In case you all weren't clear

[substitute]

I’m not a Christian any more because that word in my country now means ignorant, bloodthirsty, hate-filled hypocrite and nothing more. The five of you who aren’t, I apologize.

I don’t tolerate Republicans or “conservatives” or any of that shit because you support the ideology and the party and the people who hate me, who want me and my friends dead, who say that I’m not American, and who want to strip us all of our civil rights and send us to concentration camps. This is not hyperbole; I’ve seen it all said by people in power.

My country is under occupation by a hostile power that seeks a theocracy and the abrogation of the Constitution, war without end, and the destruction of the middle class. No one who makes less than a half million a year benefits from them financially and no one who believes in the Enlightenment ideals of our country’s founders has any business agreeing with their ideas.

It’s total war now. I reject your god of conquest, your worship of wealth, your hate of everyone different or weak, and your ignorance.

Come and fucking get it and find out what armed liberals are like. .40 hollowpoints kill right-wingers too.

Comments

[salvadors.livejournal.com]

I am not a Christian because Christianity is demonstrably false. One of its fundamental premises is the very existence of a sentient supernatural entity---God---which hasn't been proven yet. I don't believe in God for the same reason I don't believe in Zeus; absence of evidence. The absence of evidence constitutes evidence of absence.

that's uninteresting to me

[substitute.livejournal.com]

Irrespective of philosophical arguments about the supernatural I am unwilling to be associated with a gang of murderers and liars.

My point was not anywhere near a critique of the rationality of religion. People who preach love and humility and generosity and then act from hate, pride, and greed are poisonous to their belief sytem whether they're Christians, worshippers of Wotan, atheist Socialists, or just really intense Star Trek fans. It's an ethical problem, not a metaphysical one.

Re: that's uninteresting to me

[salvadors.livejournal.com]

Though your point was obvious to me from the start and I agree with it, they're interrelated. People act based on what? Beliefs. In fact, I'd argue your beliefs on metaphysics will determine a great deal of your ethics (how you will act).

Re: that's uninteresting to me

[(Anonymous)]

I completely disagree.

People act mainly on the basis of "what's in it for me?" If it happens to fit a system of beliefs they choose to wear on their sleeve, so much the better, it gives them a reason that publically does not appear to be selfish.

I respectfully disagree

[citizenx.livejournal.com]

I consider myself agnostic rather than atheist, though some would consider weak and wishy-washy because of this. How would you propose to prove the existence of God? What would be considered evidence of God's existence?

It had better be a good test. Consider the words of Edsger Dijkstra, who said "Testing can be used to show the presence of bugs, but never to show their absence."