Little "debate" i am having
Offline I thought i'd get your guys opinon and help on this. (also some of it i thought was pretty funny.
It's a pretty long read sorry.
This article came out recently in my student newspaper http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/the_rational_response_squad_radio_show/freethinking_anonymous/80
There article isn't as important. I think since you have to sign up for it i'll put it in another thread. This post will already be long enough.
First comment :
Stop making sense! Oh right, the religious right will have some tricky response that "proves" that a secular university should bend to the will of a fairytale god.
not what i replied to its the comment that follows. I'll call him Theist.
theist: The religious right doesn't have to be tricky when the loudest opposition is made up of simple-minded, opportunistic, atheists itching for the chance to refer to religion as a fairy tale.
Me: The religious right doesn't have to be tricky when the loudest opposition is made up of simple-minded, opportunistic, atheists itching for the chance to refer to religion as a fairy tale. -bob
First of all how are these people "simple-minded"? i would love to hear your reasoning behind that.
Second of all you need to realize the viewpoint of many atheists. To many of us beliving in god is akin to beliving in a fairy tale. If you look at ancient greek mythology and see why you think they are fairy tales you will see why many of us think yours is the same way.
Third, related to the second point i just made. So what about the theists who belittle atheists? Call them immoral or that they are going to hell? Tell us that we must have a meaningless life? Say that "atheists are simple-minded"? That all atheists are angry? or that we all become atheists because of some emotional event? Are these not at least as bad? In fact alot of them are what is called projections. I ,as an atheist, am very happy. I am not angry at theists, unless that try to make laws forcing religion down my throat. Also I am not angry at any god, how can you be angry at somethign that you don't think exists?
Theist(long): Most, not all, but most are simple minded. They prove themselves such by claiming religion is a "fairy tale" and attempt to demonstrate proof simply by pointing out that it relies on certain levels of faith. Stating that belief in a higher power is akin to believing there are trolls who control bridge crossings or that a woman can find her prince by kissing a frog is about as simple minded as you can get.
I don't doubt that to many of you believing in God is akin to believing in a fairy tale. But don't you see that to assume the beliefs that so many hold true to be nothing more than a fairy tale you would have to be at least some what of an egotist? What makes you able to say belief in God is a fairy tale? And in doing so it seems you are also assuming the people who believe in God are dim enough to hold such "mere fantasies" as truths. More than a few atheists who see fit to voice their opinions on the subject seem to hold these attitudes. Hell I'll even give agnostics some credit, at least they are open minded about the subject.
"Third, related to the second point i just made. So what about the theists who belittle atheists? Call them immoral or that they are going to hell? Tell us that we must have a meaningless life? Say that "atheists are simple-minded"? That all atheists are angry? or that we all become atheists because of some emotional event? Are these not at least as bad?" – Zach
Most of them are about as bad. It depends on whether or not they are saying such things in response to being told their beliefs are nothing more than fairy tales. Many evangelical Christians belittle atheists but I would say they are no worse then the many atheists who do the same to Christians. Many on both sides see fit to tell others how unintelligent they must be to hold the contrary opinion. Brad seems to fit into this category.
It seems many atheists like to place themselves above the ignorant masses as if they are somehow more enlightened than the rest of us. If they didn't "fairy tale" is not how they would describe religious beliefs. They like to think that people who believe in God do so because they are psychologically incapable of dealing with the concept of not existing after death but that as an atheist they are.
That is often also used as another excuse to claim the idea of God is nothing more than an idea formed to comfort the mind and nothing more. This argument is flawed as it ignores those who have little trouble thinking of existence in which they do not exist yet still believe and because it can be easily turned around. After all what if I were to say that atheism is nothing more than a fairy tale conjured up to give those too dense to comprehend an omnipotent being something to follow. That atheism was nothing more than an anti-religion feeding on belief systems like a parasite feeds on a host in order to give some meaning to being incapable of comprehending God. Now does this attitude bring thoughts of the respect I hold your beliefs, or lack there of, to your head? Or rather does it sound like I am assuming you must be of lesser mental capacity than me?
The point here is that many atheists see fit to belittle those who "believe" as they are of the opinion that such people are of lesser intelligence for doing so. Calling ones belief system a fairy tale is evidence of this and is about as simple minded as any argument against religion can get.
me(shit i didn't realize i wrote this much) :
Most of them are about as bad. It depends on whether or not they are saying such things in response to being told their beliefs are nothing more than fairy tales. Many evangelical Christians belittle atheists but I would say they are no worse then the many atheists who do the same to Christians. Many on both sides see fit to tell others how unintelligent they must be to hold the contrary opinion. Brad seems to fit into this category.
It seems many atheists like to place themselves above the ignorant masses as if they are somehow more enlightened than the rest of us. If they didn't "fairy tale" is not how they would describe religious beliefs. They like to think that people who believe in God do so because they are psychologically incapable of dealing with the concept of not existing after death but that as an atheist they are.
That is often also used as another excuse to claim the idea of God is nothing more than an idea formed to comfort the mind and nothing more. This argument is flawed as it ignores those who have little trouble thinking of existence in which they do not exist yet still believe and because it can be easily turned around. After all what if I were to say that atheism is nothing more than a fairy tale conjured up to give those too dense to comprehend an omnipotent being something to follow. That atheism was nothing more than an anti-religion feeding on belief systems like a parasite feeds on a host in order to give some meaning to being incapable of comprehending God. Now does this attitude bring thoughts of the respect I hold your beliefs, or lack there of, to your head? Or rather does it sound like I am assuming you must be of lesser mental capacity than me?
The point here is that many atheists see fit belittle those who "believe" as they are of the opinion that such people are of lesser intelligence for doing so. Calling ones belief system a fairy tale is evidence of this and is about as simple minded as any argument against religion can get. -bob
I have never met a simple-minded atheist. Ever. The only thing this sounds like is a projection pure and simple. Also, i know tons of atheists and they are among the most knowledgeable people i know. So i think you are either projectioning here or commiting a sample bias.
Why is it different? just because you hold it to be true? Why does holding a believe to be true make it so that it automatically doesn't get the same critisism as any other belief? Besides the fact that i said mythology not fairy tales(all though you could argue that a mythology can be a fairy tale.) If you could prove it to us then we would accept it. otherwise you do hole to it on non-contigent faith. Most theists are proud of this non-contigent faith.
I'll repeat it is from our point of view. Do you think wiccan's belief in magic is like a fairy tale? Do you believe the idea of reincartiton is like a fairy tale? So we are blunt about the way we feel about something you believe? I don't like sugar coating things i am sorry. This though does not make me simple-minded it makes me blunt or any other atheist blunt. Also you do the common thing and mix up what atheist and agnostic means. This is a pet peeve of mine. Atheist and agnostic answer two read it two different statements. Atheist is the lack of belief in god. It is the negation of theism-the belief in god. Agnostic is the lack of knowledge about god. It is the negation of gnostic-to have knowldege. I am an agnostic atheist.
Why do i think belief in god is the same as mythology? Why do you think greek mythology is incorrect? Why is it absurd to you? Then you may see why it is absurd to me why you believe in god. Most atheists that i know of think theists believe becuase a) they have been indoctrinated or b) that are ignorant. I haven't met an atheist who thinks a theist is necessariliy of lower intelligence of an atheist. They can be just as an atheist can have a lower intelligence then a theist.
How in the world can the lack of belief in something become a fairy tale? So your lack of belief in fairy tales are fairy tales in them self? This is absurd!
Can you prove that i have less intelligence? Can you prove I am less knowledge about in this field (which is what most atheists actually mean that many theists are ignorant which does not equal stupid). We belittle people by showing how we see their beliefs. Ok have you ever told a person who sees other people who aren't there that they are crazy? Do you agree that we should? Do you think we should just respect their beliefs and let it be?
I think all beliefs should be up to critisim. You can crisize any beliefs i have. hell call me what ever you want, but don't think for a min. that i won't critize what you say, or try to show you it from my point of view.
You mention that atheists might not understand an omnipotent being. Tell me do you? Most theists i know will say god is unknowable. Also, most atheists i know understand omnipotence better then most theists (could be sample bias but it seems to hold true everytime i test it). Also, can you prove that an atheist is dense? Can you prove all these points you make? most atheists can prove why they say the things they do. No i would say that it says nothing about how smart or knowledgeable you think something is. It is your opinon on them. Now can your prove your claims that is the point. We are able , at least alot of us, to prove or disprove your claims or things that we say(you cannot prove a negative ever).
Also you say that atheists are as bad as evangical christians. For the sake of argument lets say you are right. How about the fact that there are millions more of them and that atheists might be reacting to being personally attacked so often such as you have done in this post.
Also on your point about the argument being flawed. I have personally shown many peoples arguments for why they believe to be wrong. I have backed people (and have seen others backed by other people) into saying they believe on faith. That they need god to make themselves have a meaningful life, as they say what meaning to life is there without god? or how can you be moral without god? This is a sign of attachment and goes against your whole argument.
- Login to post comments
Offline I agree brights. I fear that since it is no longer on the front page of the website it no longer will produce comments 
. I suppose he thinks atheists make fun of other's beliefs then it's ok to do it with atheists
- Login to post comments
Offline He's stuck on understanding the problem with omniscient and omnipotent. It's a very simple concept.
When a being is both Omniscient and Omnipotent, there is a variable paradox that this being lives through, thus, it does not exist. The paradox is a simple one.
If the being is Omniscient, then he knows everything, including the future. If he is omnipotent he can do anything. Here is the problem with this:
If a being knows everything, including the future, then he can't make choices. Simple as that. If the future is allready known anything he does is allready pre-destined, making him just... potent? I'm not sure of the wording here.
The fact that he WOULDN'T be able to change anything is the reasoning behind this.
However, there is a problem with thinking like this. If a being is Omniscient and Omnipotent, he may know the outcome of any of his actions and can "choose" which action suits him best. Think of this as "Choose your own adventure! book but with God allready knowing the outcome of every choice he can make, making him both Omniscient and Omnipotent.
That, really, isn't where the debate is. The Christian God is Omniscient, Omnipotent, and Omnibenevolent. This is where the flaws in Christian dogmatic thinking shines.
If a God is Omniscient and Omnipotent, think of him like I said above. He chooses whichever path he sees fit. If he's Omnibenevolent then he will choose the path that does nothing but good for everyone and everything.
This is not the case as we have: Disease, pain, hunger, death, and bad music, just to name a few. And it boils down to this: If your love is everlasting, undying, and plain ol' awesome, why would you create those things? Also, why would you create an unforgivable sin? That, in itself, PROVES beyond a reasonable doubt by using logic and reason, that the Christian God is an illogical fallacy.
- Login to post comments
Offline However, there is a problem with thinking like this. If a being is Omniscient and Omnipotent, he may know the outcome of any of his actions and can "choose" which action suits him best. Think of this as "Choose your own adventure! book but with God allready knowing the outcome of every choice he can make, making him both Omniscient and Omnipotent.
Unless he knew everything about himself (for example, if he was maybe um... omniscient), in which case he would already know which of the choices he would make. He'd already know the path he was going to take through his choose-your-own-adventure book. This would mean that the other options weren't really options because it's impossible for him to choose them. this means that, if he believed them to be options then he was wrong and therefore not omniscient.
My head hurts
Oh, a lesson in not changing history from Mr. I'm-My-Own-Grandpa!
- Login to post comments
Offline Unless he knew everything about himself (for example, if he was maybe um... omniscient), in which case he would already know which of the choices he would make. He'd already know the path he was going to take through his choose-your-own-adventure book. This would mean that the other options weren't really options because it's impossible for him to choose them. this means that, if he believed them to be options then he was wrong and therefore not omniscient.
My head hurts
What I'm saying is that it's logical to be Omniscient and Omnipotent for two reasons.
1. You know the results of your actions all the way through regardless of what path you take (make up any huge number and I'm sure this is represents about 1/*insert that number again* the number of 'choices' an Omniscient Omnipotent being would have.
2. Because he is Omnipotent, he has the ability to pick and choose his way through these while still knowing the outcome of every result all the way through.
However, an Omniscient, Omnipotent, Omnibenevolent being is an observable fallacy because:
1. We can observe pain, hate, etc.
2. God would be a prick if he let people suffer like he does, hence, not being Omnibenevolent.
It's not illogical to say that you wouldn't want anyone you love (especially if this love is infinite) to experience pain. Simply because we do experience pain shows that God can't be Omniscient, Omnipotent, and Omnibenevolent.
- Login to post comments
Offline You are trying to hold God to some sort of standard or rule when God is the standard God is the rule.
Seriously WTF, Sigh If yuo wanted to control the masses, phesants, have them under your control and set yourself up as the authority and one day found they now question your authority what would be the best course of action with out killing off your own race, family. You would make up a scapegoat, pass the buck to a higher authority. When they question your authority yu come up with an all powerful god who can hurt and punish them more severly than you can. Create fear in the unknown, unseen. Want an excuse to kill anyone you don't like, approve of use the god.
Also, brights what i think he meant is that we shouldn't say anythign negative about their beliefs because they base their lives on them.
Ahh but it's ok for them to say anything negative they want to the extreme of bigotry, discrimination, refuse to accept atheists as patriotic and strip our rights away.
It's ok for them to say anything negative they want about other religions different from their own. Since they don't want anything negative said about their beliefs b/c they base their lives on their beliefs then they should stop indoctrinating, preaching, proselytizing, brainwashing, forcing their beliefs on everyone else. It's ok for them to spread their beliefs like a virus but not ok for us to say it's wrong when they can't even freakin proove their beliefs in a god, diety, angels, talking animals, etc etc to be real outside of their own delusion. Have these people never met a bi-polar, paranoid schizophrenic before.
____________________________
God that's the guy you pray to and nothing happens.
- Login to post comments
I've given my opinion of some of his points:
If I insisted that there are invisible unicorns living on the far side of the moon would you consider it egotistical to think I was delusional? THe only advantage your god has over my unicorns is the number of people who share the delusion. Unfortunately for you reality is not decided by popular vote.
We recognise that the self-preservation instinct is strong. Atheists have it too, we just choose to not live in a fantasy because of the fear of death. We accept that pretending we wont die will make it true. No judgement is made of your capability or lack thereof, we just recodnise that it is a strong motivation to believe in god.
There is a strong case for this. Just because you don't like it does not make it false. Why else has every culture invented some idea of the afterlife? If your god is the only right one where did ideas for the others come from?
example please
There's no magic, or impossible creatures in atheism, how is it then a fairy tale?
I'd suggest that everyone is 'too dense to comprehend an omnipotent being' as if you really think about it, omnipotence is inherently contradictory.
There is nothing to follow in atheism. It's an opinion (I do not believe in god) not a religion, atheism provides no rules or answers.
True, atheism cannot exist without theism. But that's just because if noone is making claims about supernatural beings there's no need to deny them.
I also doubt that you comprehend your own god (see inherent contradictions).
We can answer your negative claims, you just tell us you don't like to hear ours.
Do you feel that a child who still believes in Santa Claus is your cognitive equal?
Oh, a lesson in not changing history from Mr. I'm-My-Own-Grandpa!
I'll bet if you told that same theist that you believe in the literal truth of Rumplestiltskin, he'd laugh at you. He probably wouldn't even believe you.
The only difference between fairy tales and Biblical stories is that we've managed to remember that fairy tales aren't real.
It's only the fairy tales they believe.
Ok a new post from him.
theist:
To claim you have never met a simple mind in an entire belief system or corresponding demographic is to claim one of two things. One, you don't know that many people in said demographic. Or two, you are biased to the point you cannot see the flaws in anyone holding similar opinions as yourself. I've met simple and complicated minds in almost every belief system theist and atheists alike. You not being able to find them says something about your perception of like minded viewpoints. What was that about possessing an egotistical attitude I mentioned before?
To sum up my opinions of other belief systems, as you seem bent on using my disbelief in their principles as some arguing point to show how logical it is for you to disbelieve mine, I do not think that Greek mythology, wiccan practices, or reincarnation are correct in their philosophies. I do however show them some level of respect as they are belief systems attempting to explain life and understand how the world works. Just because I do not believe in them does not mean I think them to be mere fairy tales, I am a little more open minded than that. Fairy tales are understood from the beginning to be entirely fictionist stories conjured simply to convey some life lesson or childish entertainment. Religious beliefs are based on some amount of fact or worldly experience and are designed to explain the existence we live in and convey lessons about our lives. Just because I do not believe in other's versions of religion does not mean I am arrogant enough to be of the opinion they are equivalent to a child's bedtime story.
How could atheism be a fairy tale? I didn't say it was, I asked how you viewed my opinion of atheists if I were to label atheism as a fairy tale. Instead of answering this question you assumed I was attacking you and turn around and ask me to prove it's a fairy tale or tell you I understand omnipotence, none of which I claimed to be able to do. I guess you indirectly answered me with your response, you got pissed off. Now that you realize how it feels to have your beliefs classified as merely a fairy tale you may come to understand the reactions you get from bluntly voicing your opinions of other peoples.
Try and look at it objectively for a moment, how absurd is it really? It's a belief system. You refer to it as not believing in something but it's still an organized perception of what constitutes reality. There is no scientific evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt your perception is correct. There isn't any scientific evidence to prove my perception correct either. The difference is Atheists see fit to claim their beliefs as superior based on little more than pre-conceived biases towards religion. I believe in God because of how I view the world and the experiences I have had not because I have been indoctrinated or am ignorant of scientific principles. I am open minded and realize all beliefs can be criticized my own included. By all means correct me if I am wrong but atheists seem to come to their beliefs by believing theists only believe because they have been indoctrinated or are ignorant of science. You have no more evidence to prove God doesn't exist than I have to prove God does, yet I have to be ignorant of science or indoctrinated by fairy tale pushers in order to believe.
Do I think we should just respect others beliefs and let it be? YES! There is a difference between criticizing someone's beliefs and disrespecting them. I am never going to be converted to Atheism and I doubt you will ever believe in God. You can criticize me and I can criticize you, we can have logical arguments about the existence of God or atheism vs. theism. But don't think I won't argue against your opinion when you make statements likening my beliefs with fairy tales. As far as the perception of someone's mental state I have never met someone who sees people who aren't there but I probably would say they are crazy. Then again are you saying because I believe in God that I am akin to people with a mental illness which causes hallucinations? We seem to be back to your assumptions about my lack of capacity to comprehend reality again. I have never claimed to have seen God or any angles. The only thing I have claimed by my beliefs is that existence makes more sense in my mind to have been created by God.
me:
I'm going to answer paragrph by paragraph.
I am pretty sure I did not say I have never met simple minded atheists before. If i some how implied this i am sorry i did not mean to say that.
found the problem that we are having in understanding each other. It's a matter of the way we are approaching these things. I am approaching these belief systems on the logical basis. You are are approaching it from the fact that people live their lives by them and therefore (correct me if i am wrong) these beliefs should be respected. I disagree. I think a belief system deserves respect if it is logical and rational. Therefore i see mythology and many religions as illogical and on equal grounds. Also, in relation to fairy tales. Children believe these to be true only the adult knows they are false (until the child is shown they are false). Therefore it is logically to me a good anolgy to mythology and religion, at least from an atheist point of view. Also, in relation to your "open-minded" i am open minded to anything that is logical and rational. Can these people show me that their beliefs are rational or logical? No? then its not respectable. May it have been logical or rational at the time? maybe, but I do not believe that these things are logical or ratioanl anymore. Just like i think theism is logical and rational therefore until someone shows it's logical basis and shows it to be rational to believe in i won't respect it. Things must earn respect not be given it automatically. Also, just because i don't respect their beliefs doesn't mean i can't respect them. I'm sure you've read the bible verse about "hate the sin not the sinner"(btw it's an addition to the original text sorry for the tangent on that). It may seem I am disrespecting you since it is a deeply held belief of yours but I am not. Also, in reference to the above that i said i treat people with respect , but treating them doesn't necessitate that i actually respect them and their beliefs. When someone tells me that i'm dogmatic or that i'm basically unhuman(no morals, a meaningless life, unemotional) they no longer deserve my respect. I don't tell someone what they believe is a fairy tale until they say something of an epistemlogical standpoint and it sounds like a fairy tale to me i will call it like i see it, assuming they are being a total ass. If they are respectful I will be respectful back. Also when did i get mad? i was not mad in any way. I was very calm and relaxed when i wrote the above. I was just showing why i thought you where wrong.
Atheism is not a belief system. It is 1 belief. There are atheists who are republicans who beleive in the supernatural who believe in magic. The only thing in common we have is a lack of belief in deities thats it.
On the fairy tale thing about atheism. I was saying how could it possible be construed as a fairy tale not that you where saying it was. There is no way that it can be so it's a false analogy.
Sorry for the long post
It just doesn't stop.
So now he's actually wanting to know why i find theism illogical
theist :Before we go any further with this debate I will have to know in some reasonable detail why you consider religion, or more specifically Christianity, Irrational and or Illogical.
PS: I'm not throwing this back ion your face but this quote is how I came to the conclusion: "I have never met a simple-minded atheist. Ever." – Zach
me: I said i haven't met them. I didn't say that I won't meet them. He said that most of them are. I am saying out of the dozens i have met i haven't met one who is. So either he is wrong or i have only met bright atheists.
Why is it illogical? Hmm... Omni-max is contradictory. Can an omnipotent and omniscient being change his mind? He can? Then he is not omniscient cause he would have already known he was going to and so is not omniscient. If he can't, he is not omnipotent. Also, because the word has no postive ontology you are speaking about a being who is incoherent. For a better understanding of this argument go here (way to long to post) http://www.strongatheism.net/library/atheology/argument_from_noncognitivism/.
but really it doesn't matter why i think it's illogical. The burden of proof isn't on me its on the theist to prove god and make it logical and rational to believe in god.
theist: Why would a omnipotent and omniscient being ever need to change it's mind?
me: My point was CAN he logically change his mind. Not if he has a need to. Can an omnipotent and omnisicent being change his mind? not will he or does he need to but is it possible for him to.
Can any help me make this argumetn better. I know the argument i am just at a loss of words for explaining it.
Can anyone give me places where i'm messing up? and maybe why i did?
i can't tell but it seems he's consended my point about fairy tales since he stopped talked about that (at least thats what i'm perceiveing. Anyone agree?
The omniscience/omnipotence contradiction argument is a tricky one to win. Not because it's fundamentally flawed, but because the theist has generally not thought about what they mean when they say omniscient or omnipotent. When you present the argument and force them to define the terms you just conveniently define out the contradition. THis had been going on over the last few days in the atheist vs theist forums.
http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/sapient/atheist_vs_theist/8038
http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/sapient/atheist_vs_theist/8040
http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/sapient/atheist_vs_theist/7985
is the longest, most involved one ans I think the one that kicked off the subject, It turns into mostly an arguement between me and Eloise. She argues that a theory of multiple universes and quantum mechanics saves god from the contradiction (not of changing his own mind though). I failed to win that one, and while I didn't really lose it raised some questions.
I dont think you will get very far due to the lack of defintion, like may hve been said we seem to define omni-anything in terms of what it isn't.
Personally I think the strongest position to argue from is the burden of proof as you brought up. If any claim is made for supernatural beings then it is a question of prooving they exist, not prooving thet don't. As no proof has been provided atheism (just like not believing in invisible unicorns on the far side of the moon) is the most rational belief.
Well sure, he's offended, the truth hurts. The only difference between christianity and fairy tales is that more people believe in christianity. How does that make those stories any more true?
[MOD EDIT - fixed links]
Oh, a lesson in not changing history from Mr. I'm-My-Own-Grandpa!
Because people base their lives on them duh!
just because people base their lives on their beliefs from stories told doesn't make the stories true.
The only truth is they base their lives on the stories or belief they think are true.
stories - not true
people basing their lives on the untrue / unproven stores - true.
2 new posts. 1 from me one from him.
Sigh. This seems like pure projection to me. So i took a step back.
Hmm my other post hasn't came up yet I hope it fucking got posted. basically i said that he needs to prove to me how theism is rational and that since he is making the positve came that is why he must do so.
Also, brights what i think he meant is that we shouldn't say anythign negative about their beliefs because they base their lives on them.
Seriously WTF, Sigh If yuo wanted to control the masses, phesants, have them under your control and set yourself up as the authority and one day found they now question your authority what would be the best course of action with out killing off your own race, family. You would make up a scapegoat, pass the buck to a higher authority. When they question your authority yu come up with an all powerful god who can hurt and punish them more severly than you can. Create fear in the unknown, unseen. Want an excuse to kill anyone you don't like, approve of use the god.
Also, brights what i think he meant is that we shouldn't say anythign negative about their beliefs because they base their lives on them.
Ahh but it's ok for them to say anything negative they want to the extreme of bigotry, discrimination, refuse to accept atheists as patriotic and strip our rights away.
It's ok for them to say anything negative they want about other religions different from their own. Since they don't want anything negative said about their beliefs b/c they base their lives on their beliefs then they should stop indoctrinating, preaching, proselytizing, brainwashing, forcing their beliefs on everyone else. It's ok for them to spread their beliefs like a virus but not ok for us to say it's wrong when they can't even freakin proove their beliefs in a god, diety, angels, talking animals, etc etc to be real outside of their own imagination. Have these people never met a bi-polar, paranoid schizophrenic before.
God that's the guy you pray to and nothing happens.