The Best of GifS Comments: Eve Gets Gawd’s Number
25 July 2006 by Sean
Another great one from the comments board. I am gonna print this on a flier and just hand it out to anyone who brings up the subject of gawd’s love to me ever again. Eve nails it.
Eve Says:
July 24th, 2006 at 9:16 pm EST
A perfect, all-good, -knowing, -powerful, -present, -male entity deliberately creates beings whom he knows are imperfect and are going to disobey him, then equally deliberately sets up a “test” for them that he knows they’re going to fail, just so that he can punish them for failing a test that he set up knowing they were going to fail in the first place, and tops it all off by coming down to earth himself (and not right away; he has to wait centuries to do this for some strange reason) to *appear* to be tortured and killed (being immortal, eternal god, he doesn’t stay dead but pops back up alive and kicking after three days) instead of these people he punished for failing the test he deliberately set up for them knowing in advance that they would fail.
In addition, still not satisfied with all the belief hoops he’s made these poor, unfortunate suckers jump through so far, he tells them - but not too clearly or definitively - that this “sacrifice” he made in which he actually didn’t die/stay dead only works to save them from the punishment he imposed on them for failing (aw, fuck it)… if they believe in it and/or continue to live perfect lives doing good works for ever and always until they die or he comes back to pick them up and take them away to Never-Never-Land (which will happen when he feels like it). In the meantime, if they stop believing in his fake sacrifice and/or don’t live sufficiently “good” lives or don’t follow exactly the right path to his satisfaction (which he’s made unclear on purpose; don’t ask me why), he’s going to punish them forever and always just like he’s punishing all the poor SOBs who had the misfortune of being born and dying *before* he decided to perform his sacrifice illusion.
And the maraschino cherry plopped atop all this creamy goodness is the inescapable fact that you can’t provide a single shred of irrefutable, incontrovertible, hard scientific evidence proving the existence of this to-all-intents-and-purposes cruel, capricious, immature, inconsistent, quite frankly crazy entity.
25 July 2006, on 7:19 am
Haha! Classic. Great writing Eve.
25 July 2006, on 7:23 am
That was great Eve…WHY can’t people see this? Why are so many seemingly “intelligent in other areas” people so STUPID when it comes to this? It just baffles me constantly.
25 July 2006, on 7:24 am
OH yeah, PS - he did it all because he LOVES us…Sorry kids, but I don’t NEED that kind of “love”…
25 July 2006, on 7:35 am
It appears the reason many on this site vilify God is due to the false notion that Hell is endless. It is not. As many knowledge depraved “believers” worldwide claim, the “orthodox” view of Gods Judgement is Endless. However TRUE knowledge from scriptures sheds a different light. First of all the punishment for sin is death. This does not, nor ever will equate to endless punishment. It means eventual destruction.
The problem is the word eternal. Somehow we decided it means endless when a careful study of ancient Greek writers shows this cannot be so. We have hashed a word, messed up the writings of Prophets and claimed OUR version as infallible. Of course different doctrines apart from Hell are another matter altogether. The christian world is a confused mess. We lack knowledge. The very thing that many believers accuse the world of pursuing, that being knowledge, is the one Godly trait that we have shown severe lack in. Make no mistake knowledge is a trait of Godliness. Knowledge is good. The knowledge that is bad is that which wants to remain independant of Gods knowledge which is exactly what we did when we ate the fruit. We said “We want to decide what is good and what is evil for ourselves”. Our independance from God destroys us.
Nevertheless, apart from this I believe that Jesus Christ defeated death. He did not defeat endless punishment. No such thing exists. He defeated death. Furthermore as the Apostle Paul prophesied in an epistle, there will come a day when the last enemy death is totally defeated.
25 July 2006, on 7:48 am
Clint Says:
Nevertheless, apart from this I believe that Jesus Christ defeated death. He did not defeat endless punishment. No such thing exists. He defeated death. Furthermore as the Apostle Paul prophesied in an epistle, there will come a day when the last enemy death is totally defeated.
How warm and cozy that must make you feel, Clint. Did it ever occur to you that this is the origin and desire for belief itself? It’s all about an attempt to conquer death.
Give me one shred of evidence that Paul’s “epistle” has any representation in the real world whatsoever.
And we don’t vilify God, you idiot. Do you have any idea how sick we are of hearing that baloney? We don’t believe in your gawd. Come to grips with that fact. You cannot vilify what you don’t believe in. Beat your head against a brick wall 100 times and repeat after me: “You cannot vilify what you don’t believe in.”
Get it now?
I knew you wouldn’t.
25 July 2006, on 8:24 am
Thanks for that input Sean!
You’re right of course. I do feel warm and cozy, as I’m sure you did as well as you forwarded your comments.
Let’s make a deal. You try to stop being a “sucker” in your communication abilities and i’ll continue to stop trying to be a “sucker” for bad religion.
I’m not going to try and convert you. No way. But I will challenge you regarding your character. Do you speak to people like that all the time? Are you having a bad day, or do you just have a low level of emotional intelligence?
25 July 2006, on 8:36 am
Blah blah blah I’m a christian blah blah blah not trying to convert blah blah words words you atheists sure are mean! blah blah blah can’t read what the site’s about blah blah yada yada yada
25 July 2006, on 8:57 am
Did Clint even READ and UNDERSTAND Eve’s comment? Obviously not. The mind-constipation of xians is sooooo solid and frustrating!
25 July 2006, on 9:19 am
I picture them as cybermormons, in shortsleeved, white dress shirts and ties, riding their bicycles through the internet tubes to the accompaniment of Kansas Tornado/Witch On A Bicycle theme music. They knock on the door here with all the moxie of a (theoretically) virginal, pageant-winning debutante joining a half-crazy, amped-up prizefighter in his room for a nightcap.
Then, they wonder why they’re so sore “down there” the next morning.
25 July 2006, on 9:32 am
Why couldn’t the all-knowing, all-infallible, all-powerful, all-pleasurable, indestructible Mushu — sorry, “gawd” — just write all the rules, regulations, caveats, sin qua nons, etc. in fire in the sky, unaltering, unchanging, untranslated into muliple languages, yet always discernable to the clans of men? That way, we avoid all the awkward verbal conjugations and mis-translated syntacitcal errors that we have today? Plus, there’s your irrefutable proof.
Well, then superior fellows would be unable to say things such as, “Well, these aren’t TRUE (trademarked) Christians, as they submit themselves to the alter on their LEFT knee, when clearly, the Prophet Hezikiah, the Goat Herder, did SAY in the third month of the season of inundation during the year of the Limping Hamster, ‘Ye verily doth I profess unto you that leftward kneeling is RIGHT OUT!’ That other lot mistranslated that bit to read ‘Ye verily doth I professunto you that lefward kneeling is right.’ Clearly they are moe-rons.”
25 July 2006, on 9:52 am
The only way I could ever make sense of this “god”, as described by Eve, would be to understand him/her as a writer. A writer knows exactly what is going to happen in the story and anything is possible in fiction. So we are characters in a fictional tale with absolutely no power to change or influence the plot.(Salman Rushdie in “The Satanic Verses” takes on such a god role.)
Believing we are merely fictional characters in a god-written story makes as much sense as anything that religion has to offer.
Clint, what do you mean by “emotional intelligence” in your response to Sean? In reading his comments over the past couple of weeks I think you could say he has a rather high level according the the Mayer-Salovey model:
The Mayer-Salovey model defines emotional intelligence as the capacity to understand emotional information and to reason with emotions. More specifically, they divide emotional intelligence abilities into four areas — in their four branch model:
1. The capacity to accurately perceive emotions.
2. The capacity to use emotions to facilitate thinking.
3. The capacity to understand emotional meanings.
4. The capacity to manage emotions.
On the other hand, Clint, I detect a lack of capacity by most theists to use emotions to facilitate thinking.
25 July 2006, on 9:55 am
Clint Says:
Thanks for that input Sean!
You’re right of course. I do feel warm and cozy, as I’m sure you did as well as you forwarded your comments. [Is that a sentence?]
Let’s make a deal. You try to stop being a “sucker” in your communication abilities…
Clint: It’s a deal! So let’s try and decipher your gibberish.
Again:
I do feel warm and cozy, as I’m sure you did as well as you forwarded your comments.
“I’m sure you did as well as you forwarded… ?”
Is that something like “I’m not as think as you drunk I am?”
Hint for next time, Clinty:
Don’t talk about communication abilities in the same paragraph wherein you write like a retard.
25 July 2006, on 10:09 am
Anyone read the NY Times article regarding scientists and faith in god ?
“…as the (atheist) physicist Steven Weinberg has famously put it, and as Drs. Dawkins and Dennett remind their readers, good people tend to do good, evil people tend to do evil, but for a good person to do evil — ‘that takes religion.’”
25 July 2006, on 10:16 am
Clint, what do you mean by “emotional intelligence” in your response to Sean? In reading his comments over the past couple of weeks I think you could say he has a rather high level according the the Mayer-Salovey model.
Hey, thanks, Lynda! That’s one of the best 40th birthday presents I’ve received!
25 July 2006, on 10:29 am
Eve,
Very enjoyable…
RDZ,
“…the accompaniment of Kansas Tornado/Witch On A Bicycle theme music.”
Am I the only one who can’t remember that music, but thinks of “The Great Gig in the Sky” at that moment?
Clit,
Did you even read the comment policy?
25 July 2006, on 10:34 am
Thankyou all for your input, it’s like a fresh breeze.
It’s fantastic to speak with people who enjoy a friendly reasonable discussion!
I agree wholeheartedly that management of emotions is a vital component of Emotional Intelligence. This involves temperance.
Thank God (oops did I offend anybody?) that diplomats worldwide have the astounding emotional intelligence demonstrated by Sean to prevent conflict on a global scale.
Regardless, thankyou Lynda for imparting your summary on the Mayer-Salovey model. Perhaps we can discuss which emotions are most beneficial to facilitate thinking. Or perhaps we could discuss whether or not verbal abuse is constructive or destructive.
Please forgive me if I left out a comma. It must mean I’m really stupid.
25 July 2006, on 10:35 am
Lynda, just read the article and was stopped in my tracks by one point the author makes;
“Of course, just as the professors of faith cannot prove (except to themselves) that God exists, the advocates for atheism acknowledge that they cannot prove (not yet, anyway ) that God does not exist.”
I’m so tired of this “you can’t prove a negative” reasoning and the notion that we are responsible for disproving the existence of a deity. The xians are the ones making a claim they are unable to back up and you can’t just decide that the debate is a tie by glibly tossing out that tired old canard about our supposed “inability” to disprove something completely unproven in the first place.
As for the four authors of apologia cited in the article, I tend to support their theme of sound science not necessarily being incompatible with religion, if only because we can’t expect a fundie to make the leap from Young Earth Creationism to rational atheism in one bound. We can, however, hope for a leap from YEC to, say, a Collins or a Gingerich worldview of science and Jeebus and, from there, the leap to here is considerably shorter.
Kind of like cozying up to the Religious Left for political expedience.
25 July 2006, on 10:59 am
Clint Says:
Thank God (oops did I offend anybody?) that diplomats worldwide have the astounding emotional intelligence demonstrated by Sean to prevent conflict on a global scale.
Who? Like John Bolton at the U.N.? Friend of yours?
Why are you attacking me, Clit? Is it because I asked you to provide a shred of evidence for your beliefs? Or that I pointed out that we cannot vilify that which we don’t believe in? Or is something else “getting your goat?”
(What is it about these nutbags that they always fixate on me?)
Regardless, thankyou Lynda for imparting your summary on the Mayer-Salovey model. Perhaps we can discuss which emotions are most beneficial to facilitate thinking. Or perhaps we could discuss whether or not verbal abuse is constructive or destructive.
Please forgive me if I left out a comma. It must mean I’m really stupid.
Don’t worry, Clit. It’s now established that there are a host of other things that are making you stupid. One comma can’t help or hurt you much.
25 July 2006, on 12:54 pm
Clint,
I have yet to come across a reasonable Xian on this site… lets see if you pass the test.
Do extrodinary claims require extrodinary evidence?
If you answer no, then you are not reasonable… go away and live in your little irrational world.
If yes, then please provide your extrodinary evidence for the existance of your sky daddy.
25 July 2006, on 1:41 pm
But I will challenge you regarding your character. Do you speak to people like that all the time?
I really get confused when people think our thoughts and comments on this site are actually a template for our behaviors in our everyday lives. That is, why would anyone think that we talk like this to cashiers in Walgreens, random people on the street, our families, or our friends and teachers (and perhaps students)? (And who the hell would ever think that typing on this blog is the same as talking to someone, anyway?)
You came to us, Clint. We just put the blog here, in this (extremely) small area of cyberspace. By contrast, most (some?) of us have to put up with people like you just to get around in society. We have people constantly looking at us when (if) we say we don’t believe, or if we want to doubt specific things. We see crosses all over the place, and people praying for and “blessing” us. So it’s a little different.
25 July 2006, on 1:51 pm
I think I’ll just sit back and watch Clint’s pending self-immolation. Good luck on whatever it is you’re trying to accomplish there, Clint.
25 July 2006, on 2:04 pm
Clint, read the end of Matthew ch. 25.
Also, if you liked the first post of this thread,
see http://www.extian.org/home.htm
25 July 2006, on 2:05 pm
It reminds me of those nature documentaries where the pack of hyenas has mortally wounded the water buffalo, and now it’s just a matter of time….
25 July 2006, on 2:06 pm
I hereby strenuously object to Clint being derogatorily nicknamed “Clit.” Proper respect must be given to what is arguably the most important errogenous zone on a woman’s body!
Other than that, I’m not sure what Clint was trying to say in the first place; that xians *shouldn’t* believe that sinners are going to hell but that they’re simply going to die? That sinners will go to hell for a while just? That ultimately no one will die at all? And what’s with knowledge being good but knowledge independent of god is bad? That we chose “bad” knowledge when we ate the fruit?
But god put that fruit there knowing we would eat it and be filled with “bad” knowledge, just so that he could punish us with hell/death/destruction/whatever and then turn around and *save* us from the punishment he gave us for eating the fruit he told us not to eat but planted in front of us knowing we would eat it anyway and he would have to punish–ah, fuck it again.
25 July 2006, on 2:48 pm
Clint, I’ve done some work with abused women and understand that “verbal abuse” is in the ear of the listener. (It’s interesting how often men use their wife’s “verbal abuse” as an excuse for physically abusing them.) A Muslim finds a drawing of the Prophet Mohammed offensive and accuses the cartoonist of abuse. Many words are still bleeped from our television programs by prudish censors. Personally, I find words only have as much power as we give them. They don’t have intrinsic value. If you find a certain writer’s language offensive, no one is forcing you to read it. This is not a school playground where you are forced to attend. You cannot accuse anyone here of being a bully. Go find someone else to play with if you can’t hack the language.
Oh, and it would be so nice to know where are these emotionally intelligent diplomats to which you refer. You haven’t noticed that there is conflict all over the globe?
25 July 2006, on 2:54 pm
BTW, is anyone else having trouble following some of Jon Stewart’s comments on the “Daily Show”? The censors are bleeping out so much stuff it’s getting very annoying. (No, I don’t want to pay for the channels not censored. I shouldn’t have to.)I hate censors! Who do they think is watching the show at 11 pm? And if you find the language offensive I believe most TVs and remotes still contain an off button. Grr…
25 July 2006, on 3:09 pm
Lynda-
You could always move to Canada. Our national television station (CBC) has, on a regular basis, movies and programs with actual nudity, real-live swear words and other non-xian-friendly things. Kind of like French-TV lite.
25 July 2006, on 3:42 pm
Eve,
Would you allow “Clunt”?
25 July 2006, on 3:53 pm
Eve Says:
I hereby strenuously object to Clint being derogatorily nicknamed “Clit.” Proper respect must be given to what is arguably the most important errogenous zone on a woman’s body!
I agree. My apologies. Can we still call him “dickhead?”
25 July 2006, on 3:55 pm
I love you people and your willingness to speak up. Most
christians won’t even discuss the book that they stake their
lives on. I figure that they know so very little about what
they believe that it becomes so very embarrassing for them to
bring up the subject. I think a strong Atheist is the result
of lots and lots of bible study whereas christians are good
listeners who can’t read. Anyway thanks everyone.
25 July 2006, on 4:52 pm
To Whom It May Concern
I would like to protest on behalf of the National Security Agency, the Office of the Vice President of the United States, and Your Friendly Neighborhood Secret Service Branch, over your usage of the term “Dickhead” to describe
Clit, um, Clunt, shit,… Clint. As a veteran member of the Secret Service, I must stress that public knowledge of a dignitary’s codename- let alone it’s arbitrary high-profile usage, constitutes a violation of National Security.While it is widely known that “Dickhead” has been
Mr. Cheney’sa Much Beloved Public Figure’s nickname since back in his “Brokeback Salad” Days with former Senator Orrin Hatch, since his first dropping of the drawers with wife-to-be,Lynne“Mrs. Beloved Public Figure”- apparently in reference to the only part of his, ahem, dick, visible amongst the flab of him in repose, and since he so terrified hisdaughterfemale relative with it that she became a lesbian like her mother.We have, therefore, established what is known as a “Poor Man’s Copyright”, which was much cheaper than the assembling of papers and lawyers for a “legal” one. It must also be noted that
Dick CheneyOur Charge has received the latest of his seven deferments releasing him from having to follow rules, laws, societal guidelines, etc.- witness therandom shooting“hunting mishap” several months back.I ask that you cease and desist on all gender sensitive namecalling for Clint and, instead, offer up “CLimp”, which is only Rush Limbaugh-sensitive.
Exidor Wellesly Rush, NSA.
25 July 2006, on 4:55 pm
Clint, I know where you are coming from. At one time I was a
fire breathing christian trying to convert anyone I came in
contact with. I was a very serious adventist with a mission
to proclaim the second advent. I was also told that I must
have a reason for my faith. Now that later presented me with
a real problem, ‘reason’ and ‘faith’ in the same sentence.
(Reason is faithless and faith is reasonless.)
I figured, OK so I’ll go back to the bible basics and make
sure I know what I believe using reason.
We know today that there are 3 million + animal species in
the world. The bible also states that in the great flood all
life that was not on the ark was destroyed. This means that
with at least two of each animal, there were 6 million animals
on a 300 foot boat with one 15 inch square window.
According to the bible, this took place only 6,000 years ago.
If you reason that there were not that many species at that
time then you have to believe in extremely fast evolution.
How good is your reasoning? (If you want more then I just
started)
25 July 2006, on 6:20 pm
Clint:
I find your concepts…novel.
It appears the reason many on this site vilify God is due to the false notion that Hell is endless.
I think you’ve got a rampant misperception here.
I’d say no 1 here believes in your deity. Kinda hard to vilify a void, know what I mean?
It is not. As many knowledge depraved “believers” worldwide claim, the “orthodox” view of Gods Judgement is Endless.
I think you meant ‘deprived’. Helluva slip, I have to say.
It sounds as if you have a Universalist bent here.
However TRUE knowledge from scriptures sheds a different light. First of all the punishment for sin is death. This does not, nor ever will equate to endless punishment. It means eventual destruction.
Shut off like a light switch. Hey, I’m cool w/that.
The problem is the word eternal. Somehow we decided it means endless when a careful study of ancient Greek writers shows this cannot be so.
Care to back that up w/something? A link, say?
We lack knowledge. The very thing that many believers accuse the world of pursuing, that being knowledge, is the one Godly trait that we have shown severe lack in. Make no mistake knowledge is a trait of Godliness.
I’m gleaning from your sparse treatment, that you’re a little bit country, a little rock’n'roll?
You sound like a heady mix of gnostic, xtian & Universalist doctrine.
Nevertheless, apart from this I believe that Jesus Christ defeated death. He did not defeat endless punishment. No such thing exists. He defeated death. Furthermore as the Apostle Paul prophesied in an epistle, there will come a day when the last enemy death is totally defeated.
I don’t think JC existed. Hard to defeat death when you don’t exist, ain’t it?
‘Death, where is thy sting?’
I’ll give that an 8: it’s got a good beat, but I can’t dance to it.
25 July 2006, on 7:22 pm
Marcus:
Eve,
Would you allow “Clunt”?
ROTFLMAO!
25 July 2006, on 10:32 pm
Jack Says:
I love you people and your willingness to speak up. Most
christians won’t even discuss the book that they stake their
lives on. I figure that they know so very little about what
they believe that it becomes so very embarrassing for them to
bring up the subject. I think a strong Atheist is the result
of lots and lots of bible study whereas christians are good
listeners who can’t read. Anyway thanks everyone.
Thanks, Jack! It’s true that we find it insulting when people tell us we don’t know anything about the Bible (or the Book of Mormon, or the Qur’an, or the Torah, etc.).
25 July 2006, on 11:11 pm
Marcus
Too good man. Clunt? LOLx10
25 July 2006, on 11:34 pm
Lynda, I agree completely with your comment about bleeping…
which reminds me…I was watch an hilarious 2002 Eddie Izzard comedy special from the BBC. It was played on Comcast’s On Demand; and yet, I guess the originator, BBC America, had bleeped the usual ‘F’ words etc. How annoying!
Izzard does a kindof existentialist, stream of consciousness, shtick on dinosaurs, The Babble, gawd, etc. He’s really unique! I really became aware of him on his HBO, NON-bleeped 1995 “Dressed to Kill” special. The bleeping really does take away from the original intent of the material…Aargh!
I’d like to find more of his routines WITHOUT the bleeps!
DVD, I guess?
26 July 2006, on 12:35 am
The response has been enormous.
It’s true that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Jesus Christ was exemplary at presenting such evidence, yet still he had his message thrown back in his face.
What perplexes me is the astounding number of binary heads out there who love the concept of time travel, for example, when it contains so much paradox. These same Einsteins cannot consider God. Why? Because of the paradox’s involved. Hrmmmmmm.
In addition these same people pursue science with gusto in order to improve our situation. Ok, no problems. Yet they do this hypothesying into the unknown. Yet they refuse to hyposthesise into the unknown of Faith, labelling it “metaphysics” whilst many of their own ideas themselves are still not substantiated.
The bottom line is, many of you just have a chip on your shoulder when it comes to God. You can’t disproove Christianity anymore than a theist can proove it( Infact less - I understand what it means to see people come into faith due to Miracles that defy the laws of Nature) You don’t, bah hah. You just think you can disproove CHRISTianity in your self-delusion. If someone has a good scientific point you criticise their Grammar. If somebody speaks well you criticise their knowledge base. It seems you Secularists just have it all!
If you refuse Christianity that’s your prerogative, but why create entire websites just to insult large groups of people.. Isn’t this just plain anti-social and STUUUPIIIDD. If some rightwing wacko decides to use violence against you i’ll be laughing it up.
May God Curse you
lol
26 July 2006, on 12:44 am
It’s not for me to disprove, Climpt. It’s for you to prove and you haven’t come close. Bye-bye.
26 July 2006, on 12:52 am
In addition there is no escuse to speak to people the way some of you do in any context. If you don’t do it in Walmart don’t hide behind your IP and do it at home. This is what loosers do. People with Character have the ability to speak their mind in any given context. They also have the ability to hear a person out before insulting them. I can give as good as I get but I will never start insulting a person when they openly and honestly express their viewpoint in a MATURE fashion.
26 July 2006, on 12:59 am
If you refuse Christianity that’s your prerogative, but why create entire websites just to insult large groups of people
Clint, since you brought it up, why do stupid xians gather in large herds to condemn people who do not believe as you do? You condemn each other for crying out loud! And you come here with your persecution complex? We have a blog here to vent…big fucking deal. Xians knock on our doors and wake us up on Saturday mornings to tell us about some supernatural sky daddy like we have never heard of it before. That insults me! (Also pisses me off really bad.) How about an atheist coming knocking on your door or invading your website telling you to dump the ridiculous sky daddy beliefs? How about that? If you are insulted, tough crap.
Clint, you should really learn how to spell — it’s l-o-s-e-r , not l-o-o-s-e-r and I know you are but what am I? Grow up.
26 July 2006, on 1:05 am
Binary heads. That’s a new one. Oddly enough, it is kind of accurate if you know anything about how neurons work.
26 July 2006, on 1:20 am
Marcus, why do you expect people to honor the Comment Policy when you have so little respect towards people of differing belief systems. Try this - Go to your local hood, find a group of youths and start playing with their names to their face. Perhaps your glee in making clever fun with that large intellect will override the fear of consequences.
Perhaps you could point out how my comment is outside of the Policy. I did not troll your site. I was not on a spamming mission. I was researching a topic and the page came up on the search engine. I made an honest comment with sincere motives. For this I was treated in an inhospitable manner. I am so sorry if my browsing protocol is not up to your standards!
If you like you can be a Cyberhero and alter my posts. That would be a noteworthy achievement no doubt.
26 July 2006, on 1:26 am
Stardust thanks for the grammatical check. Some great authors in the world could harness your talent.
Personally I don’t knock on doors. Take that up with the people that do it. Additionally I don’t have a persecution complex, although like all people I appreciate good discussion without trash talk.
Finally I would never develop a PUBLIC website with titles like this one. People that do deserve to be reprimanded by the authorities when and if they do.
26 July 2006, on 1:55 am
Personally I don’t knock on doors. Take that up with the people that do it. Additionally I don’t have a persecution complex, although like all people I appreciate good discussion without trash talk.
Be honest Clinty…you aren’t here to “DISCUSS”, you are here to tell us how “evil” we are. You do indeed have a persecution complex…and you also LIE. You came a’knockin’ at this website and then start bitching and complaining when we make fun of you when you are WARNED at the top of the page that this is a site that makes fun of believers everywhere. If you don’t like that, go find yourself a herd to bleat with.
Finally I would never develop a PUBLIC website with titles like this one. People that do deserve to be reprimanded by the authorities when and if they do.
This isn’t fucking Pakistan or India and we can call this “God is for Dumbasses” if we really want to get mean about it. How is simply calling you a SUCKER as bad as telling people they are going to burn in HELLFIRE for simply not believing in the existence of a sky daddy? That is pretty damn hateful if you ask me. And what do you win by bothering us? Extra brownie points in your imaginary heaven?
Your believe your all - powerful gawd created EVERYTHING and could have made things anyway he/she/it wanted but instead decided to create creatures and dick with them on a regular basis, and then send them to hell when they don’t kiss his ass even when he does dick with them. It’s all so bizarre.
The ONLY reason you believe, Clinty is because you are AFRAID TO DIE and are WISHING for your life to go on forever somehow and that just isn’t going to happen. Nothing that you say your gawd created lasts forever…not even the stars in the sky. No amount of wishful thinking will change that…maybe give you a crutch to cope, but that is all.
26 July 2006, on 2:02 am
I was not on a spamming mission. I was researching a topic and the page came up on the search engine. I made an honest comment with sincere motives.
Clinty, this is such bullshit. If we have read this once, we have read it a hundred times.
26 July 2006, on 2:39 am
Clint:
lol
Personally I don’t knock on doors. Take that up with the people that do it.
Hmmm…it sure looks like you came a knockin’ here.
Additionally I don’t have a persecution complex, although like all people I appreciate good discussion without trash talk.
& you come to a site name ‘God is for Suckers’, & not expect to get banged up a bit?
Finally I would never develop a PUBLIC website with titles like this one. People that do deserve to be reprimanded by the authorities when and if they do.
Good luck repealing the 1st amendment. Have you made the phone call yet?
If someone has a good scientific point you criticise their Grammar. If somebody speaks well you criticise their knowledge base.
I mean, really, dude, I haven’t really seen you do either of these things.
The bottom line is, many of you just have a chip on your shoulder when it comes to God.
Ah, here comes the judgment - for the Nth time.
May God Curse you
Ah, the mark of the true xtian.
26 July 2006, on 2:46 am
Clint says
People with Character have the ability to speak their mind in any given context. They also have the ability to hear a person out before insulting them. I can give as good as I get but I will never start insulting a person when they openly and honestly express their viewpoint in a MATURE fashion.
And yet he has no hesitation to tell All of us “May God Curse you lol”
Hmmmm? How typical.
26 July 2006, on 2:47 am
Clinty said:If someone has a good scientific point you criticise their Grammar. If somebody speaks well you criticise their knowledge base.
R.A said: I mean, really, dude, I haven’t really seen you do either of these things
R.A. - Ramen!
26 July 2006, on 2:49 am
And yet he has no hesitation to tell All of us “May God Curse you lol”
Hmmmm? How typical.
Jimmer - yep…typical and redundant. AND they never come with any evidence. Just their own version of the delusion.
26 July 2006, on 3:04 am
I repeat again my initial comment was done in all sincerity. I am not lying. The title that this page has been given is WRONG. It shows a lack of decency and character regardless of your belief system. Freedom of Speech is one thing, showing respect and dignity in the way you relate to other human beings is an entirely different matter altogether. Your First Amendment ( I am not American) surely does not include an allowance for derogative name calling. If you truly want to communicate your message with sincerity, try doing it in a manner which you would like shown to you.
All of my sarcasm, etc has been done in fair response to initial hostility which was unwarranted and uncalled for.
I would expect such websites from pubescents but not from adults.
Your website is PUBLIC. That is PUBLIC. I have not gatecrashed, I have not doorknocked. It appeared on my IE window when I was conducting a search on a specific subject with no initial intent to discourse with Atheists.
Goodbye abusive people.
26 July 2006, on 3:31 am
I hereby admit to having not read all of the responses.
It appears the reason many on this site vilify God is due to the false notion that Hell is endless. It is not.
Hell is a mythological realm that does not actually exist. Furthermore I do not *vilify* god, the bible does a sufficient enough job of this.
First of all the punishment for sin is death. This does not, nor ever will equate to endless punishment. It means eventual destruction.
Correct me if I’m wrong – I certainly don’t spend a great deal of time pondering this subject – but he punishment for *first sin*, Eve eating from the tree of knowledge, is death but the punishment for specific sins - like the denial of the holy spirit - is eternal damnation.
The problem is the word eternal…..blah, blah, blah….independance from God destroys us.
Would you care to evidence any of these claims? I don’t take well to wild assertions.
Nevertheless, apart from this I believe that Jesus Christ defeated death. He did not defeat endless punishment. No such thing exists. He defeated death. Furthermore as the Apostle Paul prophesied in an epistle, there will come a day when the last enemy death is totally defeated.
This is an unsupported and essentially erroneous assertion.
I repeat again my initial comment was done in all sincerity. I am not lying. The title that this page has been given is WRONG. It shows a lack of decency and character regardless of your belief system. Freedom of Speech is one thing, showing respect and dignity in the way you relate to other human beings is an entirely different matter altogether.
Number one: I take the title of this blog as facetious, one would do well to entertain a sense of humor. Number two, beliefs do not deserve respect and dignity in and of themselves the *reasons* for the beliefs suffice or they do not and I will not offer undue respect and/or dignity for beliefs which cannot justify themselves with reason. However I do agree that when engaging in dialogue with others it is a wise decision to do so with civil decency.
Your website is PUBLIC. That is PUBLIC. I have not gatecrashed, I have not doorknocked. It appeared on my IE window when I was conducting a search on a specific subject with no initial intent to discourse with Atheists.
Irrelevant. Ultimately it was your decision to either visit this site and engage in discussion or not.
26 July 2006, on 8:58 am
Your website is PUBLIC. That is PUBLIC. I have not gatecrashed, I have not doorknocked. It appeared on my IE window when I was conducting a search on a specific subject with no initial intent to discourse with Atheists.
If there are any sites that appear in my searches for various things that I don’t think looks appealing to me, “Women are Bitches”, for example, I surely would not go to that site and start harrassing people or even to try to engage in dialogue with them because I know that I would be made fun of. That is how blogland is. Whenever I am doing a search and an xian site comes up, for another example, I bypass it because I think it is bullcrap and have no desire to engage in discussion with xians who want to “save me” from whatever that person’s interpretation of eternal damnation is.
We just want xians to KEEP YOUR RELIGION TO YOURSELF AND YOUR LITTLE SHEEPLE FLOCKS and quit bothering us. No xian will answer this…do you believe you get extra brownie points for harrassing people? Do you get extra rewards in your afterlife? Do you get preferred treatment from your sky daddy for having bothered the most people in blogland? Do you get your own fluffy cloud?
26 July 2006, on 9:18 am
They also have the ability to hear a person out before insulting them.
We have heard it all before. Most of us were xians for many years. We are not interested in circular or pointless debating about a religion we left behind. If you wish to have that kind of debate, there are other atheist blogs where they like to engage in “debating” your babble and non-existent sky daddy. You might want to try Debunking Christianity if you want discussion (but even they have their limits with obnoxious and proselytizing xians.) Or go try various sects of xianity who believe you have it all wrong…you can proselytize to each other!
26 July 2006, on 9:24 am
Stardust says:
Or go try various sects of xianity who believe you have it all wrong…you can proselytize to each other!
Seriously! Can we just send them to the great circle jerk in the sky??
Clint:
What is it about your pathetic ilk that you stop in here once a month or so and claim victimhood? We’re the ones who have to live in YOUR vicious, bigoted, backwards, science-denying, hateful fucking world. Remember? Get back to me the next time atheists are caught burning Xians at the stake, you sick little piece of shit.
AAAH. That felt good.
26 July 2006, on 9:43 am
Your First Amendment ( I am not American) surely does not include an allowance for derogative name calling.
Yes it does (Clint you must live in a cave!)…there is such a thing all over the free world called SATIRE and PARODY and we are FREE to use it in the U.S.A and other nations who value freedom of speech and expression. This is done on LIVE TELEVISION programs such as Daily Show, Stephen Colbert, Jay Leno, David Letterman, Conan O’brien, Saturday Night Live, and a host of others.
If you truly want to communicate your message with sincerity, try doing it in a manner which you would like shown to you.
That’s what you don’t understand…we aren’t into PROSELYTIZING for atheism…this blog is a place for ATHEISTS to come together and make fun of all of the people who believe in things with ZERO evidence and who attempt to FORCE their fantasy on us on a regular basis.
26 July 2006, on 9:48 am
Dear Clint,
Like I just told Randy, your very presence here is an affront to us. You’ve been told that we’ve all heard every example of your kindergarten logic- plus a few that are significantly higher up the scale of reason than your’n. You’ve been told that we have no interest in hearing these things again. You’ve been directed to a guideline on participation here and chosen to ignore it. This is not the public square. You’re 1st Amendment rights do not apply here and can be taken from you with one click of the mouse. Given the right mood, some of us might deign to engage your pathetic attempts at rationale but, like a cat with a mouse, we eventually get bored and either eat or abandon you.
26 July 2006, on 9:50 am
We don’t swim in your toilet, Clint, so please don’t pee in our pool.
26 July 2006, on 10:50 am
Is Clint really gone for good? Hope so. How many signs does one have to post on their front door to keep the solicitors from banging?
Interestingly when Clint was presented with a mathematical or scientific problem (the Biblical flood story)from Jack’s comment, Clint offered NO scientific explanation or rebuttal or even a good guess.
Also of note was his declaration that “If some rightwing wacko decides to use violence against you i’ll be laughing it up” . The standard Xian (well, Muslim too) response to any language or publication they deem “abusive” or offensive or insulting is violence.
My mom use to tell me a rhyme when kids called me names: “sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me.”
26 July 2006, on 11:01 am
Clint,
“Goodbye abusive people.”
You’ll be back.
26 July 2006, on 11:07 am
You’ll be back.
Most likely Clinty is going to be a regular “lurker”. They just CAN’T stay away!
“Goodbye abusive people.”
See you around little masochist!
26 July 2006, on 11:10 am
Ha Ha, Raindog, I like your last comment about the toilet and
the pool.
Actually, I have a younger brother named Clint that hates me
with that good old christian spirit. I haven’t heard from him
for 6 years now. The last words I had for him were”Just think.”
I guess it was asking too much.
But then again too I realize that I have much to be desired
in my ways of communication. This group looks like a good place to practice.
26 July 2006, on 11:35 am
Actually, I have a younger brother named Clint that hates me
with that good old christian spirit. I haven’t heard from him
for 6 years now.
Jack - it’s sad how religion divides families and friendships…causes so much division in the world. My alcoholic youngest brother (who is a non-church-attending Lutheran) and his sometimes mass-attending catholic wife call us “satanists” and we were told we are no longer welcome in their house around their children. We don’t communicate and haven’t seen each other for about 2 years now. We never even brought up religion when we were around them, but what we DID do was tell him he needs A.A. for his drinking problem after he was verbally abusive to various family members at several family gatherings. (He is in denial that he has a problem to this day.)He lashed out with the “satanist” crapola and banished us from his life saying that he doesn’t want his kids “corrupted” and that we are going to hell.
26 July 2006, on 3:26 pm
Stardust, gentlemen, the checks are in the mail!
26 July 2006, on 3:53 pm
Stardust, I think for most christians the bible is misleading
in so many ways. The idea that with enough faith you can move
mountains leads people, I think, to believe that much faith
can create. It seems to give the impression that believing can
create. Some people are lead to believe that prayer heals if
you have a strong faith. This is the problem with the Witnesses.
So many of their children have died because of this problem and
it doesn’t end with just that religion.
26 July 2006, on 4:34 pm
Stardust:
Love the ‘herd to bleat w/’ comment. Very funny.
I find this bit of skullduggery interesting:
Finally I would never develop a PUBLIC website with titles like this one. People that do deserve to be reprimanded by the authorities when and if they do.
Obviously, Fred Clintstone needs to get out more. There’s a multitude of anti-atheist hate sites, varying from subtle to outrageous. There’s also multiple Holocaust revisionist sites, supremacist sites - hell, name it, it’s out there.
Such is the price we pay for freedom of speech.
26 July 2006, on 5:12 pm
Fred Clintstone
R.A. - haha! How fitting!
26 July 2006, on 6:53 pm
In addition there is no escuse to speak to people the way some of you do in any context. If you don’t do it in Walmart don’t hide behind your IP and do it at home. This is what loosers do.
*snif*…
me-no-like-clinty…
People with Character have the ability to speak their mind in any given context. They also have the ability to hear a person out before insulting them.
Obviously someone who does not live in Amerikkka…
I can give as good as I get but I will never start insulting a person when they openly and honestly express their viewpoint in a MATURE fashion.
You know, it’s kinda funny. You come to a website — purely by accident — called “GIFS” and you post some comment. Then, you get fucked with, and then I’m guessing you probably figure out the name of our site. Then after figuring that out, instead of raising your hands up in this “Ok-My-Bad-My-Mistake-Nevermind” kind of way, you instead go on the offensive and claim that our site, our manners, etc., are all wrong. Who does that? If I came to some website — purely by accident — that was titled “Atheists Suck!” and found this out, I wouldn’t then tell those people that they had any kind of problem. I’m pretty sure the “Oops, wrong room” attitude is probably the way to react — or, better, stay around (quietly) and see what goes on. But not you, Clint.
So, please, just shut the fuck up.
Try this - Go to your local hood, find a group of youths and start playing with their names to their face. Perhaps your glee in making clever fun with that large intellect will override the fear of consequences.
WHAT THE FUCK DOES ANY OF THIS MEAN?…
SOMEBODY HELP ME…
MY BRAIN HURTS…
26 July 2006, on 7:13 pm
Try this - Go to your local hood, find a group of youths and start playing with their names to their face. Perhaps your glee in making clever fun with that large intellect will override the fear of consequences.
I like this idea better: why doesn’t Clintypoo go to his local hood and find a group of youths and tell them they are a bunch of loser sinners who will burn in hell and see how long his pansy ass lasts there and how much his gawd will protect his sorry ass while spreading gawd’s luv.
26 July 2006, on 7:19 pm
Stardust:
I like this idea better: why doesn’t Clintypoo go to his local hood and find a group of youths and tell them they are a bunch of loser sinners who will burn in hell and see how long his pansy ass lasts there and how much his gawd will protect his sorry ass while spreading gawd’s luv.
Even better yet, go spread the ‘good news’ somewhere a little more dangerous - say like, Beirut, or Cyprus.
Yabba-dabba-doo.
26 July 2006, on 7:25 pm
Even better yet, go spread the ‘good news’ somewhere a little more dangerous - say like, Beirut, or Cyprus.
Yabba-dabba-doo.
R.A. Yeah! All these rapture freakos should all get together and go where the “prophecy” is coming to light! Go where the “action” is and convert some Hezbollah fighters?
26 July 2006, on 8:09 pm
Clint: Finally I would never develop a PUBLIC website with titles like this one. People that do deserve to be reprimanded by the authorities when and if they do.
I guess we could concede that we might consider renaming our site if “God Hates Fags” and “Guns, God, and Glory” change their names first. It’s only fair that the xians set the example for proper public behavior, after all, since they’re the vast majority in the US.
27 July 2006, on 2:11 am
Stardust, I love your #45 comment [among others!].
Like, …”you Jazz…er…I mean…Rock…er…
OK, I’ll compromise with my own style of made-up preference: ‘Jazz-Rock’!…
yeah, you “Jazz-Rock”, Stardust, in my book!
[OK, I admit, I'm an old Bebop Jazz beatnik type!...Oh, those Jack Kerouac days!]
You gal members [Stardust, Eve, Lynda] really do hit the mark with some extremely cogent and accurate ‘zinger’ comments RE so many similar thoughts that I’ve had…but I never put them together so well!
So, am I being a ‘Chauvinist pig’, by saying that I think you ‘broads’ are VERY HOT?
And of course, I just HAVE to add:
“Some LIKE it Hot”! “ZOWEE”!!!
[Am I being too corny?]
To my fellow ‘guy’ members: “You KNOW I’m right about the gals!”
27 July 2006, on 9:35 am
You gal members [Stardust, Eve, Lynda] really do hit the mark with some extremely cogent and accurate ‘zinger’ comments RE so many similar thoughts that I’ve had…but I never put them together so well! So, am I being a ‘Chauvinist pig’, by saying that I think you ‘broads’ are VERY HOT?
ChuckA, Thanks for the compliment! (I’ll let the “broads” reference slide this time ;))
27 July 2006, on 12:56 pm
OK,Stardust,…of course [RE your 'slide': "Nice Sliding!"?], I was kidding…I just [purposely] slipped into an old Sinatra ‘Rat Pack’ jargon mode!
I think you know, I’m a ‘dyed in the wool’, feminist, kinda guy!
["Dyed in the wool"?...what 'engram' of mine did THAT pop out of?...and no, I'm not a Scientologist!]
[I need the smiley practice!...that does get trite in a hurry, though;...I think it's time to explore some of the other posting tricks...?]
27 July 2006, on 1:00 pm
I need the smiley practice!
ChuckA - (Leave the dash out and just put a : ) (but together like so with no space in between :)) Winky is ; ) but no space in between ;).
27 July 2006, on 3:11 pm
ChuckA, since some of the “broads” the Rat Pack hung out with included the bodacious Ava Gardner among others, I got no problem with the term.
28 July 2006, on 3:08 am
Eve, as to that Ava pic:
Besides Joe E. Brown’s “ZOWEE”. another very old, sexually descriptive, and verbally reactive expression ‘pops up’ in my mind:
“HUBBA, HUBBA!” [which is more like the 1940's, I think!]
What a great ’shot’ of Ava. I never saw that one.
What is there left to say?…
OK…are we all, now, going to start a “Show and Tell”?
28 July 2006, on 4:12 am
Ava sure is purty. But where are her fleshy bits? Put a little meat on her bones!
Just kidding. A beautiful woman is a beautiful woman, regardless of size or shape.
28 July 2006, on 4:13 am
Hey, Eve… Howz about taking a bow? 79 (I mean 80!) responses to a recycled comment! You rock.
28 July 2006, on 4:15 am
Jack Says:
I have a younger brother named Clint that hates me
with that good old christian spirit. I haven’t heard from him
for 6 years now. The last words I had for him were”Just think.”
I guess it was asking too much.
But then again too I realize that I have much to be desired
in my ways of communication. This group looks like a good place to practice.
Damn, man. That doesn’t sound like asking too much. “Just think” and he went all braindead on you?
28 July 2006, on 4:07 pm
Sean, any man who thinks Ava Gardner in her prime could do with a few more “fleshy bits” is more than OK in my book! Ramen to beautiful women of all shapes and sizes, indeed.
Yay, 80 on a recycled comment - and a comment, no less, not even a main-page post! *sniff* It’s enough to bring a tear to this broad’s baby browns…
28 July 2006, on 4:43 pm
OK, Eve, and Sean, …I just can’t resist adding my agreement with your ‘tastes’ RE the “few more fleshy bits” for Ava comment.
Maybe I’m a kinda “19th Century Impresionist” type guy in that regard. : )
OK…”Meaty”…AND, I’ll add: “Athletic”?
Are we giving away too much here?…REALLY!…Tsk! Tsk!
Personally, I guess, I’ve LITERALLY reached the infamous…
“Dirty Old Man Stage” of life!…
and I don’t flinch about either!
“Does it show?…I won’t tell!”
OK…I see the ‘hook’ coming at me from stage left!
28 July 2006, on 5:41 pm
Eve Says:
Clint: Finally I would never develop a PUBLIC website with titles like this one. People that do deserve to be reprimanded by the authorities when and if they do.
I guess we could concede that we might consider renaming our site if “God Hates Fags” and “Guns, God, and Glory” change their names first. It’s only fair that the xians set the example for proper public behavior, after all, since they’re the vast majority in the US.
Man, that fuckin’ ROCKED!
Eve Says:
Sean, any man who thinks Ava Gardner in her prime could do with a few more “fleshy bits” is more than OK in my book! Ramen to beautiful women of all shapes and sizes, indeed.
Stop it or I am gonna start openly flirting with you.
14 September 2006, on 11:38 pm
I was just re-reading this and was laughing out loud at this statement by RA:
Finally I would never develop a PUBLIC website with titles like this one. People that do deserve to be reprimanded by the authorities when and if they do.
Good luck repealing the 1st amendment. Have you made the phone call yet?
As you may know about me at this point, I love righteousness combined with hilarity. Why I love Jon Stewart.
Ha!
Right fuckin’ on, RA!
14 September 2006, on 11:48 pm
stardust Says:
July 26th, 2006 at 7:13 pm EST
Try this - Go to your local hood, find a group of youths and start playing with their names to their face. Perhaps your glee in making clever fun with that large intellect will override the fear of consequences.
I like this idea better: why doesn’t Clintypoo go to his local hood and find a group of youths and tell them they are a bunch of loser sinners who will burn in hell and see how long his pansy ass lasts there and how much his gawd will protect his sorry ass while spreading gawd’s luv.
I’m sorry, but I have to say again that I am laughing so loud re-reading this thread tonight. Those that follow the feeds should check back in on this one. Seriously funny shit.
17 September 2006, on 4:09 pm
Hi everyone,
Argument by analogy; appeal to ethos; rhetorical question? Position statement.
Personal Statement; attempted ethos building.
Vague anecdote; appeal to ethos.
Statement of benefit.
Admission of opposing argument; following denial of previous admission.
Reassertion of intelligent design; continued attempt to establish ethos.
Same as above.
Faulty analogy.
Apology for witnessing. Assertion of benefit of conversion. Amusing comment. Hope for our future enlightenment. Condemnation of “atheist ignorance”. Witty closer!
Whaddya think?