The road to the End of Religion: How sex will kill God

[the joint]

For the hundredth time, just because it is in a book doesn't make it science.

I recommend the works cited section at the end of Sex At Dawn.

Pick ONE SOURCE STUDY, and provide the premise which you believe it supports. Anything else is just bullshit.

It doesn't matter.  He already tried that once and all it did was contradict previous statements he had made, and fail to support everything else.  He claims to see the world "very very" accurately and can't even accurately understand the implications of his references, whether direct and indirect.  He just makes up crap as he goes and then uses appeal to ridicule when he's shown to be wrong.

[1715603998]

1715603998

[1715603998]

1715603998

[1715603998]

1715603998

[1715603998]

1715603998

[misterycoins]

Religion will never end. some religious people may change with the times, but most people will hang onto religion because they need that faith to get themselves through things, they need something to believe in.

[MakingMoneyHoney]

Religion will never end. some religious people may change with the times, but most people will hang onto religion because they need that faith to get themselves through things, they need something to believe in.

...ignoring the fact that people can logically come to the conclusion that something (God or Intelligent Designer) created this world regardless of what they wanted to believe in.

[TECSHARE]

For the hundredth time, just because it is in a book doesn't make it science.

I recommend the works cited section at the end of Sex At Dawn.

Pick ONE SOURCE STUDY, and provide the premise which you believe it supports. Anything else is just bullshit.

It doesn't matter.  He already tried that once and all it did was contradict previous statements he had made, and fail to support everything else.  He claims to see the world "very very" accurately and can't even accurately understand the implications of his references, whether direct and indirect.  He just makes up crap as he goes and then uses appeal to ridicule when he's shown to be wrong.

It DOES matter. You know why? Because as you said he continually just dances around the issues. As long as he is dancing around the issues and not making a claim to something substantive that he claims supports his argument, he can never be proven wrong, because he is never even really declaring his position. If he declares his position he has to defend it, and can be proven wrong with science pointing in the other direction. Anything else is just bullshit bickering that is a waste of time and has nothing to do with facts.

[the joint]

For the hundredth time, just because it is in a book doesn't make it science.

I recommend the works cited section at the end of Sex At Dawn.

Pick ONE SOURCE STUDY, and provide the premise which you believe it supports. Anything else is just bullshit.

It doesn't matter.  He already tried that once and all it did was contradict previous statements he had made, and fail to support everything else.  He claims to see the world "very very" accurately and can't even accurately understand the implications of his references, whether direct and indirect.  He just makes up crap as he goes and then uses appeal to ridicule when he's shown to be wrong.

It DOES matter. You know why? Because as you said he continually just dances around the issues. As long as he is dancing around the issues and not making a claim to something substantive that he claims supports his argument, he can never be proven wrong, because he is never even really declaring his position. If he declares his position he has to defend it, and can be proven wrong with science pointing in the other direction. Anything else is just bullshit bickering that is a waste of time and has nothing to do with facts.

I'm sorry, maybe I wasn't clear enough in what I meant to say.  I meant that it it doesn't matter if he posts a peer-reviewed study in the sense that he's just going to believe whatever he wants to believe, anyway; he's already posted a couple peer-reviewed links and it's clear he doesn't understand what he's posting.  And then you can try to explain to him that he doesn't understand it or that it doesn't support what he's saying in any way, and he's just going to either 1) ignore you and keep going anyway, or 2) meme you to death.

Basically, it doesn't matter what he posts because he just always thinks he's right no matter how wrong he is.  He's like BADecker's equal-and-opposite alter ego.

[TECSHARE]

For the hundredth time, just because it is in a book doesn't make it science.

I recommend the works cited section at the end of Sex At Dawn.

Pick ONE SOURCE STUDY, and provide the premise which you believe it supports. Anything else is just bullshit.

It doesn't matter.  He already tried that once and all it did was contradict previous statements he had made, and fail to support everything else.  He claims to see the world "very very" accurately and can't even accurately understand the implications of his references, whether direct and indirect.  He just makes up crap as he goes and then uses appeal to ridicule when he's shown to be wrong.

It DOES matter. You know why? Because as you said he continually just dances around the issues. As long as he is dancing around the issues and not making a claim to something substantive that he claims supports his argument, he can never be proven wrong, because he is never even really declaring his position. If he declares his position he has to defend it, and can be proven wrong with science pointing in the other direction. Anything else is just bullshit bickering that is a waste of time and has nothing to do with facts.

I'm sorry, maybe I wasn't clear enough in what I meant to say.  I meant that it it doesn't matter if he posts a peer-reviewed study in the sense that he's just going to believe whatever he wants to believe, anyway; he's already posted a couple peer-reviewed links and it's clear he doesn't understand what he's posting.  And then you can try to explain to him that he doesn't understand it or that it doesn't support what he's saying in any way, and he's just going to either 1) ignore you and keep going anyway, or 2) meme you to death.

Basically, it doesn't matter what he posts because he just always thinks he's right no matter how wrong he is.  He's like BADecker's equal-and-opposite alter ego.

Who said I was trying to convince him?

[Beliathon]

Religion will never end.

Everything which has a beginning also has an ending. Homo Sapien superstition has only existed for a micro-fraction of the age of the universe. Its end will be just as universally irrelevant as its beginning.

[cmthompson22]

And once they are done doing all this, we will lose all of our moral compass. The church, even with some of its wrongdoings in the past, has always been the moral compass of society. Whether it is Greek mythology, Buddhism, Catholicism, or some other religion, it has always been around to help people know how to behave and lead lives that are in alignment with their society. When we start to lose that, we begin to lose everything that we hold dear.

And American is a great example of that. Soon enough churches all over the place will be closed down. The priests and pastors will refuse gay marriage and they will lose their nonprofit status and will no longer be able to support themselves because of the high taxes. Don’t worry, any religion who believes in gay marriage and cults will still be around. Planned Parenthood is already making a mockery of the freedom of choice and bringing us down even more in the moral arena I am scared to bring up my children in this kind of world. I am old enough to know that things used to be different, but now my young kids will think this is right just because it is the norm.

[callynyan]

Burn the society built on corrupted moral righteousness and make a new one based on sexual pleasure.
Make love not war.

[1aguar]

Burn the society built on corrupted moral righteousness and make a new one based on sexual pleasure.
Make love not war.

It seems to me that you are confusing pleasure and love.
Is it love when you give your "partner-in-love" a fatal disease?

I am only asking you because Beliathon refuses to answer this!

[OBAViJEST]

Burn the society built on corrupted moral righteousness and make a new one based on sexual pleasure.
Make love not war.

Is it love when you give your "partner-in-love" a fatal disease?

That's a loaded question and fallacy, cannot be answered properly

[1aguar]

Burn the society built on corrupted moral righteousness and make a new one based on sexual pleasure.
Make love not war.

Is it love when you give your "partner-in-love" a fatal disease?

That's a loaded question and fallacy, cannot be answered properly

Do you truly have no answer to my question?

Could you try making an argument that does not rely on the notion of fallacy?

OP apparently thinks that morality is some sort of computer program or "computer code" that can simply be "run" (once it is "cracked" or "solved"?) with nothing more than the right "hardware"; you can tell that he would like to avoid discussing the consequences of destroying monogamy.

Phase 5. Merging of hardware and wetware, next phase of human evolution. Religion fully obsolete as mortality itself has been solved.

OP has no willingness to discuss the "science" that backs up his idea that monogamy has no value, and no science regarding his gender "theories".
What is known is that Sex-for-pleasure is "addictive" to the point that all sorts of people can and do act irresponsibly (without regard for love!) and the consequences are immense!
OP is not willing to discuss the science of life-after-death with me either. This is not a rational approach to the traditional views of monogamy, gender, and God; OP and his supporters merely avoid the questions I have posed!

[Beliathon]

The church, even with some of its wrongdoings in the past, has always been the moral compass of society. Whether it is Greek mythology, Buddhism, Catholicism, or some other religion, it has always been around to help people know how to behave

You mean like during the centuries when the Church was burning people alive for such "crimes" as masturbation, heresy, witchcraft, and sodomy?

It seems to me that you are confusing pleasure and love.

According to science there is no confusion, nor is there any meaningful distinction.

Love is reward sequence - a drug, a chemical reaction in our brains that predisposes us to reproduce lots and lots.

http://www.medicaldaily.com/sex-first-date-science-behind-why-people-put-out-when-they-go-out-313844

[MakingMoneyHoney]

The church, even with some of its wrongdoings in the past, has always been the moral compass of society. Whether it is Greek mythology, Buddhism, Catholicism, or some other religion, it has always been around to help people know how to behave

You mean like during the centuries when the Church was burning people alive for such "crimes" as masturbation, heresy, witchcraft, and sodomy?

Someday you'll have to separate the Catholic church and the sinners from what Christianity is all about.

[callynyan]

Burn the society built on corrupted moral righteousness and make a new one based on sexual pleasure.
Make love not war.

It seems to me that you are confusing pleasure and love.
Is it love when you give your "partner-in-love" a fatal disease?

I am only asking you because Beliathon refuses to answer this!

1. I am not confusing pleasure and love.Love is relative for each person and it is not impossible in a society based around sexual pleasure.
2. Love can be in many forms including pain play so yes if getting infected by a sexually spread disease is a person's cup of tea that's also love.

[the joint]

Burn the society built on corrupted moral righteousness and make a new one based on sexual pleasure.
Make love not war.

It seems to me that you are confusing pleasure and love.
Is it love when you give your "partner-in-love" a fatal disease?

I am only asking you because Beliathon refuses to answer this!

1. I am not confusing pleasure and love.Love is relative for each person and it is not impossible in a society based around sexual pleasure.
2. Love can be in many forms including pain play so yes if getting infected by a sexually spread disease is a person's cup of tea that's also love.

Yet people who enjoy things like "pain play" generally do so because they either 1) were affected negatively in some way in the past wherein they learned to associate pain with pleasure, or 2) have low self-concept and subconsciously believe that is how they deserve to be treated.

[1aguar]

Love is reward sequence - a drug, a chemical reaction in our brains that predisposes us to reproduce lots and lots.

Your claims about love are ignoring conclusions from the science of consciousness.

Calling it a drug in no way offsets what love means to us. Even if it is "reducible", it does not mean that it is a "hallucination", or that it lacks meaning for us.

Actually, the mind is not "reducible", as shown from Irreducible Mind and other studies such as the study with the 52 points; under the materialistic explanation, NDEs are an "evolutionary anomaly", and an apparent medical impossibility. Further, we can see that NDEs change people, unlike hallucinations and dreams, and the way people change is very telling, it is again contrary to anything that a theory of "evolutionary selection" could explain.

"The values you get from an NDE are not the ones you need to function in everyday life," says Greyson. Having stared eternity in the face, he observes, those who return often lose their taste for ego-boosting achievement. Not even the diehard skeptics doubt the powerful personal effects of NDEs. "This is a profound emotional experience," explains Nuland. "People are convinced that they've seen heaven."

Also, further evidence to consider is the concept of "subjectivity" as it relates to the findings of quantum mechanics. Subjectivity is used in contrast with "objectivity" which is described as "a view of truth or reality which is free of any individual's influence". A fully reducible view of the world can never be an objective one because these quantum observations are in a state of subjectivity (subject to an individual's influence), i.e. mathematics logically proves that the observation is affected by choices made by the observer.

When you observe something, what is the aspect of yourself which is interacting with that which you are observing but awareness/consciousness?

At the fundamental level of reality everything is energy, and that is an irrefutable conclusion in physics no matter how you look at it. And thus to believe that we are in any way separate from anything else in the universe, let alone the particles in our immediate vicinity, once again is not supported by the evidence.

So please consider these ideas regarding the "science of consciousness" from physics and NDE research.

"The modern tradition of equating death with an ensuing nothingness can be abandoned. For there is no reason to believe that human death severs the quality of the oneness in the universe."

[Tusk]

Religion will never end.

Everything which has a beginning also has an ending. Homo Sapien superstition has only existed for a micro-fraction of the age of the universe. Its end will be just as universally irrelevant as its beginning.

Only time will tell, looking at the implications of science and the direction we are headed with genetic engineering, I wonder if we haven't reached a point of no return. If we think of the Genesis story as an allegory, rather then historical fact. I think the Genesis story holds more relevance today then in any time during our history.

Human evolution is now on the threshold of the door that allows humans to self-determine their own evolutionary path. One which could allow us to not only become “Gods” of our planet but later of the solar system and possibly our galaxy…... Right now we are hesitating as to whether to proceed, but how long before we are forced through that the door by our own progress?  Have we possibly reached that tipping point of no return? The outcome of that action may not be certain. The only certainty is, when we go through that door we will be departing from the Garden of Eden.

Imagine for the moment the tree of knowledge is the evolutionary tree, the fruit is the knowledge that we have harnessed to manipulate our DNA. I love the fact the snake is also the symbol used on the Caduceus. That they are arranged in the double helix ascending the staff or “evolutionary tree” is strongly suggested, do the wings imply salvation?

The Garden of Eden is the world we have lived in, until man began DNA engineering “creations evolution”. Man has now plucked the fruit of knowledge from the tree, is this perhaps the new Genesis moment of “humans’ evolution” vs “creations evolution”.

In the first Genesis man chose to seek independent knowledge from “God”, in the new Genesis he becomes a “God”. In the first genesis god’s disapproval could be interpreted as a selfish or non benevolent attitude. In the second version god’s actions becomes more self evident, would you as a parent allow your child to play with a loaded gun? Are we possibly opening a door into Pandora’s Box? It’s not that nature will banish us from Eden; we will have destroyed it ourselves. 

I think we are already trough the door, lets hope we are up to the job.

[1aguar]

Human evolution is now on the threshold of the door that allows humans to self-determine their own evolutionary path.
One which could allow us to not only become “Gods” of our planet but later of the solar system and possibly our galaxy…...

The only way any one can succeed in "human evolution" is by living responsibly within the laws of balance.

Man has overpopulated the planet, he has left behind a legacy of ecological devastation. In the speeding up of the dying process of a planet Man errs greatly for he causes such rapid loss of balance that life cannot sustain itself.

In the interest of a complete discussion on space travel, human evolution, God(s), preparing places for human form, etc., it would be wise to consider what Hatonn says about these and the "Genesis allegory".

We come not as regards the "Christian RELIGION". We come in truth and knowledge of that which IS--it bears on Christ-ness and perfection of the Sacred Infinite Circle but we come not as "religious" anything.
...
There have been some quite barbarous creatures who have also traveled through the cosmos, and have come to Earth, too, many being power hungry and quite wicked indeed--how do you think evil was introduced upon your place--from a snake in an apple tree? They have sometimes kidnapped earth humans, as well as other planetary human beings from other systems, and abduct them away to their home planet. There these poor creatures might then have been caused to be placed on exhibition, etc.--as you do with aliens who are captured voluntarily or involuntarily--by your governments.

It is now come to be that in these times of closing cycles upon your planet that the evil is already perfected upon your sphere--working now in your own density of perception--you are already infected and infested and you must awaken to your plight for YOU have let the demons within. These ones carry great power in some instances and they are malignant in nature for they use the power of "feelings" and other physical human characteristics and movements which are often quite strange for them and thus, a life means very little to them for they do not abide by Cosmic Law--although now, they cannot get off your planet in these closing days of sorting and separation. This is why I tell you again and again that, "It is what is already on your planet which you must attend--not we who come in these days of perception, to assist you!"

Many deceivers have come forth with their fantastic UFO tales and gained great publicity but there are MANY who do not deceive. There are ones who have encountered our ships and even have made contact and physical radio contact with our craft or other ships from strange visitors. These ones have been discredited and often simply "murdered" to stop the stories of truth and ones sent from the CIA, etc., to start cover-up stories to denounce and spread panic and fear. The worst scenarios are yet to come as your Conspirators and One World Global Cartel sets up actions which will be blamed on the space brotherhood--I ask you to mark my words NOW for it shall be in the coming.

Earth human is very difficult to convince of anything and you are so focused and centered on the false projections that you no longer know which is false and which is truth--so you cling to the physical elements--but I remind you that life-span is only averaging about 75 years of counting seasons and I suggest that there is something of which you are not aware, afoot. If it is not of the physical plane as you know it, does it not stand to reason that it might perhaps come from the Heavens, as you refer to the Cosmos? If you are EXPECTING A RETURN OF GOD, AND YOU HAVE, BY MAJORITY PROJECTION, STATED, YOURSELVES, THAT IT IS "SOON" OR "NOW"--WHAT IS IT THAT YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND? WHY WOULD YOU DENOUNCE THE VERY TRUTH-BRINGERS WHO WOULD BRING YOU INTO TRUTH AND BRING ABOUT THE RETURN OF GOD WHICH YOU EXPECT? HOW LONG WILL HU-MAN OF EARTH DENY GOD? HOW LONG WILL YOU CHOOSE RIDICULOUS FABRICATIONS WHEN THE TRUTH OF THAT WHICH IS COMING IS SO MUCH MORE PERFECTED AND WONDROUS? ALL OF YOU WISH TO TAKE YOUR HUMAN FORMS; WOULD IT NOT BE MORE CREDIBLE TO SUGGEST TAKING THEM TO PLACES PREPARED FOR HUMAN FORM THAN TO RESIDE ON FLOATING CLOUDS WHERE HUMAN FORMS WOULD SIMPLY FALL BACK TO EARTH? I SUGGEST IT IS NOT "OUR" TRUTH WHICH IS IN QUESTION, BROTHERS!

[J. J. Phillips]

I stumbled onto the Encyclopedia Dramatica page for "Sarah Butts" recently.

https://encyclopediadramatica.se/Sarah_Butts

Formally the owner of "Final Fantasy Shrine", an infamous one-stop-shop of piracy and pedophilia, Sarah Nyberg (aka Sarah Butts/Twitter-favicon.png srhbutts/retrogradesnowcone/srh/Sarah Isabelle/Nick/Maezr/Ender/Disgust/AlexMack/opiumprincess and formerly Nicholas Edwin Nyberg), finally shut down the site when he was unable to scam his users out of 60k (perhaps to pay is 40k worth of debt to the IRS and the rest towards hormone treatments) and became an SJW.

This cross-dressing molester from the land of incest, good ol' American education, and cows (aka Wisconsin) is no stranger to questionable logic, being that he is an unstable, sexist, insecure faggot that spends all day e'ry day stalking prominent GamerGate figures, looking to grasp at any terrible excuses for "evidence" and pretend it's established fact (while accusing GamerGate of the same thing). Because of this obsession, Butts has become the largest driving force behind Reddit-favicon.gif GamerGhazi (a collection of white knights believing in patriarchy conspiracy theories who literally worship Anita Sarkeesian) where he sat upon his ivory tower accusing people of being criminals and pedophiles until a swift doxing exposed him to be one himself.

Doesn't this sound a lot like Beliathon?