When you have a Muslim

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by Old-T

Once again you are clueless and happy to be so.
Old-goaT, you are the one who is clueless, and it truly angers you to find yourself foundering and left wanting in discussions such as these.
I never said Mao was a nice guy. I never supported his actions as a whole. But contrary to what your small mind can absord, increased food production did keep more people alive than otherwise would have been. Is half dieing better than 70% dieing? Pardon, your equivocation is showing. Mao's 'demand economy' directives caused the deaths - plain and simple. As a child, you may have fed on a Chinese grain product fertilized by a rotting, Chinese body. So it may be you who owes your life to Mao, while someone, long ago, mourned the desecration of their grandmother's grave so that you could better eat.
The desecration was not a ploy--it was what it was claimed to be: a way to increase crops. Yes, the central gov't then confiscated much of the harvest but there is no government that can keep a hungry farm worker--especially in a labor intensive agricultural system--from eating some of the produceYou are so silly. Where did you go to school? The farmers were 'collectivized'. They lived in dormitories - much like Apple's Chinese workers do today. The farmers slept under watchful, armed guards. The farmers were escorted to the fields by watchful, armed guards and they labored in the fields under watchful, armed guards. Mao instituted 'Killing Fields' nearly two decades before Pol Pot. And all governments, communist or not, understand that dead farmworkers are of little value to bringing in the harvest. Hence Mao's quote: “It does not amount to more than one finger out of ten.”

“When there is not enough to eat, people starve to death. It is better that half of the people die, so that the other half can eat their fill.” Mao: Minutes of Mao’s Talk, Gansu 25 March 1959. pp. 44-48.

[CJ7]

IB, an atheist has no religion, so remind everyone how Mao conducted his actions in the name of religion.

(stand by peeps, this should be good)

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by Diomidis

That was merely an inference that such a bold-faced lie (stating that any religion could be without fanatics bent on destroying those that don't believe) could make someone spontaneously combust. Funny how people seem to know anger from a typed post on a message board. It was an interpretation based on what you said in your post. I'm far from angry, just wanted to point out the fallacies in your statements. Those weren't fallacious statements. Those individuals were guilty of those atrocities. Instead of just acknowledging my decision, you felt compelled to backhand my "beliefs" in such a way that necessitated a response.Your interpretation, and you are choosing to stay and 'demonstrate' your imagined superiority of your beliefs.

Yes, Mao was a very evil person and he would have probably been just as evil under the guise of any religion. He isn't a hero of mine nor someone that I view as having the values that an atheist should have. Here, you are discounting or wholly ignoring the atheism of historic communism. Atheistic communists - and there were millions of them - actively persecuted those who dared to believe in a divine being. True evil knows no boundaries. To use him as some kind of example of what atheism is all about would be about the same as using the purging of pagans in Europe as an example of Christianity. I would rather view Christians as believers in a man who wanted his followers to be able to love all people, regardless of differing points of view. Mao, and the others, wrote their legacy in blood. The stated intention of the communists, the 1919 Third International, was to dominate the world and subordinate the world to their beliefs. Your 'belief' that that didn't happen, doesn't make your 'belief' true. Those individuals enumerated above established once and for all that atheists are neither as intelligent nor as benevolent as they claim they are.

..

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by CJ7

IB, an atheist has no religion, so remind everyone how Mao conducted his actions in the name of religion.

(stand by peeps, this should be good) CBJ7 is wrong again (Does it surprise anyone that CBJ7 constantly likes having his ass handed to him?).

Atheism is a belief system that supplants a divine being with the imagined 'infallibility' of man. As such, it meets the definition of religion:

Definition of RELIGION

2: a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices

4 : a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/religion


Furthermore, U.S. courts (up to and including the Supreme Court) have defined 'atheism' as a religion:

"If we think of religion as taking a position on divinity, then atheism is indeed a form of religion."
http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F3/330/931/565138/



And atheists have a church: http://firstchurchofatheism.com/

..

[CJ7]

yet nowhere in the definition of atheist does it mention religion


the Italian mafia are catholics. Are they Mafia because theyre Catholic?

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by CJ7

yet nowhere in the definition of atheist does it mention religion CBJ7, are you really saying you cannot read and couldn't find 'atheism' mentioned the 7th Circuit Court's decision? Really, CBJ7, you are finally admitting that in a public forum?

the Italian mafia are catholics. Are they Mafia because theyre Catholic?

..

[CJ7]

since when did a court write a dictionary?


did you skip this because why?
the Italian mafia are catholics. Are they Mafia because theyre Catholic?

[Old-T]

I B Brainless,

It is interesting to watch you chase your tail to the amusement of so many others.

You "reply" to a direct question, or direct statement, with a non sequitor and declair victory for yourself. You are the brother with the beam in your eye, blinded by your hate, blinded by your midnless devotion to a religeon you do not understand.

If you were not such a loud empty gong spewing falsehoods about so many things, you would almost be pitiful. It is very hard to pity someone who acts as you do.

Your description of Chineese conditions is not necessarily wrong, it just has nothing at all to do with anything you were supposedly responding to. Have you worked in a field, harvesting? Have you watched your family go to bed hungry night after night? Simple "yes" or "no" will do, but that is beyond your level of self control. You feel psycoticly compelled to go on and on about drivel.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by Old-T

I B Brainless, Old-goaT, you and CBJ7 are brainless.
It is interesting to watch you chase your tail to the amusement of so many others. The facts are presented and the sources are cited and you, Old-goaT, and CBJ7 remain in denial.
You "reply" to a direct question, or direct statement, with a non sequitor and declair victory for yourself. You'd do well to illustrate exactly what you are talking about. You are the brother with the beam in your eye, blinded by your hate, blinded by your midnless devotion to a religeon you do not understand.

If you were not such a loud empty gong spewing falsehoods about so many things You'd do well to illustrate exactly what you are talking about. , you would almost be pitiful. It is very hard to pity someone who acts as you do.

Your description of Chineese conditions is not necessarily wrong, it just has nothing at all to do with anything you were supposedly responding to. Have you worked in a field, harvesting? Have you watched your family go to bed hungry night after night? Simple "yes" or "no" will do, but that is beyond your level of self control. You feel psycoticly compelled to go on and on about drivel. You are the one driveling Old-goaT. This entire post of yours is nothing your unsubstantiated opinion without a hint of fact.

.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by CJ7

since when did a court write a dictionary? The court did 'define' 'atheism' as a religion. Couldn't you not read that?
did you skip this because why?
the Italian mafia are catholics. Prove they are universally Catholic!

.

[Old-T]

CJ,

Just acknowledge he selectively reads, selectively defines terms, and hardly ever makes sense.

[CJ7]

see? what did I tell you?

good in the pathetic sense.

The End.

(heres where IB comes in declares victory and continues to grovel for attention by yammering insults)

[CJ7]

Originally Posted by Old-T

CJ,

Just acknowledge he selectively reads, selectively defines terms, and hardly ever makes sense.

you sir, misunderestimate me

thats a given

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by Old-T

CJ,

Just acknowledge he selectively reads, selectively defines terms, and hardly ever makes sense.

Read it again Old-goaT.

Atheism is a belief system that supplants a divine being with the imagined 'infallibility' of man. As such, it meets the definition of religion:

Definition of RELIGION

2: a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices

4 : a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/religion


Furthermore, U.S. courts (up to and including the Supreme Court) have defined 'atheism' as a religion:

"If we think of religion as taking a position on divinity, then atheism is indeed a form of religion."
http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F3/330/931/565138/



And atheists have a church: http://firstchurchofatheism.com/

..

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by CJ7

you sir, misunderestimate me

thats a given

While you look remember, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot and Ceaușescu were still atheists.