Odd.
How do you think non-believers feel when you open the discussion by saying that they engage in genocide and forced sterilization?
Well, I am a city boy raised in southwest Los Angles. I fail to make any connections here?
I went back and checked my post, I never said that but can see how some one may have taken it that way.
I don’t understand. As a believer you would do nothing and let more people die? As a believer you’d pray and hope God would intervene? Exactly how would your decision differ from the atheistic leader working on the best ethics available?
The choice of who dies has nothing to do with science, obviously.
Close enough. So answer my question - how do you think people feel when you open the discussion by saying that they’d resort to genocide and forced sterilization? Why do you feel that’s a neutral tone to set for a discussion, and are confused when they come back with a little bit of animosity for the characterization?
I never said Ihoped god would intervene, I said I would trust that God would handle things the way he always has. No matter how I might feel about the results of something has no bearing wether it is right or wrong. Maybe god felt it was time to turn earth over to insects so he chose to start a decline of mammals that might take 10 million years to finsih, not for me to say.
I projected myself into the position of an athiest, no one else. I tried to imagine how I could make decisions I would not want to make but felt I had to. As I believer I felt I could be relieved of that process, as an athiest I felt I would need to try and fix it. Just me.
To be fair, his later clarification suggested this would only happen in a desperate extinction-threatening circumstance.
At least I hope he’s suggesting that atheists would wait for a desperate extinction-threatening circumstance.
[sub]All hail Governor Kodos![/sub]
That song really hit the spot, kind of refreshed me.
Truly, and awesomely bizzare point of view. I guess that explains why religious conservatives don’t hive a hoot about global warming.
Well, God will intervene. Or not, whatever.
So what do you do if your god tells you to kill half the population?
If you don’t have sense enough to read the thread before you post an idiot response like this you don’t deserve and answer.
This situation was man made and had no bearing on the thread. The decison what to do about this was easy yet they still seemed to take their time about it.
Well, what would you do? Let the world die off or kill 1/2 the population to save the rest? Or are you just like me and can’t really deal with the answer?
Of course it was man made, just as everything else that is justified by any god is man made.
The perpetrators’ god was invoked to justify the war in the first place, as it was by every other army for or against, and these victims’ belief in their god (or disbelief in the perpetrators’), was used to justify their assembly-line murders.
Not that it made made much difference.
You *are *aware that there are several instances in the bible where god commanded just that, right?
You know as well as I do that God was just used to sell the idea. So far it looks like human nature will abuse power when they have too much regardless of their beliefs or lack there of. If you have 90% of one group and 10% of another without a well written and enforced constitution you may have problems.