girls to a 48-year-old man is godly would immediately be rejected from the pool of moral authorities. If someone claimed that helping a sinner when they are sick, hurt, or starving is wrong, that is in direct contradiction with Jesus' words, so that church is also going into the Reject bin.

But...since all these folks are claiming Scriptural authority for their viewpoints, then I have to be able to judge the rightness or wrongness of their moral code without merely referencing the Bible. That means I have to have at least a general understanding of what is Good that is not just, "Because God said it." Otherwise, if some newly-uncovered scroll indicated that God wanted all lefthanded redhaired men to be stoned, then we'd have to engage in murder.

This led me to the question: Why is what God tells us is right, right? There are two answers to this: Because God recognizes what right is, and that's what he tells us to do; or, Whatever God says is right, is right merely because God says so. Okay so far?

Well, if the first answer is correct, then there is an objective standard of Right which is outside simple obedience to God. God won't tell us to slaughter all blue-eyed blondes because it's wrong, and He won't lead us to do wrong. (Implicitly, almost all Christians believe this, because they know they can make moral decisions on issues for which there is no scriptural basis. Methamphetamine is a modern invention, but even without a verse condemning it, we know that making and selling it it wrong: It destroys bodies and minds, it's addictive, it can and does kill directly and indirectly.) But, if right and wrong are objective, that is, outside of simply God's decision, then it is possible to determine morality without God in the picture.

The second answer leads to a simple thought experiment: How is God using the argument, "Do it because I say so" any different from the playground bully saying that? God is, after all, the Toughest Guy Around (Omnipotent) and therefore has ultimate Might. But it's clear in the bully's case that Might does not make Right. How is God not just the biggest bully in the Universe? That leads back to, Because he only demands that which is truly Right...or answer 1. Which in turn leads back to, Morality can be objectively determined.

So now we have ended up with not needing a deity to run the Universe, it runs fine on its own; and we don't need a deity to determine Right and Wrong. So...what need is there for a god(s) in my life??

I found, after a few years of reflecting on these issues, arguing them with friends, reading numerous books, and asking myself hard questions, that I could find no REASON to believe. And I am not willing to tell myself, "Oh, I'll believe that because it makes me feel better to believe it" about something as fundamental is the nature of Existance and the basis of Ethics. I can't apply one set of rules to how I think about everything I observe and learn and know and think except God, and a completely different method/set of rules to God. That simply makes no sense to me.

I realize this isn't what you expect to find. You're looking for someone who is angry, or hates Christians, or wants a moral free pass--but that's not how it works. Not in my case, nor in the case of many others I know that are without gods, was there a blinding flash, an "embracing" of atheism. There just was the final surrender of belief in God, just as in childhood there was a final surrender of belief in Santa, the Tooth Fairy, and my invisible friend Sarah. One day I said, "You know, I don't really believe that anymore," and it was true--it had been true for a while, and I had just recognized it.

I have to say, the whole morality thing is easier with an authority figure telling you what is okay and what is not. Whether it's eating meat and dairy products together or sleeping with another person's beloved, I have to decide for myself what is okay. I have to test it against the standards I have selected for What Is Right and Why It's Right. I have to actually think about it. Sometimes, I have to decide first, what do I do (or not do) while I determine what the moral course is!

There is an implied view in your posts that atheists must believe that mindless, short-term gratification is the only measure of morality. That's a stupid standard, and I don't think many people hold it. It only takes a moment's reflection to realize that if that's the definition of "moral", then other people disrepecting or misusing you, your property, or your family would be "moral". Instead, you learn to look for universal principles that apply to all people, at all times. It's wrong to initiate the use of force. It's wrong to use deceit to get the same results as using force. It's wrong to act without thinking. It's wrong to inflict pain unnecessarily (pain is sometimes necessary in medical treatment).

I'm not going to go into a long list here, and the underlying philosophic arguments cost me years of hard work to think through and understand. What I am trying to show you is that it isn't as simple as you think it is. Much of your confusion and anger, I think, is caused by you believing that being an atheist is the opposite of being a Christian. "If Christians value humility, charity, and monogamy, then atheists must value being selfish, sexually wanton braggarts" seems to be your usual expectation. "If Christians love their families, then atheists must hate families!" "If Christians donate blood, then atheists must not only not donate blood, they must ridicule blood donation..." and so on. This perspective is simply wrong, demonstrably so. The only place where most atheists and most religious people differ in their morality is in the specific religious observations of attending church, praying, and donating to religious organizations.

People are people: Some of them do bad things, some of them do good things; and most of them try to do good. That observation is true regardless of whether the people involved are believers or atheists. If you can learn to see the truth in this, Yrreg, you'll discover that we all have much more in common than you fear. I respect your right to make your own decisions about what spiritual beliefs your hold, and I expect you to respect mine. I ask no special treatment for my atheism, just respect for the right of an adult to make her own decisions on these issues. If I am wrong, I am harming no one but myself. I am not trying to make you an atheist; I am not demeaning you for holding religious beliefs. I am simply saying that I don't believe as you do.

Best wishes to you and yours for the holiday season, MK

[Tumblehome]

Excuse me while I finish masturbating...

There. Okay, I rejected the idea of God when I was about ten years old. I reached puberty at--oops, here I go again...

Sigh, that was good. Where was I? Oh yeah, I reached puberty at 13 so one could surmise that guiltless masturbation had nothing to do with it. In the other hand--er, on the other hand--hey, that gives me an idea...

[six7s]

As I have repeatedly told you, and as you have repeatedly chosen to ignore, something like this cannot be a reason for atheism. It is an impossibility.Indeed

Otherwise, my 12-month-old niece must be polishing her crown

@ yrreg;

The simple reason adults are atheists is the complete and utter lack of reason to be a theist

It is a simple reason because it is uncomplicated by any other factors

There have been, over the last few weeks, dozens and dozens of polite, concise and coherent posts in various threads that have attempted (in vain) to alleviate your ignorance

That you choose to persist in complicating the issue indicates that you are nothing more than a troll; a stupid troll and/or a brazenly lying troll

Please, read the posts

If that is too much to ask, stop trolling this forum anyhow. Your persistence in posting despite a complete lack of arguments is mind-numbingly boring

[Marquis de Carabas]

Serious question yrreg, why should someone feel guilty about masturbating?
For a chick, there's no problem, but for guys, it's like running a little self-contained genocidal abortion clinic.

[six7s]

For a chick, there's no problem, but for guys, it's like running a little self-contained genocidal abortion clinic.Every sperm is scared

47P59ha9k9s

[Smackety]

Every sperm is scared

47P59ha9k9s

that is okay, just save them all in a big jug until you do meet someone someday, and give them to her/him then. no guilt!

[Twiler]

that is okay, just save them all in a big jug until you do meet someone someday, and give them to her/him then. no guilt!

AARGH

Anyway, to address the OP, no. Things aren't that simple.

[six7s]

that is okay, just save them all in a big jug until you do meet someone someday, and give them to her/him then. no guilt!

Psalm 45:1-4 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ps%2045:1-4;&version=49;)
1My heart overflows with a good theme;
I address my verses to the King;
My tongue is the pen of a ready writer.
2You are fairer than the sons of men;
Grace is poured upon Your lips;
Therefore God has blessed You forever.
3Gird Your sword on Your thigh, O Mighty One,
In Your splendor and Your majesty!
4And in Your majesty ride on victoriously,

[six7s]

Psalm 69:1-2 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ps%2069:1-2;&version=49;)
1Save me, O God,
For the waters have threatened my life.
2I have sunk in deep mire, and there is no foothold;
I have come into deep waters, and a flood overflows me.

[ImaginalDisc]

The first time I realized I was an atheist, I was eight. I was aware of sex only in a purely scientific sense.

[Dr Adequate]

I like to give attention to the matter of rational consistency and guiltless masturbation as the benefit accruing to atheists for their embrace of atheism. There is nothing in the Bible forbidding masturbation, so of course that can't be it.

You have clearly forgotten about the greater temptation of gustatory libertinism. Obviously the real reason people become atheists is so that, unlike you, they can flout all the Biblical commandments against eating pork, lobsters, and rock-badgers, something that you would never ever do 'cos you're a theist.

I'm off to eat a blasphemous cheeseburger. Yes! Meat and dairy products in the same meal! Without waiting a minimum of three hours in between! Mmm ... sacrelicious.

And then I'm going to be rational, which is what really scares you, isn't it, yrreg? Not the guilt-free cheeseburgers, but the delusion-free thought.

[Wally]

His behavior seems almost... masturbatory.

I wonder if he types with one hand?????:confused:

[learner]

I think the lack of response from Yregg is due to poor eyesight. He cant read the posts? The evidence is strong. :eek:

[Dancing David]

Serious question yrreg, why should someone feel guilty about masturbating?
The sin of Onan, other than seeing his father naked.

'It is better to spend you seed in the belly of a whore than to spill it upon the ground...'

'Every sperm is scared...'

[Safe-Keeper]

And then I'm going to be rational, which is what really scares you, isn't it, yrreg? Not the guilt-free cheeseburgers, but the delusion-free thought.Not to mention flipping light switches on the Sabbath. Comes in handy during those dark Norwegian winter months.

'It is better to spend you seed in the belly of a whore than to spill it upon the ground...'That's some very constructive and reasonable morals, there. How could we ever progress from such an Utopia?

[Björn Toulouse]

I like to ask atheists whether sexual libertinism is the real motivation for embracing atheism, and rational consistency is just an attempt at convenient justification supposedly afforded by the atheism worldview.



No more so than "embracing" xianity motivates these people (http://forums.delphiforums.com/libchrist/messages?msg=1706.1).

[gdnp]

Every sperm is scared



Scared of what?

[godless dave]

For a chick, there's no problem, but for guys, it's like running a little self-contained genocidal abortion clinic.

The sperm die anyway, whether inside your body or out.

[bruto]

The sin of Onan, other than seeing his father naked.

'It is better to spend you seed in the belly of a whore than to spill it upon the ground...'

'Every sperm is scared...'Onan's sin was coitus interruptus, not masturbation as such, and even that is not condemned by the bible in its own right, but rather the circumstances under which it occurred. God killed him because he violated family law and refused to impregnate his brother's widow. How kinky is that? Isn't it wonderful to have scripture to guide us down the straight and narrow?

[articulett]

For a chick, there's no problem, but for guys, it's like running a little self-contained genocidal abortion clinic.

I heard that atheists can commit guilt-free genocide...

and wear mixed fibers while doing so.

I joined for the guilt-free masturbation, myself. But there are just so many perks that go with being a card carrying member of Yrreg's "I-Hate-God" club. (Come to the darkside, Gerry. *cackles*)

[articulett]

Every sperm is scared
Scared of what?
The sperm die anyway, whether inside your body or out.

Maybe that's why every sperm is scared...
scared of death...
pour souless gametes.

[bruto]

Maybe that's why every sperm is scared...
scared of death...
pour souless gametes.

Yeah, on the ground, right? Godless baby killer.

[RandFan]

yrreg: So you are an atheist because you are angry at god.
EE: No, you can't be angry at something that doesn't exist.

yrreg: So you are an atheist because you hate god.
EE: No, again, you can't hate something that doesn't exist.

yrreg: So you are an atheist because you want to be a pervert.
EE: No.

yrreg: So it is the anger then.
EE: {sigh}

[articulett]

Yeah, on the ground, right? Godless baby killer.

Yah.

(...I..er.. meant to do that.)

[six7s]

Every sperm is scaredScared of what?Suffering the fate of being dealt a fatal blow at the hands of the MdCrunning a little self-contained genocidal abortion clinic.

It was a play on words, gdnp

47P59ha9k9s

[yrreg]

Posted by yrreg
I like to ask atheists whether sexual libertinism is the real motivation for embracing atheism, and rational consistency is just an attempt at convenient justification supposedly afforded by the atheism worldview.



Absolutely correct - please ignore the deniers, because they're just scared to admit the truth.

Atheism is all about anger at god, and yes, most of that anger is plain sexual tension. Easy way out is to deny god, then we can all root like rabbits.

Why do you think Mark Siefert is always complaining about not getting laid? If you're not getting laid by all manner of people and sexes, indulging in as many types of kinky sex as possible, then there's no point being an atheist.

Please note the authority of my opinion, I am not just an atheist, I am The Atheist.

Congratulations on your highly perceptive insight!


In the study of atheism we are dealing with humans not with the moon and stars, that is why I am concentrating on atheists the subjects instead of an abstract worldview of an ism.

I take every word you write as coming from your honest heart and mind, of course you can later deny them with the disclosure that you were only joking.

I use the phrase sexual libertinism to indicate sex without any restraints whatsoever unlike sexual liberation.


What about bestiality, are you into bestiality?

And incest?

And pornography?

And rape of children or seducing kids?


If you are not into the practice of the above acts, do you believe that it is not unacceptable for atheists?

So if you yourself should ever feel some urge to go into those acts you would not have any socalled qualms of conscience to do them?

Specially if you can get away with man-enacted laws against the commission of such acts?




Yrreg

[JoeTheJuggler]

In the study of atheism we are dealing with humans not with the moon and stars,

The "study" of atheism? You're kidding right?

You just spew a bunch of false assumptions about atheists and ignore actual responses to your questions.

It makes at least as sense to assume that theists believe in God because of all their sexual hangups and repressions.

[Marquis de Carabas]

The sperm die anyway, whether inside your body or out.
People die anyway, too.

[articulett]

Wow... who knew there was so much potential for sexual variety...

And, here, I was just an atheist for the guiltless masturbation and being able to wear mixed fabrics. (Oh, and that thingy about there being to evidence for any invisible entities too.)

[RandFan]

What about bestiality, are you into bestiality? I've never been sexually attracted to animals. If I were I wouldn't have sex with animals as I believe sex should only be between consenting adults. Animals can't consent.

And incest?I'm not sexually attracted to my siblings, parents or children. If I were I could think of a whole host of reasons that would make it problematic. I suppose there could be exceptions though.

And pornography? Sounds good.

And rape of children or seducing kids?I leave that to Catholic priests.

BTW, a simple look at the statistics will tell you that believing or not believing in god has little practical effect. In fact it would seem that prohibitions simply cause far more problems with sexual devency and abuse. In other words, it's arguable that pathological, sexual deviancy would decrease if we got rid of theism.

If you are not into the practice of the above acts, do you believe that it is not unacceptable for atheists? Being atheist doesn't preclude morality and ethics. To the extent that an act is illegal, unethical or immoral would not make an atheist more likely to commit such an act because that person is an atheist.

So if you yourself should ever feel some urge to go into those acts you would not have any socalled qualms of conscience to do them? Being atheist doesn't preclude morality and ethics. To the extent that an act is illegal, unethical or immoral would not make an atheist more likely to commit such an act because that person is an atheist.

Specially if you can get away with man-enacted laws against the commission of such acts?Being atheist doesn't preclude morality and ethics. To the extent that an act is illegal, unethical or immoral would not make an atheist more likely to commit such an act because that person is an atheist.

[articulett]

I wonder what benefits are due to me for my being a non-Scientologist?

Are there goodies for not believing in demons?

Does my disbelief in chupacabras earn me any "get out of hell" free passes?

[articulett]

As far as I can tell, threats of hell are no impediment to pedophilia in the clergy... and I don't think there's evidence that theism has prevented any sexual aberrations--

[articulett]

I feel "guilty" when I hurt other sentient beings.

I don't feel guilty imagining an invisible man spying on me and disapproving.

This appears to be all that is needed for moral behavior, and I see no evidence that belief in gods enhances the process anywhere except in the minds of each believer.

[RandFan]

I feel "guilty" when I hurt other sentient beings.

I don't feel guilty imagining an invisible man spying on me and disapproving.

This appears to be all that is needed for moral behavior, and I see no evidence that belief in gods enhances the process anywhere except in the minds of each believer. And prohibitions introduce their own problems (see pedophile priests).

When I was in counseling my therapist explained it thusly. Sexual expression is like a river. It's one of humans most powerful drives. It will seek the course of least resistance so if you focus on no intercourse then the drive will seek other outlets. If you then tell a person that god is unhappy with unapproved sexual expression you set the person up for sexual hangups, fetish and a pathological view of sex.

Religious prohibitions and sex are a bad mix for humans.

[yrreg]

yrreg --

I didn't "embrace atheism", I just stopped believing in gods. It's not a moment of conversion or some bolt of cosmic understanding; it's just the realization that believing in a deity doesn't make sense. If the Universe is adequately explained by the principles of physics, chemistry, biology, etc. then it's not necessary to postulate the existance of a god(s). Further, since there is no evidence of any kind concerning the nature of any god(s), only evidence of what people believe their god(s) to be like, the point is amazingly moot.

[...]

There is an implied view in your posts [ I don't imply that ] that atheists must believe that mindless, short-term gratification is the only measure of morality. That's a stupid standard, and I don't think many people hold it. It only takes a moment's reflection to realize that if that's the definition of "moral", then other people disrepecting or misusing you, your property, or your family would be "moral". Instead, you learn to look for universal principles that apply to all people, at all times. It's wrong to initiate the use of force. It's wrong to use deceit to get the same results as using force. It's wrong to act without thinking. It's wrong to inflict pain unnecessarily (pain is sometimes necessary in medical treatment).

[...]

Best wishes to you and yours for the holiday season, MK


Instead, you learn to look for universal principles that apply to all people, at all times. It's wrong to initiate the use of force. It's wrong to use deceit to get the same results as using force. It's wrong to act without thinking. It's wrong to inflict pain unnecessarily (pain is sometimes necessary in medical treatment).

That's very good.

And you find those universal principles in "physics, chemistry, biology, etc."

Not rational and intelligent on your part, this logical sequitur of your advocacy.



By the way should you ever feel any urge to go into all kinds of sexual libertinistic acts and you can get away with them from the law of human society, would you go into them?

If not, do you believe that atheists who go into such acts are not doing anything wrong morally, just make sure they don't get in trouble with the law of human society?



Yrreg

[Mister Agenda]

I know maybe fifty atheists personally, but I only know one who could be described as a sexual libertine. I'm a trifle disappointed, really, I got more action with the Assembly of God chicks.

[RandFan]

[his fingers in his ears humming loudly]

If not, do you believe that atheists who go into such acts are not doing anything wrong morally, just make sure they don't get in trouble with the law of human society? {sigh}

Being atheist doesn't preclude morality and ethics. To the extent that an act is illegal, unethical or immoral would not make an atheist more likely to commit such an act because that person is an atheist.

[articulett]

I suspect religious guilt was just one of the ways religious men learned to keep the sexual goodies for themselves...

The sex drive evolved to be strong and not subject to reason...

(Try to guilt a dog out of humping things--ha!)

And all the clergy scandals show us that religious induced guilt is more likely to lead to perversion than atheism... in fact, I suspect it might be why yrreg is so angry and bizarre. In fact, I bet that believers are more likely to be involved in the "list of perversions" yrreg mentioned than atheists.

Though, clearly the nonbelievers win when it comes to "guiltless masturbation"...

I think we have the corner on blasphemy too.

[RandFan]

I suspect religious guilt was just one of the ways religious men learned to keep the sexual goodies for themselves... I'm beyond suspecting. There's just too much evidence.

[articulett]

I know maybe fifty atheists personally, but I only know one who could be described as a sexual libertine. I'm a trifle disappointed, really, I got more action with the Assembly of God chicks.

My experience and observations are similar. It's the Ted Haggards that surprise you with their leanings... the atheists I know tend to have the same types of relationships that the theists are pretending to have I guess. Mostly monogamous and a trifle boring and "vanilla".

It's the theists that are always being caught with their pants down and assorted butt plugs in various orifices or having sex with gay male prostitute meth dealers.

[Mister Agenda]

Instead, you learn to look for universal principles that apply to all people, at all times. It's wrong to initiate the use of force. It's wrong to use deceit to get the same results as using force. It's wrong to act without thinking. It's wrong to inflict pain unnecessarily (pain is sometimes necessary in medical treatment).

That's very good.

And you find those universal principles in "physics, chemistry, biology, etc."

Not rational and intelligent on your part, this logical sequitur of your advocacy.

By the way should you ever feel any urge to go into all kinds of sexual libertinistic acts and you can get away with them from the law of human society, would you go into them?

If not, do you believe that atheists who go into such acts are not doing anything wrong morally, just make sure they don't get in trouble with the law of human society?


Yrreg

No need to go into physics. Would you want people initiating force or fraud against you? Do you want people acting thoughtlessly or cruelly? If you have even a rudimentary sense of empathy you can understand why acting this way makes you feel badly. If you have a bit of logic you can understand why a society that encouraged such behavior would not be as successful as a society that encouraged the opposite.

What other consenting adult humans do in privacy isn't our business. Animals and children aren't capable of informed consent, even if it was legal, it would be wrong.

[articulett]

I'm beyond suspecting. There's just too much evidence.

I agree.

In yrreg's case though, I think he's denied himself to please god and he wants to make sure atheists are miserable for not doing the same.

He needs to see himself as happy by seeing atheists as angry in their "perverse" lifestyle--

But the truth is, he's frustrated and obsessed with what he's given up for his faith.

(If his gay male "friend" can't indulge his fantasies... then the gay male "friend" wants to make sure his fantasy mate isn't getting pleasures elsewhere.)

Yrreg's beliefs deny him his sexual outlets, so he imagines that atheists are engaging in the "aberrations" he himself would be engaging in if he wasn't afraid of the spy in the sky. And he's bent on getting us to admit that's "why" we are atheists. It's his new perverse compulsion to cover for his sexual frustrations.

Religion makes some people positively mad.

[yrreg]

Onan's sin was coitus interruptus, not masturbation as such, and even that is not condemned by the bible in its own right, but rather the circumstances under which it occurred. God killed him because he violated family law and refused to impregnate his brother's widow. How kinky is that? Isn't it wonderful to have scripture to guide us down the straight and narrow?


I like to ask from the Jews here who are knowledgeable about the common consensus of religious Jews in regard to their teaching about the acceptability or unacceptability of masturbation.


By the way, rational consistency and guiltless masturbation are stated by Foster Zygote to be the benefit of atheism.

And we have here The Atheist who confirms my guess that sexual libertinism is indeed notwithstanding the denials of fellow atheists the benefit accruing to atheists from their embrace of atheism.

See:

http://www.randi.org/forumlive/showpost.php?p=4285097&postcount=68



Yrreg

[six7s]

I know maybe fifty atheists personally, but I only know one who could be described as a sexual libertine. I'm a trifle disappointed, really, I got more action with the Assembly of God chicks.

lVPIwTwGz8o
All the way
Thats the way they go
Every day
And none of their mamas ever seem to know
Hip-hip-hooray
For all the class they show
Theres nothing like a catholic girl
At the cyo
When they learn to blow...

[Safe-Keeper]

I agree.

In yrreg's case though, I think he's denied himself to please god and he wants to make sure atheists are miserable for not doing the same.

He needs to see himself as happy by seeing atheists as angry in their "perverse" lifestyle--

But the truth is, he's frustrated and obsessed with what he's given up for his faith.

(If his gay male "friend" can't indulge his fantasies... then the gay male "friend" wants to make sure his fantasy mate isn't getting pleasures elsewhere.)

Yrreg's beliefs deny him his sexual outlets, so he imagines that atheists are engaging in the "aberrations" he himself would be engaging in if he wasn't afraid of the spy in the sky. And he's bent on getting us to admit that's "why" we are atheists. It's his new perverse compulsion to cover for his sexual frustrations.

Religion makes some people positively mad.I see our counter-trolling team has arrived and engaged the enemy. Excellent:p.

[yrreg]

For all of you complaining that I am not answering your posts, please assure yourselves that though not answering each and every one of your posts, I do read them and think about them for my study of atheists' heart and mind.

Besides, the readers here read your posts and get to know from your own words the benefits and also the ills consequential to your embrace of atheism.

And they derive thereby some wisdom for their own lives.



Yrreg

[articulett]

I embrace my non-Scientology more than I embrace my atheism.

I also embrace my non-belief in demons.

I may occasionally embrace the odd atheist, but that's part of my willy-nilly guilt free sexual practices that I'm allotted for each god I don't believe in.

[six7s]

For all of you complaining that I am not answering your posts, please assure yourselves that though not answering each and every one of your posts, I do read them and think about them for my study of atheists' heart and mind.

Besides, the readers here read your posts and get to know from your own words the benefits and also the ills consequential to your embrace of atheism.

And they derive thereby some wisdom for their own lives.I have the time to fulfill my need to spout rivers of crap on a various aspects of reality that elude me. However, I ain't interested in responding to clear and concise posts that debunk my woo as to do so would interrupt my flow



Yrreg

Fixed that for you :)

[articulett]

I'm reading each and every yrreg post for my thesis on how religion makes people mad.

I find the anognosia particularly fascinating.

[Fiona]

And we have here The Atheist who confirms my guess that sexual libertinism is indeed notwithstanding the denials of fellow atheists the benefit accruing to atheists from their embrace of atheism.

Yrreg


Good. I was looking for a good practical example of confirmation bias to use.

[RandFan]

..please assure yourselves that though not answering each and every one of your posts, I do read them and think about them for my study of atheists' heart and mind.

yyreg: So, atheists are perverts.
EE (everyone else): No

yyreg: So why do you think atheists are perverts?
EE They're not.

yyreg: But atheists are perverts.
EE: No. You are not paying attention.

yyreg: Yes I am. I'm trying to study atheism. Your answers are important.
EE: Ok, but there is nothing about atheism that translates into being a pervert. If you would engage in dialog we could gauge your understanding and focus our arguments to correct your mistakes.

yyreg: So, again, why is it that atheists are perverts?
EE: {sigh}

[Doubt]

I was a pervert when I believed in God.

I am still a pervert.

Most of the believers I know are perverts.

I see a pattern here.

[Foster Zygote]

What about bestiality, are you into bestiality?
No. I'm amazed that you brought it up. Do you think about this sort of thing often?

And incest?
No.

And pornography?
I have no problem with pornography as long as it does not depict anything illegal.

And rape of children or seducing kids?
I could not be more disgusted by those things.

If you are not into the practice of the above acts, do you believe that it is not unacceptable for atheists?

So if you yourself should ever feel some urge to go into those acts you would not have any socalled qualms of conscience to do them?

Specially if you can get away with man-enacted laws against the commission of such acts?
Every time I think to myself "Gerry couldn't possibly post a dumber argument than this one" I find myself corrected. What makes you think* that because someone rejects the oppressive sexual restrictions of a great many religious institutions that that person must therefor reject all restrictions on sexual behavior? For you to go from the rejection of Christian sexual rules to the acceptance of child rape shows the true depth of your bigotry. Are you so intellectually dishonest that you have to convince yourself that people who do not agree with you are morally inferior to yourself? If this is really the way you think then it is transparently obvious that you are not merely angry with atheists. You in fact have a hatred of atheists.


*This is probably not the correct word.

[Eskarina]

By the way, rational consistency and guiltless masturbation are stated by Foster Zygote to be the benefit of atheism.


What are the benefits of theism?

And what makes you think Foster Zygote is the spokesperson for all atheists? (Nothing personal, Foster Zygote. ;))

yregg, do you suffer from hive-mind syndrome?

[yy2bggggs]

For all of you complaining that I am not answering your posts, please assure yourselves that though not answering each and every one of your posts, I do read them and think about them for my study of atheists' heart and mind.

Your "study" is rigged. Stop flattering yourself.

[The Atheist]

I use the phrase sexual libertinism to indicate sex without any restraints whatsoever unlike sexual liberation.

Sure, that's what I took it to mean.

What about bestiality, are you into bestiality?

Not personally, no. But I really like blondes, so the idea of an afghan hound turning my head is possible, I guess.

And incest?

Sure, why not? Incest between consenting relatives can't be much of a problem. It's legal or compulsory in Tennessee, I can't recall which.

And pornography?

Porno's good.

And rape of children or seducing kids?

Not really my scene, but if you look at Russell's and Huxley's stated ideas on children and sex, it's quite plain that child sex is a part of atheist values.

If you are not into the practice of the above acts, do you believe that it is not unacceptable for atheists?

Dead simple. No god = no moral code other than what we make it.

When atheists rule the entire world, we will no doubt figure out a suitable moral code to have laws based upon. If most people felt those acts were acceptable, then they would be acceptable, that's how it works.

So if you yourself should ever feel some urge to go into those acts you would not have any socalled qualms of conscience to do them?

Specially if you can get away with man-enacted laws against the commission of such acts?

Obviously.

Like I said, it's why we become atheists.

Society can jail us, or even kill us for committing what theists see as "sin" - murder, rape and the like - but only god can give punishment of eternal length.

[bruto]

I like to ask from the Jews here who are knowledgeable about the common consensus of religious Jews in regard to their teaching about the acceptability or unacceptability of masturbation.


By the way, rational consistency and guiltless masturbation are stated by Foster Zygote to be the benefit of atheism.

And we have here The Atheist who confirms my guess that sexual libertinism is indeed notwithstanding the denials of fellow atheists the benefit accruing to atheists from their embrace of atheism.

See:

http://www.randi.org/forumlive/showpost.php?p=4285097&postcount=68



YrregAn interesting response, since it has virtually nothing at all to do with the post to which it is in response. Do you read posts, and do you understand them, or do you just pick them at random and then say what pops into your head?

[Ron_Tomkins]

What about bestiality, are you into bestiality?

And incest?

And pornography?

And rape of children or seducing kids?

But of course we are!! I mean, isn't it obvious?? That's what being an non-theist is all about!!! Come on, stop asking such obvious questions!
*Makes extremely ironic gesture*

[Fiona]

Looks forward to seeing several of these posts presented as the atheist position in the "Protocols of the Elders of Atheism" - the movie

[six7s]

Looks forward to seeing several of these posts presented as the atheist position in the "Protocols of the Elders of Atheism" - the movie

Looks forward to seeing Protocols of the Elders of Atheism - the movie winning at the Oscars

Voice-over-man: Prof Dawkins can't be here tonight, he's busy shagging his illegitimate daughter and the corpse of Lord Russell

[Elizabeth I]

In the study of atheism we are dealing with humans not with the moon and stars, that is why I am concentrating on atheists the subjects instead of an abstract worldview of an ism.

I take every word you write as coming from your honest heart and mind, of course you can later deny them with the disclosure that you were only joking.

I use the phrase sexual libertinism to indicate sex without any restraints whatsoever unlike sexual liberation.


What about bestiality, are you into bestiality?

And incest?

And pornography?

And rape of children or seducing kids?


If you are not into the practice of the above acts, do you believe that it is not unacceptable for atheists?

So if you yourself should ever feel some urge to go into those acts you would not have any socalled qualms of conscience to do them?

Specially if you can get away with man-enacted laws against the commission of such acts?

You're going for some kind of incoherence record, aren't you?

[threejr]

For all of you complaining that I am not answering your posts, please assure yourselves that though not answering each and every one of your posts, I do read them and think about them for my study of atheists' heart and mind.

Besides, the readers here read your posts and get to know from your own words the benefits and also the ills consequential to your embrace of atheism.

And they derive thereby some wisdom for their own lives.



Yrreg

Well, so far I am only seeing the benefits!

But you are right-I am gaining wisdom. Wisdom that further proves that atheism is right for me. So thanks for that! :)

[phantomb]

By the way should you ever feel any urge to go into all kinds of sexual libertinistic acts and you can get away with them from the law of human society, would you go into them?

If not, do you believe that atheists who go into such acts are not doing anything wrong morally, just make sure they don't get in trouble with the law of human society?



Yrreg

Right. Here's the problem, the laws of our society are decided upon by us, the people living in the society, not by your god. It is just plain stupid to say that because atheists reject the legitimacy of "divinely revealed laws", they necessarily also reject the laws that they themselves have helped to create by participating in our society.

It might make some sort of half-assed sense if census data showed that atheists vote against all the laws that you are saying they disagree with, but unfortunately for you, that isn't true. It also isn't true that countries like Norway with large atheists populations have laws that diverge significantly from countries with small atheists populations on these issues either.

So stop pulling stuff out of your ass. If you want to know what atheists think about your ideas, why don't you try asking them and then responding to what they say with further questions or criticisms based on actual evidence. I'm seriously surprised that the atheists here have been so civil with you considering that you've basically prejudged us all to be rapists and liars who only obey the laws because we don't want to get caught.

The true irony here is of course that the christian god, among others, condones or has nothing to say about many of your "sexual libertinistic" acts, that it is catholic priests who are known in the media for raping children, and that some theists are the ones claiming that were it not for a bunch of stupid rules written in an old book, they would be out killing their annoying neighbors and doing whatever else they wanted.

[Hokulele]

I'm seriously surprised that the atheists here have been so civil with you considering that you've basically prejudged us all to be rapists and liars who only obey the laws because we don't want to get caught.


It is hard to be offended by willful ignorance spouted by someone you don't respect.

[articulett]

Consistently, more secular societies are shown to be healthier. Of course, secularity is about choice-- freedom of conscience-- freedom to believe in whatever you've been indoctrinated with or not. Secular democracies have some of the highest measures of societal health-- fewer abortions, divorces, suicides, homicides, venereal diseases, teen pregnancies, and crimes. Religion doesn't seem to show any measurable benefit in regards to morality, though every believer imagines that those that believe like they do are the "most moral of all".

Every theist thinks they are doing what god wants-- heck, god ordered rape in the bible... there's scripture to justify every misdeed--slavery, polygamy, genocide, stoning children, pedophilia (save the virgin daughters for yourself), etc. Even theists driving airplanes into buildings think that they are doing what god wants.

[bruto]

For all of you complaining that I am not answering your posts, please assure yourselves that though not answering each and every one of your posts, I do read them and think about them for my study of atheists' heart and mind.

Besides, the readers here read your posts and get to know from your own words the benefits and also the ills consequential to your embrace of atheism.

And they derive thereby some wisdom for their own lives.



Yrreg

Instead of trying to analyze the hearts and minds behind the posts, perhaps you would do better to try to comprehend the actual content of them before you filter them through your preconceptions. So far this has eluded you.

[Toke]

Yrreg, does jesus wacht you mastrubate?
Does it turn you on?

[Safe-Keeper]

Agree with Articulette. While there are benefits to believing in God - I understand theists suffer from depression and whatnot less often than atheists, for example, and churches and whatnot are often great community centres... it doesn't really change the fact that the countries topping the HDI have large atheist populations.

[articulett]

It is hard to be offended by willful ignorance spouted by someone you don't respect.

I kind of get gleeful actually... I get to exercise my "evil atheist cred"... and once they've shared their "opinions", I think of it as a personal invitation for me to share my opinion of them.

[bruto]

I'm reading each and every yrreg post for my thesis on how religion makes people mad.

I find the anognosia particularly fascinating.Perhaps my experience of religion and religious people is less traumatic than yours, but I think that's a bit broad. I don't think religion makes sensible or sane people mad, and because human beings are so good at denial and separation, it doesn't even make them stupid about most of the rest of life. Unfortunately it doesn't seem very good at making mad people any saner, and there seems to be some compelling anecdotal evidence developing that it makes some people a good deal stupider. more stupid

[articulett]

Agree with Articulette. While there are benefits to believing in God - I understand theists suffer from depression and whatnot less often than atheists, for example, and churches and whatnot are often great community centres... it doesn't really change the fact that the countries topping the HDI have large atheist populations.

I don't even think this is true. I think it's been determined to be the social factor... people who have social outlets are happier than those who are isolated. Also, people who are depressed or sick are less likely to go to church even if they are theists --which allows theists to confuse correlation with causation and say that going to church makes someone healthier and happier.

Also, deluded people may well be happier.

But I know a lot of theists and a lot of atheists... and I'm not sure that theists suffer less depression. They are just more likely to attribute it to Satan or "not enough faith" or--in Utah--to take antidepressants. (Utah has the highest rate of Mormons and the highest rate of anti-depressant usage in the US.)

I've been to all but the first TAM, and I dare you to find a merrier crowd of people. I don't think it has to do with our wanton "sexual libertinism", but who knows. I think it's due more to our wicked sense of humor and brilliant rationality--(and Phil Plait, of course) --but everyone knows that stuff is HAWT! (which means "sexually libertine" right?)

[six7s]

Religion doesn't seem to show any measurable benefit in regards to morality, though every believer imagines that those that believe like they do are the "most moral of all".Indeed

Part and parcel in christian belief is that, without faith, Beelzebub will triumph

If - no, when - blind faith breeds ignorance and hatred, believers never have to go far to find all the reinforcement they need for more blind faith

You have to hand it to Vatican Inc., they really do knock Amway into a cocked hat... No other business on the planet manages so deftly to pull off such a combination of pyramid selling, viral advertising and spiral marketing!

[articulett]

Perhaps my experience of religion and religious people is less traumatic than yours, but I think that's a bit broad. I don't think religion makes sensible or sane people mad, and because human beings are so good at denial and separation, it doesn't even make them stupid about most of the rest of life. Unfortunately it doesn't seem very good at making mad people any saner, and there seems to be some compelling anecdotal evidence developing that it makes some people a good deal stupider. more stupid

You're right. Confirmation bias on my part. I was noticing a correlation between yrreg's theism and his madness and assumed causation. Perhaps I was confused by "the friend" he mentioned on another thread.

[articulett]

Indeed

Part and parcel in christian belief is that, without faith, Beelzebub will triumph

If - no, when - blind faith breeds ignorance and hatred, believers never have to go far to find all the reinforcement they need for more blind faith

You have to hand it to Vatican Inc., they really do knock Amway into a cocked hat... No other business on the planet manages so deftly to pull off such a combination of pyramid selling, viral advertising and spiral marketing!

You'd think that Beelzebub would be making his presence known in those places that allow gay marriage and the like... but such "sexually libertine" places seem to have fewer disasters and tragedies than their more faithful (sexually repressed?) counterparts.

[articulett]

Yrreg, does jesus wacht you mastrubate?
Does it turn you on?

Jesus, Satan, his dead grandma, the holy ghost, his guardian angel--

no wonder he's a nervous wreck and compulsively in need in finding evil in the guiltless masturbators of the world.

[Darth Rotor]

Why are you projecting your sexual hang ups on others? Can't you face your own sexuality? Face it. A lot of Christianity is about controlling the sexual behavior of others.
No, but some of it is. Indeed, establishing the norms of sexual conduct that fits within the group isn't unique to Christianity, though due to familiarity that who gets discussed here.
It's all about control.
No. Your problem here is all.

@ yrreg: Please go and jack off, feel guilty about it, then go confess to a priest or reverend about your sin. You'll feel better, and one more load that shouldn't won't get a name.

DR

[Darth Rotor]

I know maybe fifty atheists personally, but I only know one who could be described as a sexual libertine. I'm a trifle disappointed, really, I got more action with the Assembly of God chicks.

Love the sinner. ;) She may love you back.

[Skeptic Ginger]

I like to ask atheists whether sexual libertinism is the real motivation for embracing atheism, and rational consistency is just an attempt at convenient justification supposedly afforded by the atheism worldview.....You've got to be kidding.


I suggest you get out of your Christian closet more often. Every religion which includes god beliefs does not necessarily hold the same views on sexual relations even if your dumbest suggestion yet had any merit.

[Darth Rotor]

Every time I think to myself "Gerry couldn't possibly post a dumber argument than this one" I find myself corrected.

If this is really the way you think then it is transparently obvious that you are not merely angry with atheists. You in fact have a hatred of atheists.


*This is probably not the correct word.
Atheiophobe might be the word for yrreg, which I think I just made up.

DR

[Skeptic Ginger]

Agree with Articulette. While there are benefits to believing in God - I understand theists suffer from depression and whatnot less often than atheists, ....Not to sidetrack this thread, but I would like to see the data supporting that claim. There are plenty of theists who suffer from depression and/or who don't have a sense of community associated with belonging to a church. And there is no reason atheists who so desire can't find groups to feel part of a community with.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Atheiophobe might be the word for yrreg, which I think I just made up.

DRI like it. Sadly, I think the need for that word may be growing.

[gdnp]

yyreg, I have participated in several of your threads (I usually give up when they exceed 3 or 4 pages.) So let me state my opinion of why I am an athiest.

First, it has nothing to do with hating God or being angry with God. I actually attend church regularly, as it is an activity that our family does together and it is important to my wife. I would very much like to believe in God, as I would find the idea of a loving, all-powerful, all-seeing being watching over me a great comfort, as would the idea that I will live forever in paradise after I die. It would also be useful to have absolute rules of morality handed to me on stone tablets rather than having to decide what is right or wrong by myself. If it were simply a choice of believing or not believing I would believe in a heartbeat.

Unfortunately, rationality gets in the way. It is my belief that human beings are naturally curious about the world around them, and since the origins of consciousness they have sought answers to how and why things happen. Back when humans were illiterates living in caves, they were at the mercy of many forces that they did not understand: the weather, earthquakes, eclipses, volcanoes, tsunamis, floods, infectious diseases, mental illness, epilepsy, etc. So they came up with stories to explain these things. some of these stories involved gods, monsters, demons, magic. Over time, science has explained many of these phenomena. Volcanoes erupt not because a particular God has not been appeased but because magma wells up through thin points in the earth's crust where tectonic plates are moving apart. Thunder and lightning happen not because Gods or monsters are fighting but because of electrical charges in the atmosphere. People die of the plague not because they have displeased God but because they have been infected with a particular bacteria transmitted by fleas. We cure them with antibiotics, not prayer. People have seizures not because they are possessed by demons but because they have abnormal electrical circuits in their brains. We treat them with drugs or surgery, not prayer. A Down syndrome child is not a curse from God, it is the result of a biological error caused by a mistake in cell division leading to an extra chromosome. A family with hemophilia has not been cursed: they carry a defective gene that gets passed on to offspring in a statistically predictable manner. People who hear God talking to them are having auditory hallucinations, often secondary to schizophrenia. They are not having a true religious experience. We treat them with drugs, we do not make them our leaders.

Over the past few thousand years much of what religion has taught us about the world has proven to be false. There are a whole lot of miracles reported in the bible, but I have yet to see one during my lifetime that can stand up to scientific scrutiny. Science has provided better explanations, explanations that not only explain how things are but how they can be changed or fixed. It also supplies the tools to test the remaining few claims of religion. For example, Christians are taught that if you pray for something in Jesus' name it will be granted. Sadly, studies have shown that this is not the case. Properly controlled studies have shown no benefit to prayer. Not a single amputee who has prayed for his limb back has had it regrow.

I suspect that you have discarded some of what your religion taught not that long ago. Do you believe in witches? Women who worship Satan and have the power to cast spells? Do you think they should be stoned or burned at the stake? Do you still sacrifice animals to God? Do you observe the Sabbath on Saturday, the 7th day of the week, as written in the 10 commandments? Do you celebrate Passover as God commands? I doubt it. You have discarded the portions of the bible. We have just taken it a step further and discarded the entire book.

It comes down to this: There is no magic. There is no Santa Claus, no Easter Bunny, no guardian angel, and no all-knowing, all-powerful being watching over us and intervening in our lives. The evidence just does not support it. We do not believe in your god or any of the myriad alternative gods for a simple reason: the lack of evidence. Show me convincing proof of the existence of your God and I will pray to him. Show me how he wants me to behave and I will behave that way.

Until you can, I will have to continue muddling through on my own.

[MarkCorrigan]

Instead, you learn to look for universal principles that apply to all people, at all times. It's wrong to initiate the use of force. It's wrong to use deceit to get the same results as using force. It's wrong to act without thinking. It's wrong to inflict pain unnecessarily (pain is sometimes necessary in medical treatment).

Not rational and intelligent on your part, this logical sequitur of your advocacy.





Yrreg

Wow. Yet again a case of "I understood the individual words but this sentence makes no sense!"

That seems to crop up around Yrreng a lot. I wonder why....

Incidentally folks, while I'm aware most, if not everyone who is posting is aware of the lunacy train of utter ignorance that Yrreng is driving, this might help those who are new or lurking.

I take every word you write as coming from your honest heart and mind, of course you can later deny them with the disclosure that you were only joking.

Therefore TA could state next that he hunts bears with a piece of liquoriche and the pins from the hand grenades while dressed as santa, and Yrrend would think he was telling the truth.

That either shows he's blatently dishonest or shows he's gone beyond the reach of all Earth based communication.

[phantomb]

You've got to be kidding.


I suggest you get out of your Christian closet more often. Every religion which includes god beliefs does not necessarily hold the same views on sexual relations even if your dumbest suggestion yet had any merit.

I considered making this argument, but I can already predict that the response will be the same as the OP claim. Perhaps something along the lines of "sexual libertinism is the real motivation for embracing a false religion, and their made up holy texts and experiences are just an attempt at convenient justification".

[Foster Zygote]

And what makes you think Foster Zygote is the spokesperson for all atheists? (Nothing personal, Foster Zygote. ;))

No offense taken. That's the last thing I want. Well, maybe not the last, but it's pretty far down the list.

[articulett]

I think it's funny that someone imagines there could be a "spokesperson" for people who don't believe in gods.

Is there a spokespeople for those who don't believe in reincarnation? How about one for those that don't believe in Bigfoot?

It's just so funny the way theists need to think of "non belief" in their invisible friend as something more than their own non-belief in all those other invisible entities and such.

And then they have to assign special motives to those "nonbelievers" of their god to make up reasons why they don't believe--because they can't let themselves understand that it's due to a glaring lack of evidence.

Yrreg's special motive this week, is "sexual libertinism". I say, let's go with it. Why not?

Let's pretend we all joined in the "non belief movement" (ha!) so that we can practice "sexual libertinism"-- It sounds fun. And it helps make yrreg feel less horrible about the faith which represses him so. It's my yuletide gift to yrreg.

(Hey, agnostics... sign up for atheism today, and you too can be a sexual libertine!)

[RandFan]

And what makes you think Foster Zygote is the spokesperson for all atheists? I am the spokesperson for all atheists! And, I'm Batman.

[The Atheist]

No question this is the best thread at JREF right now:

Prof Dawkins can't be here tonight, he's busy shagging his illegitimate daughter and the corpse of Lord Russell

Yrreg, does jesus wacht you mastrubate?
Does it turn you on?

:dl: ^2

Atheiophobe might be the word for yrreg, which I think I just made up.

DR

I think it's atheophobe.

I'm happy to credit you with that.

[gdnp]

(Hey, agnostics... sign up for atheism today, and you too can be a sexual libertine!)

Perhaps we could erect a Statue of Libertine to demonstrate our common bondage.

[RandFan]

Yrreg, does jesus wacht you mastrubate?
Does it turn you on?Mathew 28:20 "I am with you always."

It's a bit creepy if you ask me.

[Foster Zygote]

Atheiophobe might be the word for yrreg, which I think I just made up.

DR

It's more creative than "dumb-ass", which is where I was leaning.

[Foster Zygote]

I am the spokesperson for all atheists! And, I'm Batman.

I'm Spartacus.

[Toke]

Mathew 28:20 "I am with you always."

It's a bit creepy if you ask me.

Yes, as an atheist I can mastrubate in private.
Not like those kinky theist.

[Silentknight]

In the study of atheism we are dealing with humans not with the moon and stars, that is why I am concentrating on atheists the subjects instead of an abstract worldview of an ism.
After several days of observation, the test subject has resumed his habit of putting words in other people's mouths. Such fascinating behavior. Tomorrow we start the food and sleep deprivation experiments.

I take every word you write as coming from your honest heart and mind, of course you can later deny them with the disclosure that you were only joking.
Ha, ha, ha, that's a good one! Oh wait, you were serious, weren't you? Nevermind then.

I use the phrase sexual libertinism to indicate sex without any restraints whatsoever unlike sexual liberation.
So you're saying that you prefer bondage? Hey, whatever floats your boat.

What about bestiality, are you into bestiality?
Now just a minute. I find that accusation racist. Demon foxes are still people, so it's not like we go around having sex with animals. Quit projecting!

And incest?
Well sure, sometimes I'll burn a few sticks to help me concentrate, such as when I'm meditating. Oh wait, misread, sorry.

And pornography?
Why do you think the net was born?

And rape of children or seducing kids?
You're projecting again. A little Viagra would help remedy your projectile disfunction.

If you are not into the practice of the above acts, do you believe that it is not unacceptable for atheists?
I won't not promise to avoid the opposite action of not ignoring that question.

So if you yourself should ever feel some urge to go into those acts you would not have any socalled qualms of conscience to do them?

Specially if you can get away with man-enacted laws against the commission of such acts?
Hey, it's your God who sends people to hell for jerking off. Deal with it.

[Darth Rotor]

It's more creative than "dumb-ass", which is where I was leaning.
Dear Sir:

I am trying to clean up my act, having been a bit too much in the nasty in the past few months (perhaps tied to my quitting smoking, not sure) but you don't help at all by doing that and getting me to laugh loud enough to get my dog's ears all a-twitch. :cool: It was all in the timing, as I went from post to post. Ya got me.

As to the neologism, I'd like to get a consensus on the spelling, TA may be right on this:

Atheiophobe or atheophobe?

Please advise, I am leaning toward excising the "i" now that TA mentioned it.

DR

[MattusMaximus]

Has yrreg abandoned another thread he/she started?

Folks, my advice from now on is...

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/thum_7747490a66cadb546.jpg (http://forums.randi.org/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=14198)

[Toke]

Please advise, I am leaning toward excising the "i" now that TA mentioned it.
Yes cut the i.

Question to yrreg:
Did you choose to belive in god because you NEED someone watching to get it up.

[RoboTimbo]

For all of you complaining that I am not answering your posts, please assure yourselves that though not answering each and every one of your posts, I do read them and think about them for my study of atheists' heart and mind.

I think the major complaints are that you haven't been comprehending anyone's posts. Or you are willfully ignoring the content. There is no possible way that you could be thinking about them.

Besides, the readers here read your posts and get to know from your own words the benefits and also the ills consequential to your embrace of atheism.

Your threads are some of the most instructive in the forum, in ways that you can't possibly comprehend.

And they derive thereby some wisdom for their own lives.

I already said that. Are you off the angry atheist kick yet? I'm afraid we won't be able to pry you away from the masturbation and weird sex themes with a crowbar.

Yrreg

[RandFan]

Yes, as an atheist I can mastrubate in private.
Not like those kinky theist.Well, just because you don't believe doesn't make jesus go away.

Jesus with you on the farm. (http://jesus-withyoualways.com/ImagesJun06/farmer.jpg)

Jesus with you lifting weights. (http://jesus-withyoualways.com/ImagesJun06/bodybuilder.jpg) (very homoerotic btw)

Jesus with you at the bank. (http://jesus-withyoualways.com/ImagesJun06/teller.jpg)

Jesus need to get a #$%^ing life.

[articulett]

My mom died when I was 12 and people would think it was comforting to say things like "your mom is watching over you..."

I didn't find this comforting.

Santa, God, demons, dead people... was there no respite from the invisible spies in the sky? Atheism does allow for more mental privacy that's for sure.

So everyone join in! GDNP is erecting a Statue of Libertine to demonstrate our common bondage. Randfan will be our spokesperson.

Sing out! "No Hell; No Hell... the heathens did sing..."

[bruto]

@ yrreg: Please go and jack off, feel guilty about it, then go confess to a priest or reverend about your sin. You'll feel better, and one more load that shouldn't won't get a name.

DR Yowtch! Good thing you're working hard at being less nasty or you'd run the risk of accidentally insulting poor Yrreg! :rolleyes:

[articulett]

I think yrreg takes all nastiness as confirmation of his biases.

It would be a shame to disappoint him.

He tends to make up stuff when we fail to comply.

[Foster Zygote]

Dear Sir:

I am trying to clean up my act, having been a bit too much in the nasty in the past few months (perhaps tied to my quitting smoking, not sure) but you don't help at all by doing that and getting me to laugh loud enough to get my dog's ears all a-twitch. :cool: It was all in the timing, as I went from post to post. Ya got me.

As to the neologism, I'd like to get a consensus on the spelling, TA may be right on this:

Atheiophobe or atheophobe?

Please advise, I am leaning toward excising the "i" now that TA mentioned it.

DR

Considering the Greek root is "theos" I would also lean toward jettisoning the "i".

So "atheophobe" it is. Or "dumb-ass". That still works for me.

[articulett]

I'm afraid we won't be able to pry you away from the masturbation and weird sex themes with a crowbar.

Come on! It's entertaining-- where, praytell, is your sexual libertinism?! What kind of atheist are you?

[articulett]

Considering the Greek root is "theos" I would also lean toward jettisoning the "i".

So "atheophobe" it is. Or "dumb-ass". That still works for me.

I like "atheophobe" because it implies that I have the power to induce fear with my "non belief".

I like the idea of people fearing me.

[Foster Zygote]

I think yrreg takes all nastiness as confirmation of his biases.

It would be a shame to disappoint him.

He tends to make up stuff when we fail to comply.

I imagine that he will conveniently ignore the fact that those mocking him are not exclusively atheists.

[fromdownunder]

I'm Spartacus.

I'm Brian. And so is my wife.

Norm

[articulett]

I imagine that he will conveniently ignore the fact that those mocking him are not exclusively atheists.


Of course he will ignore that! How else will he imagine his faith gives him moral superiority?

The theists must clearly be masturbating guiltily.

(Gods seem to have an inordinate interest in orgasms. You'd think they would have tweaked their creations so that they didn't have such a yen for forbidden fruit... but I suppose they need to give us some sort of test to see whether we deserve salvation or damnation. If they are going to be watching over us all the time, they may as well focus on something interesting. Our bathroom habits surely can't be fun to watch. I hope their immaterial odor detection is not as finely attuned as their immaterial vision. Of course, they say "god is everywhere"... so I guess rectums are god infested as well.)

[ponderingturtle]

The sin of Onan, other than seeing his father naked.


But I thought the sin of Onan was pulling out of his widowed sister in law and not knocking her up.

[gdnp]

Now just a minute. I find that accusation racist. Demon foxes are still people, so it's not like we go around having sex with animals. Quit projecting!



Some foxes prefer dancing, but only in the woods when they think no one is looking. Of course, dancing is also considered sinful to some subsets of Christiandom.

I will admit to having sex with animals at times, but only the female human kind.

[articulett]

How come it wasn't considered a sin for Lot to offer his virgin daughters up for sexual favors?

How come it wasn't a sin for him to to have sex with his daughters?

As a sexual libertine I demand to know... because I find these things immoral... and, despite my heathen ways, I would not consider engaging in either of these acts and would be repulsed by anyone who thought it was a-ok to do so.

How come I'm more moral than yrreg's god?

[gdnp]

The theists must clearly be masturbating guiltily.

I wonder if they prefer it that way. I mean, which releases more adrenaline: sex with your wife, or sex with your mistress? Why do married men hire prostitutes? Why do men with attraction to little boys become priests? Why do wealthy people shop lift?

The forbidden fruit is always the tastiest.

[articulett]

Some foxes prefer dancing, but only in the woods when they think no one is looking. Of course, dancing is also considered sinful to some subsets of Christiandom.

I will admit to having sex with animals at times, but only the female human kind.

I've never had sex with a human female animal... does that make me more or less of a sexual libertine than you?

[articulett]

Mind you, I'm not against it...

My motto is the same as the Bonobos-- make orgasms; not war.

[articulett]

In fact, I might well be out making orgasms right now if I wasn't busy entertaining myself on this thread.

[ponderingturtle]

I wonder if they prefer it that way. I mean, which releases more adrenaline: sex with your wife, or sex with your mistress?

I think the sex that is supposted to turn you on the most is sex with the girl slaves you take after killing all the men, boys and women. Either that or you are supposted to be castrated it is so hard to tell which parts to focus on in the bible.

[gdnp]

I've never had sex with a human female animal... does that make me more or less of a sexual libertine than you?

We'll have to ask yyreg.

Yrreg: Since people become atheists so that they can be sexual libertines without guilt, should atheists who are not sexual libertines feel guilty about it?

[Miss_Kitt]

...
I've been to all but the first TAM, and I dare you to find a merrier crowd of people. I don't think it has to do with our wanton "sexual libertinism", but who knows. I think it's due more to our wicked sense of humor and brilliant rationality--(and Phil Plait, of course) --but everyone knows that stuff is HAWT! (which means "sexually libertine" right?)

Articulett -- Are you saying Phil is HAWT?? :jaw-dropp

Now, if you're talking about all the presenters, which would include Ben Goldacre and the Sexiest AstroPhysicist on Earth, I might agree... MK

[Foster Zygote]

I'm Brian. And so is my wife.

Norm

You sank my battleship.

[articulett]

I cannot confirm or deny whether I implied Phil is HAWT...

(But lets not deny the sexual libertine prowess of the brilliant, wry, and rational.)

I may be a sexual libertine, but I'm coy. I shan't give my crush(es) (or lack of crushes) away.

[Miss_Kitt]

As to the neologism, I'd like to get a consensus on the spelling, TA may be right on this:

Atheiophobe or atheophobe?

Please advise, I am leaning toward excising the "i" now that TA mentioned it.

DR


I concur, atheophobe or perhaps atheiphobe (the "o" isn't necessary).

Perhaps we should start a poll? With the Planet X option being, "...people like Yrreg are the subject of reality TV humor programs."

[six7s]

I shan't give my crush(es) (or lack of crushes) away.This info is for sale?:boggled:

[articulett]

I'd have to consult the "sexual libertine" handbook...
but how much is it worth to you?

[articulett]

duplicate

[Toke]

I think the sex that is supposted to turn you on the most is sex with the girl slaves you take after killing all the men, boys and women. Either that or you are supposted to be castrated it is so hard to tell which parts to focus on in the bible.

Well, I have a pretty good idea which part yrreg focuses on, and they are not parts of the bible.

[articulett]

I'm just doing a public service announcement to let everyone know that in less than 4 hours it will be time to orgasm for peace:

http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/swift-blog/352-orgasm-orgone-or-not.html

All guiltless masturbators: don't forget to set your wank alarms.

[X]

I've never had sex.

I'm an atheist.

It has nothing to do with a rejection of some percieved moral code, or with anger at any specific deity-figure.

I simply see no reason to believe in god.

It's not a rejection of Christianity (or any other religion) because I don't like it.
It's that I have no belief in god, therefore am not Christian (or any other religion).


Why are you so determined to believe that atheists hate god?

It's as though the very concept of someone not believing causes you so much trouble you have to delude yourself into believing we hate your god.


A final note: Don't attempt to assign a single reason for atheism. It is simply a term for people who don't have a god belief. There is no doctrine, there is no common belief, there is no catechism.

There is simply individuals who, for whatever reason (which will vary person to person) don't believe in your god.

Accept it, stop embarrassing yourself, and move on.

And please answer my question in your "angry atheist" thread.

[Eskarina]

Well, just because you don't believe doesn't make jesus go away.

Jesus with you on the farm. (http://jesus-withyoualways.com/ImagesJun06/farmer.jpg)

Jesus with you lifting weights. (http://jesus-withyoualways.com/ImagesJun06/bodybuilder.jpg) (very homoerotic btw)

Jesus with you at the bank. (http://jesus-withyoualways.com/ImagesJun06/teller.jpg)

Jesus need to get a #$%^ing life.


I've just taken a look at that website. :boggled:

Let me get this straight: Jesus seems to have all the time in the world to watch you when you're playing golf or the French horn, when you jog, count money or cut hairs, but he can't find the time to solve some more than pressing issues like starvation, wars or the global recession?

I think he's doing a piss-poor job.

[Eskarina]

I am the spokesperson for all atheists! And, I'm Batman.

I'm Spartacus.

I'm Brian. And so is my wife.

Norm


Damn you all and damn the different time-zones and my need for sleep.

All that's left for me to say now is:

I am the walrus.

[Twiler]

On the subject of perversion:

I suspect that everyone may be a pervert by their own standards because they can't be aroused unless they feel they're doing something wrong.

Are there any psychologists here? What do you think?

[Fiona]

On the subject of perversion:

I suspect that everyone may be a pervert by their own standards because they can't be aroused unless they feel they're doing something wrong.

Are there any psychologists here? What do you think?


Not a psychologist but I think that may be a little overextended: well a lot overextended really :)

[Dancing David]

What about bestiality, are you into bestiality?

And incest?

And pornography?

And rape of children or seducing kids?





Same old tired claims about atheism. You can have morals without religion Yrreg.

You can believe that it is wrong to cause others suffering and not believe in god.

In fact it is a moral stupid position to do so because of god, that is rather infantile.

I choose to not harm others because I feel it is the better way to act, not because I am afraid the Bloody Crazy Sky Daddy will Get Me.

[Dancing David]

On the subject of perversion:

I suspect that everyone may be a pervert by their own standards because they can't be aroused unless they feel they're doing something wrong.

Are there any psychologists here? What do you think?

Nope, perversion is defined socially, as 'inappropriate' arousal.

I work very hard to not feel I am doing it wrong, I try to do it right. (and only with my spouse.)

[Toke]

Same old tired claims about atheism. You can have morals without religion Yrreg.

And probably more common, religion without moral.
Wich is why once deebly religius people go bad they go VERY bad.
The externaly enforced morals have withered their internal ones.

Badmouthing atheists is simply a projection of what they themselves would do if not for fear of skydaddy.

[bruto]

On the subject of perversion:

I suspect that everyone may be a pervert by their own standards because they can't be aroused unless they feel they're doing something wrong.

Are there any psychologists here? What do you think? Sorry, can't agree there. It works the other way for some of us.

[Elizabeth I]

Now just a minute. I find that accusation racist. Demon foxes are still people, so it's not like we go around having sex with animals. Quit projecting!

Are you a werefox?

[articulett]

I've just taken a look at that website. :boggled:

Let me get this straight: Jesus seems to have all the time in the world to watch you when you're playing golf or the French horn, when you jog, count money or cut hairs, but he can't find the time to solve some more than pressing issues like starvation, wars or the global recession?

I think he's doing a piss-poor job.

Oh, he's watching all those things too. He likes to watch... he doesn't get involved except to help people win football games and stuff like that.

Willy Nilly Jesus.

[gdnp]

Oh, he's watching all those things too. He likes to watch... he doesn't get involved except to help people win football games and stuff like that.

Willy Nilly Jesus.

I see him more as Chauncey Gardiner Jesus

[Hokulele]

I see him more as Chauncey Gardiner Jesus


Awesome movie.

[RandFan]

I see him more as Chauncey Gardiner Jesus

Chance the Gardener: "I like to watch."

[six7s]

You can have morals without religion Yrreg.The only people who have no morals are (literally) dead

[Pardalis]

Has anyone read Michel Onfray (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Onfray)'s Atheist Manifesto (http://www.amazon.com/Atheist-Manifesto-Against-Christianity-Judaism/dp/1559708204)? I haven't read it and am just learning about the author, but he seems to favor an hedonistic phylosophy, that we should focus more on pleasure, that this is where true moral is.

http://newhumanist.org.uk/1421

I'm not sure I agree with that. Of course I would have to first read his book to really understand what he means, but at first glance I think knowledge and science are better endeavours than just personal pleasure. Hedonism seems so small and egoistic to me, its rewards are short term, where science's reach is infinite, and its rewards universal and enduring.

[yrreg]

Posted by yrreg
I like to ask from the Jews here who are knowledgeable about the common consensus of religious Jews in regard to their teaching about the acceptability or unacceptability of masturbation.


By the way, rational consistency and guiltless masturbation are stated by Foster Zygote to be the benefit of atheism.

And we have here The Atheist who confirms my guess that sexual libertinism is indeed notwithstanding the denials of fellow atheists the benefit accruing to atheists from their embrace of atheism.

See:

http://www.randi.org/forumlive/showp...7&postcount=68



Yrreg


An interesting response, since it has virtually nothing at all to do with the post to which it is in response. Do you read posts, and do you understand them, or do you just pick them at random and then say what pops into your head?



Are you a Jew and knowledgeable about what religious Jews teach about the acceptability or unacceptability of masturbation?

That is a relevant inquiry in a topic like Atheism and sexual libertinism, inspired by the statement of Foster Zygote that for him atheism affords him rational consistency for a worldview and guiltless masturbation in his private morality.




Yrreg

[Nogbad]

Well pursuing the sexual libertine life offered a couple of choices - atheist or Catholic Priest


unfortunately I am not very keen on little boys so it was atheism* for me.





* I was sold a crock though. All I got was a degree of intellectual coherence. :(

[The Atheist]

Well pursuing the sexual libertine life offered a couple of choices - atheist or Catholic Priest


unfortunately I am not very keen on little boys so it was atheism* for me.





* I was sold a crock though. All I got was a degree of intellectual coherence. :(


Nominated!

Pithy.

[yrreg]

Atheiophobe might be the word for yrreg, which I think I just made up.

DR



You give evidence of linguistic prolificacy.

I read your what is that, signature?

Helicopters don't so much fly as beat the air into submission.

Perhaps you can enlighten me about my amazement with helicopters, an invention of man of course founded upon models in nature.

The way I see it, the rotor blades of the helicopter are supporting the air-ship in space in mid air, against the pull of gravity, and the air-ship with its contents can weigh together as much as what? even ten tons or more of mass-weight.

And these blades don't break, that is how man has made them so strong.

Then also those blades are linked to the crankshaft which at one line of circular contact in the body of the helicopter 'shell' is rotating on bearing balls and sealed up with rubber bushing.

But the whole air-ship with its contents, all their massive tonnage together, does not fall out and down from and through that spot where the crankshaft passes from the inside to the outside of the helicopter body shell.

Really amazing.


If man can do that and even more than that, there is indeed God Who has done and is sustaining feats even infinitely greater than those done by His creature man.



Yrreg

[Fiona]

God didn't make any helicopters Yrreg. He can't. He doesn't exist

[Nogbad]

You give evidence of linguistic prolificacy.

I read your what is that, signature?

Helicopters don't so much fly as beat the air into submission.

Perhaps you can enlighten me about my amazement with helicopters, an invention of man of course founded upon models in nature.

The way I see it, the rotor blades of the helicopter are supporting the air-ship in space in mid air, against the pull of gravity, and the air-ship with its contents can weigh together as much as what? even ten tons or more of mass-weight.

And these blades don't break, that is how man has made them so strong.

Then also those blades are linked to the crankshaft which at one line of circular contact in the body of the helicopter 'shell' is rotating on bearing balls and sealed up with rubber bushing.

But the whole air-ship with its contents, all their massive tonnage together, does not fall out and down from and through that spot where the crankshaft passes from the inside to the outside of the helicopter body shell.

Really amazing.


If man can do that and even more than that, there is indeed God Who has done and is sustaining feats even infinitely greater than those done by His creature man.



Yrreg

Anselm's ontological argument makes no more sense today than it did in the 11th century. It makes an unsupported leap of logic and thus becomes circular reasoning.

Actually helicopters are repelled from the ground because they are so ugly - as proof I simply point out that helicopters not in use are tied down.

[RandFan]

If man can do that and even more than that, there is indeed God Who has done and is sustaining feats even infinitely greater than those done by His creature man. If man can do > A then God.

Fail.

But you are off topic so let me steer you back.

If religious sexual normative statements can be linked to priests and ministers buggering children then there is a god.

See how the conclusion doesn't follow from the premise? That's the mistake that you are making.

[yrreg]

Read the line from your message put in bold by yours truly.


yyreg, I have participated in several of your threads (I usually give up when they exceed 3 or 4 pages.) So let me state my opinion of why I am an athiest.

First, it has nothing to do with hating God or being angry with God. I actually attend church regularly, as it is an activity that our family does together and it is important to my wife. I would very much like to believe in God, as I would find the idea of a loving, all-powerful, all-seeing being watching over me a great comfort, as would the idea that I will live forever in paradise after I die. It would also be useful to have absolute rules of morality handed to me on stone tablets rather than having to decide what is right or wrong by myself. If it were simply a choice of believing or not believing I would believe in a heartbeat.

Unfortunately, rationality gets in the way. It is my belief that human beings are naturally curious about the world around them, and since the origins of consciousness they have sought answers to how and why things happen. Back when humans were illiterates living in caves, they were at the mercy of many forces that they did not understand: the weather, earthquakes, eclipses, volcanoes, tsunamis, floods, infectious diseases, mental illness, epilepsy, etc. So they came up with stories to explain these things. some of these stories involved gods, monsters, demons, magic. Over time, science has explained many of these phenomena. Volcanoes erupt not because a particular God has not been appeased but because magma wells up through thin points in the earth's crust where tectonic plates are moving apart. Thunder and lightning happen not because Gods or monsters are fighting but because of electrical charges in the atmosphere. People die of the plague not because they have displeased God but because they have been infected with a particular bacteria transmitted by fleas. We cure them with antibiotics, not prayer. People have seizures not because they are possessed by demons but because they have abnormal electrical circuits in their brains. We treat them with drugs or surgery, not prayer. A Down syndrome child is not a curse from God, it is the result of a biological error caused by a mistake in cell division leading to an extra chromosome. A family with hemophilia has not been cursed: they carry a defective gene that gets passed on to offspring in a statistically predictable manner. People who hear God talking to them are having auditory hallucinations, often secondary to schizophrenia. They are not having a true religious experience. We treat them with drugs, we do not make them our leaders.

Over the past few thousand years much of what religion has taught us about the world has proven to be false. There are a whole lot of miracles reported in the bible, but I have yet to see one during my lifetime that can stand up to scientific scrutiny. Science has provided better explanations, explanations that not only explain how things are but how they can be changed or fixed. It also supplies the tools to test the remaining few claims of religion. For example, Christians are taught that if you pray for something in Jesus' name it will be granted. Sadly, studies have shown that this is not the case. Properly controlled studies have shown no benefit to prayer. Not a single amputee who has prayed for his limb back has had it regrow.

I suspect that you have discarded some of what your religion taught not that long ago. Do you believe in witches? Women who worship Satan and have the power to cast spells? Do you think they should be stoned or burned at the stake? Do you still sacrifice animals to God? Do you observe the Sabbath on Saturday, the 7th day of the week, as written in the 10 commandments? Do you celebrate Passover as God commands? I doubt it. You have discarded the portions of the bible. We have just taken it a step further and discarded the entire book.

It comes down to this: There is no magic. There is no Santa Claus, no Easter Bunny, no guardian angel, and no all-knowing, all-powerful being watching over us and intervening in our lives. The evidence just does not support it. We do not believe in your god or any of the myriad alternative gods for a simple reason: the lack of evidence. Show me convincing proof of the existence of your God and I will pray to him. Show me how he wants me to behave and I will behave that way.

Until you can, I will have to continue muddling through on my own.


Now, think really hard and with no holds barred, genuinely consulting your reason and intelligence, God is not what religions can adequately describe Him to be.


Religions are so many scripts written by men who have discovered God, for God to play in regard to men, so that men can deal tangibly with God.

Think about that.


Here is your homework:

Read up on theory and practice of theism in Judaism, theory and practice of theism in Christianity, theory and practice of theism in Islam, and also theory and practice of theism in Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism, and in the so far most favored religion for yours truly, Bahá'í.

And continue thinking with your head, your reason and intelligence, taken out of the sand where you as an atheist prefer to bury them, in order to attain your kind of rational consistency under the sand.




Yrreg

[Dr Adequate]

By the way, rational consistency and guiltless masturbation are stated by Foster Zygote to be the benefit of atheism. It's strange that you can't recognize a joke --- after all, you're one yourself.

[Toke]

So all you get from being christian is rational inconsistency and jesus to wacht and disapprove when you masturbate ?

[yrreg]

Posted by yrreg


What about bestiality, are you into bestiality?

And incest?

And pornography?

And rape of children or seducing kids?
Same old tired claims about atheism. You can have morals without religion Yrreg.

You can believe that it is wrong to cause others suffering and not believe in god.

In fact it is a moral stupid position to do so because of god, that is rather infantile.

I choose to not harm others because I feel it is the better way to act, not because I am afraid the Bloody Crazy Sky Daddy will Get Me.


Perhaps it was in another forum but of explicitly atheists' sponsorship and patronage...


Confirm for me, Dancing David, didn't you tell me that you were molested as a kid?

And you seemed to have said as much that the bad trip made you to be what you are today, an atheist?


Take courage, my man, you can still master the self-help or DIY knowledge and skill to mental and emotional well-being without availing yourself of atheism.

Much less of Buddhism.


Please do not make personal attacks.



Yrreg

[gdnp]

Now, think really hard and with no holds barred, genuinely consulting your reason and intelligence, God is not what religions can adequately describe Him to be.
And yet you describe God as Him, based on self-contradictory words written in dead languages by semi-literate people hundreds of years ago.

Religions are so many scripts written by men who have discovered God, for God to play in regard to men, so that men can deal tangibly with God.

Think about that.
And yet the one thing that they almost all agree on is that all the others are wrong. Think about that one.

Here is your homework:

Read up on theory and practice of theism in Judaism, theory and practice of theism in Christianity, theory and practice of theism in Islam, and also theory and practice of theism in Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism, and in the so far most favored religion for yours truly, Bahá'í.

And continue thinking with your head, your reason and intelligence, taken out of the sand where you as an atheist prefer to bury them, in order to attain your kind of rational consistency under the sand.
Reread my previous post. I have not studied all religions, but I have studied enough religion along with enough science to come to two possible conclusions that fit the data: Either there is no God, or God created the universe in the Big Bang and has left it alone since then. He has left us with no guidance on how he believes we should behave, and no evidence that consciousness persists after death. Thus for all practical purposes, the two alternatives are equivalent. We are forced to develop morality on our own.

[bruto]

Are you a Jew and knowledgeable about what religious Jews teach about the acceptability or unacceptability of masturbation?

That is a relevant inquiry in a topic like Atheism and sexual libertinism, inspired by the statement of Foster Zygote that for him atheism affords him rational consistency for a worldview and guiltless masturbation in his private morality.




YrregI am not a Jew. I was raised and educated as a Christian, by Christian teachers who, because they were not flaming idiots, had some understanding of what is actually important. There is such a thing as thoughtful and intelligent Christianity, though there's precious little of it found in these exchanges. My inability to accept theism is ultimately to their credit.

The subject of my post was the question of how the sin of Onan, as reported in the Bible, is to be interpreted, and whether it has any bearing on our daily behavior. Christians cite this passage in various contexts, including as either a prohibition of masturbation or a metaphor for it. Whether or not Jews also use it, or other laws from other sources, to regulate masturbation or any other conduct is largely irrelevant to the subject, though it might be interesting in determining whether the interpretation of some Christians is corrupt.

[RandFan]

Here is your homework:

...continue thinking with your head, your reason and intelligence...Here is yours. Go look in a mirror. And when you've finished with that look up the definition of "hypocrite".

[RandFan]

All you need do is grow up and master the technique and art of rational and intelligent thinking and self-guidance. All you need do is take your own advice.

[Fiona]

Confirm for me, Dancing David, didn't you tell me that you were molested as a kid?

I doubt what you say is true because not much you say is true, as I have read your threads. But if it is true then do you think it is kind or responsible to use the information just to gratify your own ego?

And you seemed to have said as much that the bad trip made you to be what you are today, an atheist?

Using "seemed" does not get you off the hook here: you have been told over and over that this is not how atheism works. Why do you tell such lies?


Take courage, my man, you can still master the self-help or DIY knowledge and skill to mental and emotional well-being without availing yourself of atheism.

You are not someone who is likely to impress as a model of mental and emotional well being, Yrreg. From my point of view healthy individuals treat other people with honesty and respect. You have shown absolutely no capacity to do that.

All you need do is grow up and master the technique and art of rational and intelligent thinking and self-guidance.

By which I take it you mean doing what you do? If there were a god he would prevent that, assuming he was a good god. Yet here you are. Which is as good a demonstration that god does not exist as I have yet seen. QED

[calebprime]

Perhaps it was in another forum but of explicitly atheists' sponsorship and patronage...


Confirm for me, Dancing David, didn't you tell me that you were molested as a kid?

And you seemed to have said as much that the bad trip made you to be what you are today, an atheist?


Take courage, my man, you can still master the self-help or DIY knowledge and skill to mental and emotional well-being without availing yourself of atheism.

Much less of Buddhism.


All you need do is grow up and master the technique and art of rational and intelligent thinking and self-guidance.

Unless of course there is some genetic or systemic trouble with you, which is a bonanza to psychiatrists who just love to befriend pharmaceutical business in the marketing of chemical compounds, to keep people supposedly on their feet and in touch with reality enough to cope with life.




Yrreg

The only way to answer bad taste like that is to tell the truth:

I was an atheist in the 3rd grade, long before I was molested--that came later.

Maybe God or Jeebus would have spared me that unpleasantness?

Oh, I guess not, what with the abuse scandal in the Church, and all.

[Silentknight]

Are you a werefox?

1) I prefer the term Vulpine American, thank you very much.
2) I dunno, but I've certainly got the crazy part down.
3) Yes, and I'm quite fed up (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitsune#Hoshi_no_tama) with those people who keep touching my ball like they're trying to steal it.
4) Only a metaphor for my creative interests.
5) All of the above.

[RandFan]

Oh, I guess not, what with the abuse scandal in the Church, and all.When I was a believer two of my favorite passages were:

Luke 17:2 "It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones."

Luke 18:16 "But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God."

Only problem is that god had such a thing with killing and torturing children in the OT. What with the flood, the 10th plague on Egypt (god killed the first born of all of the Egyptian children), the slaughter of the Amalekites, etc., etc..

God's got a mixed record. I'm not really sure where he stands given the sex abuse in the churches. It would have been nice if he could have tipped someone off (someone not in the church that is).

[The Atheist]

Here is yours. Go look in a mirror.

Now this raises a very important question.

If he's looking in a mirror while masturbating is that double the sin?

Masturbation and voyeurism?

Or even triple - masturbation, voyeurism and narcissism?

[articulett]

So yrreg can imagine that molestation causes atheism... but we aren't allowed to speculate whether his "friend's" homosexuality caused his madness and obsession with the sex lives of atheists.

[Silentknight]

So yrreg can imagine that molestation causes atheism... but we aren't allowed to speculate whether his "friend's" homosexuality caused his madness and obsession with the sex lives of atheists.
No, but you could address that towards homophobes or bigoted fundies as a whole, rather than attacking any one individual. After all, most of these people prefer to have their group mentality do all the thinking for them, since it saves them the trouble of having to think for themselves.

Now this raises a very important question.

If he's looking in a mirror while masturbating is that double the sin?

Masturbation and voyeurism?

Or even triple - masturbation, voyeurism and narcissism?
What if you're looking at your reflection in a pond and drown while trying to lean over to kiss it? Does Darwin-awarding add a fourth sin to the list?

[Fiona]

I think we have speculated about that, so we must be "allowed" surely?

[RandFan]

Or even triple - masturbation, voyeurism and narcissism?Sounds hot. Throw in a cat and rubber gloves and I'm there.

[The Atheist]

Hell, now I've got to consider how to break all ten commandments at once.

I think making a snuff film with your next-door neighbour's wife, stealing her handbag and coveting her ass while saying the paternoster backwards could do the trick.

Because intent is everything, I even think faking her death would be ok!

If you can work rubber gloves in, so much the better.

[Darth Rotor]

God didn't make any helicopters Yrreg. He can't. He doesn't exist
All God needed to provide was the air. The flogging He could safely leave to Man, in the shape of

Sikorsky, Huges, and Bell (and others, of course.)

Paid political announcement here: f:rule10 Eurocopter. It was a lot cooler when it was Aerospatiale. (Innovative use of composites on the heads, Precious, and at one time the industry leader. At one time. )

You give evidence of linguistic prolificacy.

I read your what is that, signature?

Helicopters don't so much fly as beat the air into submission.
Perhaps you can enlighten me about my amazement with helicopters, an invention of man of course founded upon models in nature.
Yes, yrreg, I am a cunning linguist.

As regards helicopters, I refer you to sctipture, for it is written in the Book of Igor, Chapter 6 verse 9:

What Bernoulli bringeth into the air let no man sunder, lest he fall rapidly with no chance to autorotate.

Omnes Domnes Tail Rotus Vobiscum

It's all about lift, drag, balance, vibration, and PFM. Titanium is the secret sauce.

DR

[Toke]

Paid political announcement here: f Eurocopter. It was a lot cooler when it was Aerospatiale. (Innovative use of composites on the heads, Precious, and at one time the industry leader. At one time. )

I think those are the ones denmark brought as rescue helicopters.
1/3 in the air 2/3 in the workshop.
The english borowed some for afganistan.

[The_Fire]

I think those are the ones denmark brought as rescue helicopters.
1/3 in the air 2/3 in the workshop.
The english borowed some for afganistan.


And from that we can learn one thing: Don't let the danish military handle the "buying" part of thing.....So far they botched helis, those vehicles that was supposedly armoured for use in Afghanistan and lets not forget Tårnfalken (a drone).......

[Toke]

There was also a transport plane for use on greenland, it could not handle sidewind or gravel runways. And anyone on a strecher were certan to be killed in a crash.

[phantomb]

Hell, now I've got to consider how to break all ten commandments at once.

I think making a snuff film with your next-door neighbour's wife, stealing her handbag and coveting her ass while saying the paternoster backwards could do the trick.

You're on a roll! Do all the deadly sins next.

[Darth Rotor]

Hell, now I've got to consider how to break all ten commandments at once.

I think making a snuff film with your next-door neighbour's wife, stealing her handbag and coveting her ass while saying the paternoster backwards could do the trick.

Because intent is everything, I even think faking her death would be ok!

While saying the paternoster backwards to a statue of Ba'al. ;)

Graven images and no other gods before me, and all that. Yes, the statuary would increase the costs of your film, and you could ensure that the money shot was fired on the ground, thus killing yet another future head of state in the every sperm is alive theory of life.

Good Lord, on that basis, I was a serial murderer by the time I was out of high school, and if we assume the status of accessory before and after the fact, so were a few of my dates.

Onan wept.

DR

[Dancing David]

Perhaps it was in another forum but of explicitly atheists' sponsorship and patronage...


Confirm for me, Dancing David, didn't you tell me that you were molested as a kid?

And you seemed to have said as much that the bad trip made you to be what you are today, an atheist?


Take courage, my man, you can still master the self-help or DIY knowledge and skill to mental and emotional well-being without availing yourself of atheism.

Much less of Buddhism.


Please do not make personal attacks.



Yrreg

Pointless as usual.

I can be moral with out a belief in god.

You apparently are what you are and do believe in god.

[Dancing David]

I doubt what you say is true because not much you say is true, as I have read your threads. But if it is true then do you think it is kind or responsible to use the information just to gratify your own ego?



Using "seemed" does not get you off the hook here: you have been told over and over that this is not how atheism works. Why do you tell such lies?




You are not someone who is likely to impress as a model of mental and emotional well being, Yrreg. From my point of view healthy individuals treat other people with honesty and respect. You have shown absolutely no capacity to do that.



By which I take it you mean doing what you do? If there were a god he would prevent that, assuming he was a good god. Yet here you are. Which is as good a demonstration that god does not exist as I have yet seen. QED

Well Yrreg does remember correctly, it is not the reason that I am an atheist.

It is the reason that I believe that the universe if either lacking in 'purpose' of the 'everything happens for a reason' variety and that I feel that if gods/goddesses do exist the are chaotic , capricious and indifferent.

So Yrreg is correct in one sense, as part of my recovery I came to believe that it was easier to believe that deities do not exist , or that they do not intervene in human affairs.

The reasons I am an atheist are more complex, but mainly that there are simpler explanations for most things than that gods exist.

Especially in world where 13 million children die from preventable causes every year.

[MattusMaximus]

After reading much of this thread, I have concluded that, more than anything, yrreg really needs to whack off.

[Belz...]

I like to ask atheists whether sexual libertinism is the real motivation for embracing atheism

I do believe that Zygote's point was about GUILT, not sex.

and rational consistency is just an attempt at convenient justification supposedly afforded by the atheism worldview.

Ah! Yes, then. I'm sure all atheists in the world are atheists because they want to have sex with dogs more often. Thanks for pointing that out. Of course, we could also argue that theists are theists because they are ashamed or affraid of sex and would rather shelter themselves from it by believing that an imaginary god forbids them from doing it.

[The Atheist]

You're on a roll! Do all the deadly sins next.

Too easy, I live those. Sluttony with goths is morning tea for me.

While saying the paternoster backwards to a statue of Ba'al. ;)

Perfect!

[Belz...]

And why? Why would god give a damn? The Christian god is so irrational. How can a perfect being be irrational? Oh, wait...

He is PERFECTLY irrational.

[RandFan]

He is PERFECTLY irrational.:)

Perfection notwithstanding. The notion of god being irrational does make one hell of a lot of sense. Much more than a mysterious perfect one.

[Darth Rotor]

:)

Perfection notwithstanding. The notion of god being irrational does make one hell of a lot of sense. Much more than a mysterious perfect one.
That would make God completely opposite of The Beast, which has an integer number (616 or 666, pick your preference).

Maybe the number of God is Pi. :cool: That would make the complaint about circular reasoning delightfully fitting, don't you think?

There is no way that joke has not been tried before, but it just came to me as I saw your Irrational line. Groaners happen.

DR

[bruto]

If it's true, as the old saying goes, that guilty pleasures are the best, then it stands to reason (well, to something vaguely resembling reason, which is as close as we get to the target in a Yrreg thread) that theists are both the savviest and most highly evolved sexual libertines, considering that they have cultivated the guilt that sweetens the act. Atheists just wank, but a good theist can really get in God's face.

[articulett]

Especially in world where 13 million children die from preventable causes every year.

Not to mention...

trillions of sperm, eons of selection, and the pinnacle of it all is people like yrreg? (Not very impressive if a deity is involved... no a deity I could worship.)

[articulett]

Atheists tend to feel guilty based on whether they have caused harm to others or done something they would not approve of others doing...

We do feel guilt, yrreg,-- just not for silly things because we imagine god is spying on them and disapproves.

We mix our fibers and eat shellfish with abandon. And we think rationally without feeling guilty because some invisible megalomaniac is going to be pissed because we don't have "faith" in him. We don't feel guilty for being "doubting Thomases".

We don't feel that it's anyone's business what we do with our own genitals.

[Toke]

After reading much of this thread, I have concluded that, more than anything, yrreg really needs to whack off.

So true:D
And nominated.

[articulett]

I suspect he may be using this thread to do exactly that.

And blaming the atheists for his "sin".

[articulett]

He can tell himself that he came here to preach the word of god (as opposed to going to evil porno sites) and we (and our Satanic influences) debauched him.

[billydkid]

No, it has nothing at all to do with it. Just exactly what is "sexual libertinism"? Is it sexual behavior that you find repellent? It's sort of the same argument I have heard from the right about libertarians - that their real motives involve the desire toward self indulgence and "libertinism". For some, showing the face or the hair amounts to "sexual libertinism". And from what I understand Larry Craig and Ted Haggard and Jimmy Swaggart and Mark Foley were pretty religious guys - as well as a boatload of other self righteous hypocrits.

[Belz...]

Perfection notwithstanding. The notion of god being irrational does make one hell of a lot of sense. Much more than a mysterious perfect one.

It sure as hell would explain a lot. I mean, TEN plagues ? Come on, man. Get a grip and just teleport those folk out of there.

[RandFan]

He can tell himself that he came...:D You said "came".

[RandFan]

It sure as hell would explain a lot. I mean, TEN plagues ? Come on, man. Get a grip and just teleport those folk out of there.Or drowning people in a flood. For crying in the dark, snap your fingers and vaporize the sinners.

OR god is a mean kid who likes to drown ants in his backyard...

Or god is schizophrenic, kill them, don't kill them, kill them, Moses was just a voice inside god's head...

On the other hand, if the flood story is myth based on a very large but local event then it's understandable...

Nah, too logical and rational.

[kbm99]

How come I'm more moral than yrreg's god?

It would be difficult to be *less* moral than the god of the old testament.

[Safe-Keeper]

It sure as hell would explain a lot. I mean, TEN plagues ? Come on, man. Get a grip and just teleport those folk out of there.I, as well as many Westerners, live with the notion that violence, be it physical fighting with a peer, corporal punishment of children or subordinates, execution or war, should be a last resort. What this means to the almighty God of the Old Testament is, essentially, that violence is never necessary. Freeing the Jews from Egypt? As was said, just poof them somewhere else. Entire human race bad? Poof them good. Someone living in the Promised Land? Make a new one, and either let the residents of the Promised Land or the Isrealites to live there.

Reading the Old Testament, however, you have a God who kills to punish, who makes the Pharaoh and his army stubborn so they'll deny the Isrealites freedom or charge headfirst into the death trap of the parted seas. Why? Because, in His own words, He wants to kill them to have survivors speak of His power throughout the land. Not only does this fly in the face of the Free Will so many Christians hold so highly, it also shows a detestable lack of love and compassion for other people than the Jews. Which is highly odd, since according to Genesis, we are all God's children.

It would be difficult to be *less* moral than the god of the old testament.Indeed. The Torah (from memory Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Deuteronomy and Leviticus) is so despicable that when I undertook reading the Bible some time ago, I simply had to give up as the contents made me too angry. Please don't really get me started.

[yrreg]

I am not a Jew. I was raised and educated as a Christian, by Christian teachers who, because they were not flaming idiots, had some understanding of what is actually important. There is such a thing as thoughtful and intelligent Christianity, though there's precious little of it found in these exchanges. My inability to accept theism is ultimately to their credit.

The subject of my post was the question of how the sin of Onan, as reported in the Bible, is to be interpreted, and whether it has any bearing on our daily behavior. Christians cite this passage in various contexts, including as either a prohibition of masturbation or a metaphor for it. Whether or not Jews also use it, or other laws from other sources, to regulate masturbation or any other conduct is largely irrelevant to the subject, though it might be interesting in determining whether the interpretation of some Christians is corrupt.


I read in one website an expert in religious Jews' morality stating that masturbation is not acceptable.

Masturbation

Jewish law clearly prohibits male masturbation. This law is derived from the story of Onan (Gen. 38:8-10), who practiced coitus interruptus as a means of birth control to avoid fathering a child for his deceased brother. G-d killed Onan for this sin. Although Onan's act was not truly masturbation, Jewish law takes a very broad view of the acts prohibited by this passage, and forbids any act of ha-sh'cha'tat zerah (destruction of the seed), that is, ejaculation outside of the vagina. In fact, the prohibition is so strict that one passage in the Talmud states, "in the case of a man, the hand that reaches below the navel should be chopped off." (Niddah 13a)

The issue is somewhat less clear for women. Obviously, spilling the seed is not going to happen in female masturbation, and there is no explicit Torah prohibition against female masturbation. Nevertheless, Judaism generally frowns upon female masturbation as "impure thoughts."

http://www.jewfaq.org/sex.htm




And you know, I find the position of that website for Jewish morality on abortion to be quite if I am not mistaken contrary to present US law.

Abortion

Jewish law not only permits, but in some circumstances requires abortion. Where the mother's life is in jeopardy because of the unborn child, abortion is mandatory.

An unborn child has the status of "potential human life" until the majority of the body has emerged from the mother. Potential human life is valuable, and may not be terminated casually, but it does not have as much value as a life in existence. The Talmud makes no bones about this: it says quite bluntly that if the fetus threatens the life of the mother, you cut it up within her body and remove it limb by limb if necessary, because its life is not as valuable as hers. But once the greater part of the body has emerged, you cannot take its life to save the mother's, because you cannot choose between one human life and another.




And here is what it says about gay and lesbian sex.

Homosexuality

Sexual relations between men are clearly forbidden by the Torah. (Lev. 18:22). Such acts are condemned in the strongest possible terms, as abhorrent. The only other sexual sin that is described in such strong terms is the sin of remarrying a woman you had divorced after she had been married to another man. (See Deut. 24:4). The sin of sexual relations between men is punishable by death (Lev. 20:13), as are the sins of adultery and incest.

It is important to note, however, that it is homosexual acts that are forbidden, not homosexual orientation. Judaism focuses on a person's actions rather than a person's desires. A man's desire to have sex with another man is not a sin, so long as he does not act upon that desire. In fact, it could be said that a man who feels such desires but does not act upon them is worthy of more merit in that regard than a man who does not feel such desires at all, just as one who refrains from pork because it is forbidden deserves more merit than one who refrains from pork because he doesn't like the taste.

I have seen some modern Orthodox sources suggest that if homosexuality is truly something hardwired in the brain, as most gay activists suggest, then a man who acts upon that desire is not morally responsible for his actions, but I am not sure how wide-spread that opinion is. In any case, it is not quite as liberal a position as some would have you believe: essentially, it is equivalent to saying that a kleptomaniac would not be held morally responsible for stealing.

Interestingly, female homosexual relations are not forbidden by the Torah. There is very little discussion of female homosexuality in the Talmud. The few sources that mention lesbian relations say that they do not disqualify a woman from certain privileges of the priesthood, because it is "merely licentiousness." There is a surprising lack of discussion of such issues as whether lesbianism would be grounds for divorcing a woman without her consent or without ketubah. Rambam asserted that lesbian practices are forbidden because it was a "practice of Egypt" and because it constituted rebelliousness.



-----------------

For people who find religions very unacceptable, please use your reason and intelligence that religions are not the only access to God.

So, don't bring up bad religions as a justification or proof even that God does not exist.

Please be guided accordingly by your more constructive use of reason and intelligence to achieve rational consistency, even though you opt for guiltless masturbation on the ground of there being no God to prohibit all kinds of sexual perversions

Rational consistency and guiltless masturbation or sexual libertinism are what Foster Zygote find to be the reward for embracing atheism, abandoning theism of the Christian kind for himself.

And The Atheist tells readers here that when atheists get to be the government in any land, they can and will do anything they want with mankind as they think to be according to their heart and mind to be the best for themselves and of course people under them, fellow human, without any attention to God.

If you fellow atheists want to say that Foster Zygote and The Atheist are not spokesmen of atheists, people will tell you that what you mean is you can speak for yourselves, that rational consistency of the atheistic kind and totally unbridled sexual perversions are the reward for embracing atheism.



Yrreg

[articulett]

Yep... he's whacking off to this thread.

[Eskarina]

I read in one website an expert in religious Jews' morality stating that masturbation is not acceptable.




And you know, I find the position of that website for Jewish morality on abortion to be quite if I am not mistaken contrary to present US law.




And here is what it says about gay and lesbian sex.



-----------------

For people who find religions very unacceptable, please use your reason and intelligence that religions are not the only access to God.

So, don't bring up bad religions as a justification or proof even that God does not exist.

Please be guided accordingly by your more constructive use of reason and intelligence to achieve rational consistency, even though you opt for guiltless masturbation on the ground of there being no God to prohibit all kinds of sexual perversions

Rational consistency and guiltless masturbation or sexual libertinism are what Foster Zygote find to be the reward for embracing atheism, abandoning theism of the Christian kind for himself.

And The Atheist tells readers here that when atheists get to be the government in any land, they can and will do anything they want with mankind as they think to be according to their heart and mind to be the best for themselves and of course people under them, fellow human, without any attention to God.

If you fellow atheists want to say that Foster Zygote and The Atheist are not spokesmen of atheists, people will tell you that what you mean is you can speak for yourselves, that rational consistency of the atheistic kind and totally unbridled sexual perversions are the reward for embracing atheism.


Yrreg


Ooooh, gooood!

YES!!!!PLEASE!!!YES!!11!eleventyones!!

YES!*


*Sorry, but as far as orgasms go, this one definitely didn't warrant a size seven font. :rolleyes:

[Toke]

And The Atheist tells readers here that when atheists get to be the government in any land, they can and will do anything they want with mankind as they think to be according to their heart and mind to be the best for themselves and of course people under them, fellow human, without any attention to God.
My bolding.

And your problem with that, is again?

Would you mind answering post #194?
So all you get from being christian is rational inconsistency and jesus to wacht and disapprove when you masturbate ?

[Silentknight]

After reading much of this thread, I have concluded that, more than anything, yrreg really needs to whack off.

I second this. Besides, he shouldn't see this as an insult, but more as a recommendation that he do something that benefits his health (http://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/BHCV2/bhcarticles.nsf/pages/Masturbation?Open).

No, seriously. :D

[Fiona]

http://www.actsweb.org/articles/article.php?i=941&d=2&c=4

I came across this. I am struck by the irony of it :)

False guilt and shame are destructive ways of controlling other people. Both are psychologically damaging.

You can confess false guilt forever but that will never resolve it because it isn't guilt. It is a conditioned response learned mostly in earlier days.

It can come from parents, siblings, and even from some churches, sad to say.

Some of it, at least, works like this: "If you do what I want you to do, behave the way I want you to behave, conform to what I want, and even believe what I want you to believe, I will give you my love and approval. If you don't do these things, I will withhold my love and approval and make you feel guilty.

Suggested prayer: "Dear God, help me never to use false guilt or shame to control anyone. Also, help me to resolve any feelings of false guilt and shame that I may have and therein experience your unconditional love, forgiveness, and affirmation at the very core of my being.

[Soapy Sam]

Like others here, I was a confirmed atheist at least eight years before I found out about masturbation.
(Bloody non-phonetic English. I supposed it had an "e", not a "u", and couldn't find it in the dictionary. )
So to the OP- No, I fear not.

[Ron_Tomkins]

I came out of the skeptic and agnostic closet long after I discovered the endless pleasures of masturbation.

However I still feel bad sometimes.... bad for all those poor women who are missing out on this :D

[Nogbad]

I have skimmed some of this thread so apologies if this is covered but I should point that Onanism isn't masturbation so it is all a load fuss about nothing. Onan got zapped for being a twunt. His brother died and he took his brother's wife in. She was a babe so he took his due and had his wicked way. His own wife didn't want the new girl pregnant as her offspring would get a share of the inheritance. The new girl wanted kids as kids were one's old age pension. Onan obeyed his wife's wishes but still had bouncy bouncy with said babe, pulling out at the crucial moment and spilling his seed on the sand. It wasn't joyous self loving that spilled the seed but the selfish using of a vulnerable young woman/babe. As I said, Onan was a bit of a twunt. Masturbation has nothing to do with it. Indeed, I am not sure the Bible has much to say about self loving.

[bruto]

We don't feel that it's anyone's business what we do with our own genitals.Spoilsport!

[articulett]

Spoilsport!

I take it back.

Some people freely share what they do with their genitals (or even share their genitals)-- others keep things private without a thought about which invisible entities might be watching.

The nice thing about being a "sexual libertine" is that you (and your partner--s?) get to decided what is okay and what is not. Not some church or invisible guy in the sky.

[Nogbad]

Of course Paul had a bee in his bottom about sex but that is another matter altogether.

[articulett]

The thing that is wacky about Christianity is that "thinking" is the same as doing. God judges your fantasies! But your fantasies can't cause pregnancy, AIDS, or hurting other people.

I think that might be behinds some of the very weird aberrations that you find amongst the faithful. Once they've thought about it, they figure they may as well indulge since they've already committed the sin from God's standpoint.

I think the world would be much better off if pedophilia clergy members indulged their fantasies in private masturbation session rather than involving actual children. To me, the latter is causes much more harm and is clearly more immoral. But, according to Jesus, thinking is the SAME as doing!

[articulett]

Of course Paul had a bee in his bottom about sex but that is another matter altogether.

Yet another perversion from the faithful... insects in the butt?

I'm not sure I'm interested in the fetishes of the faithful, and I'd feel sorry for any invisible entities that were forced to be privy to such things. (Though it might be an amusing way to pass eternity.)

[articulett]

Paul was a misogynist.