Also, I think the scientist was irresponsible and reckless. He knows that the brain is highly plastic and changes based on experiences. He tested people he knew believed in a certain faith and then claims that faith and susceptablity to a belief is hardwired?? The more reasonable and RATIONAL explanation is that thes individual brains changed as the result of their beliefs.

The Lard provides:

http://onegoodmove.org/1gm/1gmarchive/2007/05/the_price_of_at.html

Or try this

[MOD EDIT - fixed link]

Hint: always hit the return button after posting a URL

Okay, try this:

http://onegoodmovemedia.org/movies/0705/2020_051107_atheism.mov

Just cut and paste it then delete the crap on the end which shows up for no particular reason. 

Yes,James Randi was on 20/20.Basically did update on Peter Popoff .

About what?

Arguing with O'Reilly is pointless, he justs shouts over people and cuts their mics when he doesn't like what they have to say.

Yeah it would be pointless to debate that guy. I have never seen him be quite long enough to let someone else get a word in. I would not want to see the RRS debate him. Im sure they could outsmart mr. O'Reilly but that would require him to shut his mouth for a few minutes. 

Edit:  ooops, this is the kindness forum, so I'll just delete my comments here...

I don't buy the 'posession' thing.  I do believe in evil.  Causing someone injury or death 'just because' is pretty evil sounding to me.  Hitler - evil.  Torturing animals - evil.  You get the idea.  I don't think anything supernatural makes us evil, though.

EDIT POST.....I JUST REALIZED WHAT SECTION THIS WAS IN. I consider equating atheists to Hitler to be out of the scope of "Kill em with kindness" and should be put where others can recipocate. But if it stays here I wont make noise in the library. Sorry for the lack of attention to what room I was in. 

This post is a joke right?

If you cant understand the flaw in this you you obviously dont know what how violent and opressive theocracies to dissentors. Do you even know what a theocracy is?

Please dont ever sit on a jury, "They dont think like me, so they must be guilty"

Let me set you strieght. I do not like Hitler any more than you. Your fallacy is that it is failing to see "worship" of anything, be it a political party, a person, or a religion, or dictator without question is bad.

If you think that knowing what I know that I'd value genocide as a goal you are just as nuts as Hitler. And if you believe that because I am an atheist I will lead people to commit genocide, then it would stand to reason that you'd act in every aspect of your life to opress me even if there were no evidence that I would.

If I am bad, even before I act on anything, then do something about it now before us kitten barbaquing, goat sacrificing, cootie spreading heathens stick you in the oven.(tTake note of sarcasm)

Should I equate all Christians to Eric Rudoph because he claimed to be a Christian?

If there is anything I hate just as much as dictators is people who blindy buy a stereotpe without even knowing the individual.

If you think religion is incapable of violence you obviously dont watch the news nor have you ever picked up a history book.

I bet you dont even know what the Nazis had embossed on their belt buckles.

If you dont, go do some research. 

Here are some words from famous people who did not like living under religious rule.

"The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the Supreme Being as his father, in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter."

TTThomas Jefferson, letter to John Adams April 11th 1823.

"Question with boldness even the existance of God, for if there be one, surely he would pay more homage to reason than to that of blindfolded fear" Thomas Jefferson, EPITAPH

"As the goverment of the United States, is not in any sense, founded on the Christian religion" Barbary Treaty(Treaty of Tripoly) articall 11, signed by both houses of congress and signed into law by President John Adams, June 10th 1797.

"I distrust what God believers say what God wants, because it usually coincides with their disires" Susan B. Anthony.

I guess these people, since they didnt want to live under religious law, must have wanted to commit genocide too.

Brian 37 wrote:

I consider equating atheists to Hitler to be out of the scope of "Kill em with kindness" and should be put where others can recipocate.

----

Please re-read my post and this thread. I never equated atheist to Hitler...never. Nor do I mean to imply that in any way. I was only responding to another's comments and pointing out what I feel to be an troublesome issue in the atheistic position. (BTW, I'm a theist and I concede issues with the theistic position as well.)

So, now that we have some "Hitler was not bad" statements, can we get some "MLK was not good" admissions as well.

/peace

I think Maragon is on the right track.  Good and evil are moral issues, not necessarily perception issues.  Yes, there is some wiggle room with regard to what is good vs. evil, but lets face it (why do we always talk about Hitler?) what Hitler did was pretty seriously an evil thing.  The destruction, death and harm that occurred at the hands of the Nazi regime is inexcusable and I think that anyone, regardless of their religious or non-religious beliefs can see that.

At the same token, I happen to find burying a woman up to her neck and chucking large stones at her head because her husband accused her of adultery as a pretty evil action.  Some people in the Middle East might not agree with me. 

Why this is an issue with atheism is beyond me, just for the record.  Perhaps I'm mistaking what that person meant (I don't remember the name, sorry) but just because I'm an atheist doesn't mean I can't tell the difference between good and evil.

The labels help us to keep from getting confused(there's alot of people who post here). Alot of people will....pretend to be atheist or agnostic an...I don't know...do stupid thing...but they're really theists and have said so in previous threads.

If we go to a christian board, we get labelled as atheists, no skin off of my back.

I don't think you can comprehend the point I'm making, because it wasn't that one. First, please do not put words in my mouth. I did not say I didn't personally think Hitler was wrong for what he did. I didn't say I disagree with MLK. See, that's where you mistake my point. I may realize good and evil are all about perception, but I still have my own sense of right and wrong. You really screwed up trying to make a point, because you ended up assuming in your entire argument. Lets state this out.

To me Hitler was wrong. I refuse to say evil because evil implies the intent to cause blantant destruction. He tried to "protect" the (Non-existent) aryan race. 

To me Martin Luther King Jr. was a great man. (Met one of his daughters too.) He fought hard for the rights of his race. (African-Americans, or what have you.)

They both defend the rights of their own "group". Neither did it for entirely selfish reasons, but they did it in different ways. One is evil and one is good for the method by which the accomplished their goal? Or, didn't, in Hitler's case. See, another mistake you make.

An act in itself is not evil. Rather, it is the intent behind the act. If I steal a million dollars, am I bad? Well, what if I stole that million dollars to donate to charity?  A charity to help save starving children? And lets say I stole from a loan shark who went around ruining peoples lives? Would I be bad for stealing? Well, by some people's understanding of how good and evil work, yes. An act is evil. Not the intent. I could save a child's life with the intent to sleep with his mother. The act is good because I saved the childs life. Well darn, guess it's okay.

Think of it like this. Lets use the word shit. Alright, people view the word shit as offensive. (Well, some do.) Is it the word that is truly offensive, or the meaning of the word? Why is shit any more offensive than crap if they mean the same thing? Why is ass more offensive then butt? They mean the same thing. Same thing with evil and good. I do something evil with good intent, or I do something good with evil intent. Is it the intent behind the act or the act itself that is evil or good? But lets say the intent is to steal food from America and send it to a starving country. Is that evil or good? Why? Again, you'd get different, answers, and therefore good and evil are perception. 

Evil. Is. A. Man. Made. Conept. That is my point. "Good" is what agrees with the social norm. Not killing is a social norm. "Bad" or "Evil" is what goes against the social norm. Hitler changed opinions of the social norm for some people.  He made it seem as if killing Jews was good because of propaganda and skillful rhetoric. He was doing something "Good" because he followed the social structure and beliefs he created and installed. 

To some people, MLK was "evil". Specifically white supremecists. Think, they're out to insure the well being of a certain "tribe" or group of people. Whites. Is that evil? Wanting to protect yourself from a perceived threat? No. Not to me. Very rarely do I ever use the word evil or good. 

Your inability to see from other peoples shoes is somewhat humorous. Merely because something is contradictory to your beliefs does not make it evil. Nor just because you believe something make it good. Is killing people wrong? Yes and no. Is killing someone who is trying to kill you wrong? Yes and no. It depends on ones perception and opinion. Since opinions vary, and forcing your opinions on others is bit fascist, no one is truly right. You may be right to yourself, but not right to someone else.

I'm not justifying the murder of millions, nor am I saying MLK was evil. And for you to judge a kid who brings a gun to school and shoots people is sickening. Imagine this. The boy is shoved around, beaten up, day after day. No one cares. No one listens. The teachers don't care. The principal doesn't. His parents don't. No one does. He gets abused, verbally, and physically. Shoved into luckers, dumped into trash cans. Day after day, week after week, year after year.

 Imagine every horrible thing to do to someone and imagine it done to him. If he brings a gun to school and shoots the people that bully him, I don't sympathasize with the bullies definately. Everyone has a breaking point. Everyone. No one has infinite patience. Everyone breaks, and loses their sanity at some point. You just put enough pressure, and it'll happen. In 6th grade some years ago, I got picked on a lot. Shoved around. I finally lost it and beat some kid senseless who decided it'd be funny to kick me while I was sitting alone not bugging anyone. It was after a long year of being shoved around and taking crap. I kept complaining, and nothing was done. I felt good for weeks after beating the crap out of him. But see, it wasn't one year, it was many. 4 years of dealing with crap. I lost it.

 So, was I evil for beating the crap out of the kid who kicked me? Some would say I am. I should have been "mature". However, that's passing judgement upon me, and making the assumption that you yourself would be fine in a situation like that under circumstances like that. 

Everyone views the world out of a little bubble. This bubble distorts what is outside of the bubble, and causes us to each form our own opinions of what is outside the bubble. Whether it be truth or not. We each form our own ideas, and therefore our own beliefs on what is good or bad. These int urn are passed down to our children who pass it down to their children and so on and on. Then, someone goes against the perception of the bubble, seeing what's outside different then what is taught, and they violate the social norm.

 I expect a poorly worded and/or response that is completely irrelevant to what I said. Either that, or no response at all.

Sorry you had such a hard time.