Anonymous wrote:I actually feel sorry for the OP. What a miserable way to go through life and to have no other outlet with which to share her beliefs other than DCUM - very sad. That's MY opinion. I'll pray for you, OP.

Anonymous wrote:I actually feel sorry for the OP. What a miserable way to go through life and to have no other outlet with which to share her beliefs other than DCUM - very sad. That's MY opinion. I'll pray for you, OP.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Thanking God for the food you have while millions of people around the world starve every single day is like thanking a serial killer because he didn't kill YOU."

That is all.

Since there is no God. You have no soul and are worth less than a pile of crap ( which doesn't consume resources or waste time with blathering opinions).

Np. You're exactly right. I'm not a special snowflake with a bff adonis watching over me every nanosecond of my life. And neither are you. All we can do, is help people in this life. And then we're mulch. Very few of us are significant in the long term human imprint. I can accept that humble reality.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Thanking God for the food you have while millions of people around the world starve every single day is like thanking a serial killer because he didn't kill YOU."

That is all.

Since there is no God. You have no soul and are worth less than a pile of crap ( which doesn't consume resources or waste time with blathering opinions).

Anonymous wrote:"Thanking God for the food you have while millions of people around the world starve every single day is like thanking a serial killer because he didn't kill YOU."

That is all.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s see – it’s OK for a Catholic priest to turn way an Episcopalian at the communion rail, because it’s against the rules of the church to serve someone from another Christian faith. We may not agree, but we respect the Catholics’ right to follow their beliefs and exercise their freedom of religion.

It’s OK for a southern Baptist to tell a gay family member that they are going to hell because the Baptists believe homosexuality is a sin. We may not agree, but we respect the Baptists’ right to follow their beliefs and exercise their freedom of religion.

It’s OK for certain Muslims to require women to cover their heads because they believe women should be subservient. We may not agree, but we respect the Muslims’ right to follow their beliefs and exercise their freedom of religion.

It’s not OK for atheists to make a factual statement about religion on an anonymous internet message board, because it might offend some religious people. Even if we agree with the statement, we do not respect the atheists’ right to state facts and to exercise their freedom of religion.

NP. I'm not following, what were the facts that are being rejected?

The problems are (a) that she's made up a straw man for the atheist example, because based on nothing that occured in this thread, and (b) she's comparing apples to oranges, by stacking up alleged bad things committed by believers against supposed good things done by atheists. Under the assumption that an atheist could never do a bad thing... or something illogical like that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s see – it’s OK for a Catholic priest to turn way an Episcopalian at the communion rail, because it’s against the rules of the church to serve someone from another Christian faith. We may not agree, but we respect the Catholics’ right to follow their beliefs and exercise their freedom of religion.

It’s OK for a southern Baptist to tell a gay family member that they are going to hell because the Baptists believe homosexuality is a sin. We may not agree, but we respect the Baptists’ right to follow their beliefs and exercise their freedom of religion.

It’s OK for certain Muslims to require women to cover their heads because they believe women should be subservient. We may not agree, but we respect the Muslims’ right to follow their beliefs and exercise their freedom of religion.

It’s not OK for atheists to make a factual statement about religion on an anonymous internet message board, because it might offend some religious people. Even if we agree with the statement, we do not respect the atheists’ right to state facts and to exercise their freedom of religion.

NP. I'm not following, what were the facts that are being rejected?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s see – it’s OK for a Catholic priest to turn way an Episcopalian at the communion rail, because it’s against the rules of the church to serve someone from another Christian faith. We may not agree, but we respect the Catholics’ right to follow their beliefs and exercise their freedom of religion.

It’s OK for a southern Baptist to tell a gay family member that they are going to hell because the Baptists believe homosexuality is a sin. We may not agree, but we respect the Baptists’ right to follow their beliefs and exercise their freedom of religion.

It’s OK for certain Muslims to require women to cover their heads because they believe women should be subservient. We may not agree, but we respect the Muslims’ right to follow their beliefs and exercise their freedom of religion.

It’s not OK for atheists to make a factual statement about religion on an anonymous internet message board, because it might offend some religious people. Even if we agree with the statement, we do not respect the atheists’ right to state facts and to exercise their freedom of religion.

NP. I'm not following, what were the facts that are being rejected?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s see – it’s OK for a Catholic priest to turn way an Episcopalian at the communion rail, because it’s against the rules of the church to serve someone from another Christian faith. We may not agree, but we respect the Catholics’ right to follow their beliefs and exercise their freedom of religion.

It’s OK for a southern Baptist to tell a gay family member that they are going to hell because the Baptists believe homosexuality is a sin. We may not agree, but we respect the Baptists’ right to follow their beliefs and exercise their freedom of religion.

It’s OK for certain Muslims to require women to cover their heads because they believe women should be subservient. We may not agree, but we respect the Muslims’ right to follow their beliefs and exercise their freedom of religion.

It’s not OK for atheists to make a factual statement about religion on an anonymous internet message board, because it might offend some religious people. Even if we agree with the statement, we do not respect the atheists’ right to state facts and to exercise their freedom of religion.

NP. I'm not following, what were the facts that are being rejected?

Anonymous wrote:Let’s see – it’s OK for a Catholic priest to turn way an Episcopalian at the communion rail, because it’s against the rules of the church to serve someone from another Christian faith. We may not agree, but we respect the Catholics’ right to follow their beliefs and exercise their freedom of religion.

It’s OK for a southern Baptist to tell a gay family member that they are going to hell because the Baptists believe homosexuality is a sin. We may not agree, but we respect the Baptists’ right to follow their beliefs and exercise their freedom of religion.

It’s OK for certain Muslims to require women to cover their heads because they believe women should be subservient. We may not agree, but we respect the Muslims’ right to follow their beliefs and exercise their freedom of religion.

It’s not OK for atheists to make a factual statement about religion on an anonymous internet message board, because it might offend some religious people. Even if we agree with the statement, we do not respect the atheists’ right to state facts and to exercise their freedom of religion.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s see – it’s OK for a Catholic priest to turn way an Episcopalian at the communion rail, because it’s against the rules of the church to serve someone from another Christian faith. We may not agree, but we respect the Catholics’ right to follow their beliefs and exercise their freedom of religion.

It’s OK for a southern Baptist to tell a gay family member that they are going to hell because the Baptists believe homosexuality is a sin. We may not agree, but we respect the Baptists’ right to follow their beliefs and exercise their freedom of religion.

It’s OK for certain Muslims to require women to cover their heads because they believe women should be subservient. We may not agree, but we respect the Muslims’ right to follow their beliefs and exercise their freedom of religion.

It’s OK for atheists to make a needlessly snarky statements about religion on an anonymous internet message board, even though it might offend some religious people. Even if we disagree with the statement, we absolutely respect the atheists’ right to offend people with sarcastic snark and to exercise their freedom from religion.

Fixed it for you. (Now it's apples to apples.)

Talk about snark! What would Jesus think?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s see – it’s OK for a Catholic priest to turn way an Episcopalian at the communion rail, because it’s against the rules of the church to serve someone from another Christian faith. We may not agree, but we respect the Catholics’ right to follow their beliefs and exercise their freedom of religion.

It’s OK for a southern Baptist to tell a gay family member that they are going to hell because the Baptists believe homosexuality is a sin. We may not agree, but we respect the Baptists’ right to follow their beliefs and exercise their freedom of religion.

It’s OK for certain Muslims to require women to cover their heads because they believe women should be subservient. We may not agree, but we respect the Muslims’ right to follow their beliefs and exercise their freedom of religion.

It’s OK for atheists to make a needlessly snarky statements about religion on an anonymous internet message board, even though it might offend some religious people. Even if we disagree with the statement, we absolutely respect the atheists’ right to offend people with sarcastic snark and to exercise their freedom from religion.

Fixed it for you. (Now it's apples to apples.)

Anonymous wrote:Let’s see – it’s OK for a Catholic priest to turn way an Episcopalian at the communion rail, because it’s against the rules of the church to serve someone from another Christian faith. We may not agree, but we respect the Catholics’ right to follow their beliefs and exercise their freedom of religion.

It’s OK for a southern Baptist to tell a gay family member that they are going to hell because the Baptists believe homosexuality is a sin. We may not agree, but we respect the Baptists’ right to follow their beliefs and exercise their freedom of religion.

It’s OK for certain Muslims to require women to cover their heads because they believe women should be subservient. We may not agree, but we respect the Muslims’ right to follow their beliefs and exercise their freedom of religion.

It’s OK for atheists to make a needlessly snarky statements about religion on an anonymous internet message board, even though it might offend some religious people. Even if we disagree with the statement, we absolutely respect the atheists’ right to offend people with sarcastic snark and to exercise their freedom from religion.