[Godstud]

Yes, and I'd trust a Christian like Drlee to protect the welfare of human beings, 100x more than I would a Christian like Hindsite. Motivation for self interest being a deciding factor.

[Pants-of-dog]

America was founded more as a Republic than a Democracy,

The USA is both.

A republic is simply a country with a president instead of a king as head of state, and has elected representation. Most republics are democracies, such as the USA.

This is not the first time I have seen this confusion from a conservative religious right wing Christian. Nor is it exclusive to unintelligent ones. I assume that somehwere in the conservative Christian blogosphere, this disinformation is being propagated.

[Victoribus Spolia]

America was founded more as a Republic than a Democracy, I do think we should perpetuate religion rather than give more people rights, the more people that have rights the more unstable and immoral a country becomes. I think we should

1. Ban all non-Christian religions

2. Supplement the US Constitution with Biblical law.

3. Get rid of unneeded government programs such as welfare

4. Reinstate property requirements for voting and ban women from voting

5. Ban the Democratic Party and any other left-leaning minor parties as they are causing instability and getting too much attention from the media.

Please tell me you are a Christian Reconstructionist!

[Victoribus Spolia]

The USA is both.

The definition I got in school was federated constitutional republic......but hey.

[Oxymoron]

Atheists are the worst

[Nonsense]

I hate them, "stinking godless children of pokemon" atheists.

Now, now, we will have no more of these 'Christian' outburst.

[fuser]

How about a Buddhist outburst then?

[Godstud]

Atheists are the best, since they don't have archaic rules and religious laws that they have to follow blindly. They can use their brains, instead of ancient tomes.

[Sivad]

Atheists are the best, since they don't have archaic rules and religious laws that they have to follow blindly. They can use their brains, instead of ancient tomes.

Reasonable people are the best, some atheists are very reasonable and some aren't. I don't think atheism is any more or less justified than any other philosophical worldview, it's just a matter of opinion.

[Prosthetic Conscience]

Reasonable people are the best, some atheists are very reasonable and some aren't. I don't think atheism is any more or less justified than any other philosophical worldview, it's just a matter of opinion.

But not being influenced by ancient writings, that you're taught to hold sacred, does give the non-religious a head-start. They can just ask "what is best for people?", and think, based on evidence from the modern world, while religions are held back by "but 2,000 years ago, my god said ...". For example, the acceptance of homosexuality. Otherwise fairly reasonable Christians, Muslims etc. are still struggling to find ways to leave behind the old prohibitions and hatred, because if they start plain ignoring one part of their moral teachings, the authority of the rest comes into question.

[noemon]

But not being influenced by ancient writings, that you're taught to hold sacred, does give the non-religious a head-start. They can just ask "what is best for people?", and think, based on evidence from the modern world, while religions are held back by "but 2,000 years ago, my god said ...".

That assumes that "lack of religion=evidence of truth" which I don't think is right. People of an enquiring mind will ask this question regardless of their background, people of a non-enquiring mind will simply digest what is being spoon-fed to them by TV and have this answer already drilled into their heads by sitcoms and cartoons. I highly doubt anyone can argue that modern TV offers better moral examples and answers than the Bible and as such a "headstart". The same calibre of people who will say the above if they are religious will also say "but Tony from Sitcom X did this...." if they are not.

[Prosthetic Conscience]

That assumes that "lack of religion=evidence of truth" which I don't think is right.

No, I'm not assuming that at all. I'm saying that many of the morals from the Bible, Quran etc. are shit. Nothing to do with "evidence of truth". I'm saying that giving credence to the Iron Age morality is a hindrance to decent debate.

People of an enquiring mind will ask this question regardless of their background, people of a non-enquiring mind will simply digest what is being spoon-fed to them by TV and have this answer already drilled into their heads by sitcoms and cartoons. I highly doubt anyone can argue that modern TV offers better moral examples and answers than the Bible and as such a "headstart". The same calibre of people who will say the above if they are religious will also say "but Tony from Sitcom X did this...." if they are not.

Yeah, I'll argue that modern TV offers better moral examples than the Bible. There's no advocacy of genocide, equality of the sexes in general, no toleration of slavery ... the Bible is a record of just how crap the morals of that time were. In amongst it all, you get Jesus saying "love everyone", but notice how reluctant all Christians are to say "OK, there's a lot of dead wood in the Bible that needs to be cut out to leave a decent guide to behaviour".

And no one takes TV as seriously as religious followers are ordered to take their dogma. Yeah, people can be very good people while believing it, but it causes problems. Look at the number of Christians who voted for Trump versus the non-religious.

[Nonsense]

How about a Buddhist outburst then?

By all means, not a chance of offending anyone there.

[Oxymandias]

You know PoFo getting bad when a thread like this pops up. The fact that people are defending the idea that atheists are less civilized than "normal" members of society goes to show how downhill PoFo is going.

[Rugoz]

A republic is simply a country with a president instead of a king as head of state, and has elected representation. Most republics are democracies, such as the USA.

Representative democracy has become synonymous with democracy, but that's a relatively new phenomena (19th/20th century). That's why Madison makes the distinction between republic and democracy.

[Oxymandias]

@Rugoz @Godstud @Pants-of-dog

Guys, I want you to look at yourselves and realize that you're arguing a meaningless debate in a topic that shouldn't even be seen let alone addressed. Assuming you all are atheists, why the hell do you need to self-validate yourselves over your own humanity in a topic which is cartoonish bad to the extent that you've begun to discuss whether or not there is a difference between republic and democracy which, not only is irrelevant to the entire topic, but is such a meaningless argument that I had to do a double take to realize that you guys out of all people are willing to invest so much time into arguing this.

EDIT: BTW POD do not respond to Rugoz's posts and if POD does respond, do not respond to his posts Rugoz. I've had enough disappointment for one day.

[Godstud]

By all means, not a chance of offending anyone there.

My wife's a Buddhist! have some respect!

She's pretty easy-going about my faith/lack thereof, however.

@Oxymandias yes, it's sort of a shit/troll thread, but that's Pofo for you. It's also what some actual people think, and not addressing it is like not addressing the Nazi in the room.

[Oxymandias]

@Godstud

Do not feed them. By bringing attention to them you are circulating their ideology and thus increasing the potential for more people to believe such garbage. In politics, the worst fate an ideology could face is ignorance. When people forget an ideology, then it dies. By bringing attention to it, negative or positive you are spreading it's ideology which is the thing ideologies were created to do.

Do not post, let the thread die. It is the best and only way.

[Godstud]

I think you are unfamiliar with Pofo, Oxymandias. When you ignore a thread (See "Funny things SJWs do thread", for instance), it doesn't fade or go away. The idiots(think trees) feed on each other, and it gets bigger as more bullshit is introduced. Soon you have something that's ridiculous, full of shit, and out of control.

You have to have some reason in there to prune the bushes, or it grows out of control, and into your neighbour's yard. Then he's pissed off at you.

[Sivad]

But not being influenced by ancient writings, that you're taught to hold sacred, does give the non-religious a head-start. They can just ask "what is best for people?", and think, based on evidence from the modern world, while religions are held back by "but 2,000 years ago, my god said ...".

Not necessarily, atheists aren't bound to any form of consequentialism. Atheists might not consider something like homosexuality a sin, but they could still regard it as immoral. You're assuming all atheists share your ethical intuitions and that just isn't the case.