This is what is known as the “reification fallacy” taking something that isn’t real or true and making it true through ad nauseam.
Epigenetics informs us that our instincts come from the predispositions of our ancestors based on their repeated actions and thoughts. There has never been a successful Atheist state because they don’t have a common morality and therefore they couldn’t create a body of law. This is why they, more than others, failed throughout history to pass on their neural myelination.
If you research Crib Talk or Cultural Universals you will find that babies are quite irrational when they are born by atheist standards and that belief in God isn’t the exception it is the rule.
One implication of Noam Chomsky’s innatism, if correct, is that at least a part of human knowledge consists in cognitive predispositions, which are triggered and developed by the environment, but not determined by it. Parallels can then be drawn, on a purely speculative level, between our moral faculties and language, as has been done by sociobiologists such as E. O. Wilson and evolutionary psychologists such as Steven Pinker. The relative consistency of fundamental notions of morality across cultures seems to produce convincing evidence for these theories. In psychology, notions of archetypes such as those developed by Carl Jung, suggest determinate identity perceptions.
Abusive Alcoholic, Drug Peddling, Satan Worshipping bisexual claimed to be “gang raped”, she lied. Later she recanted and got baptized as a Christian. “Jane Roe” was a Jane Doe and the Supreme Court case concealed the anonymous nature of her identity. Now she is more Pro-Life and apparently she never had the abortion that she won the right to have.
Early in 2015 I wrote a short story about the Moral Equivalency of Atheists and cannibalism as an homage to the Argumentum Reductio ad Absurdum which was frequently used by an Atheist philosopher who I much respect. I noticed that Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins were using a fallacious argument suggesting that Atheists can be moral because they can cherry pick their morals. The problem, however, is that Atheists can never generate a morality or a Law Code because they can’t agree upon anything but the fact that God doesn’t exist. So they have no Highest Form of their Good. If there was a Big Book of Atheist Morals then Atheism would be re-categorized as a “Religion”. Both of them were smart enough to know what they were doing. Furthermore, they were doing it consciously and intentionally. (CLICK HERE FOR SHORT STORY)
Richard Dawkins destroyed his reputation when he exposed himself as being pro-pedophilia. He recently came out in response to new research suggesting that “Clean Meat” can be grown in laboratories by asking when we can eat Human Meat. I get that he is sexually aroused by science because his teacher molested him at a young age in a British school system, but he is also expressing a contempt for Western values which he himself acknowledged when he said, “I have mixed feelings about the decline of Christianity. I feel it might be a bulwark against something far worse (Islam).”
He really has nothing to fear. He has already had a stroke and he is on his way out of this world. He conflated his sexual arousal with science with his teacher. He is now trying to pass on his disease and his contempt of moral values to future generations.
Still you have to realize, just because human meat is grown in a lab, that doesn’t mean you won’t still get prion disease from eating your own kind. It is Sadistic and disgusting. As Tucker Carlson says, “The Revolution always eats itself”. We would be reduced to having the same diseases as the people in Syria, Pakistan, and Papua New Guinea who also eat their own brothers and sisters.
I started trolling and debating Atheists long ago but it wasn’t until 2012 that I really started sinking my teeth into them. My criticism of Richard Dawkins and his God Delusion book was that he had conflated Atheism with Hatred of God and created a Meritocracy of Mocking & Ridiculing the Religious. Being exposed to Nazi propaganda (as he was) in British schools (and as C. S. Lewis described) he created the Neologism “Meme” by benchmarking the Pollock Joke used by the Nazis as a form of Psychological warfare.
Atheists claim that they aren’t organized so they can’t be a religion, but they are organized enough to have lawyers and lobbyists that attack small towns with vexatious litigations in order to remove semi-religious, secular objects of veneration that are popular with the majority of residents.
Atheists claim that humans are innately moral and therefore don’t need Organized Religion (as did Devin Patrick Kelley), ignoring the fact that Neural Myelination and Epigenetics is created by repeated patterns that were passed on to children through cellular memory. Which means that in order to become “innately moral” mankind had to exert some moralizing influence on itself, namely, Religion. If all religions were equal all people would be equally morally evolved, which is obviously not the case.
If Atheism is a Morally Superior, Saving Grace, which absolves all people of their ignorance and makes them more intelligent and a connoisseur of Science then please explain to me how the God of Scientism didn’t restrain this Sociopathic Atheist from committing this crime.
Richard Dawkins is directly responsible and has leaked his own guilt by saying, “I have mixed feelings about the decline of Christianity, I feel it might be a bulwark against something worse (Islamic Terrorism).” And that tweet was most likely prompted by myself.
Hating God doesn’t make people smarter, more scientific, or more moral. It makes them obsessed.
Einstein said, “Science without Religion is Lame. Religion without Science is Blind.” Why? Because religion is the legs of science and science is the eyes of religion. Conscience is a juxtaposition of the prefix “Con” with the word “science”. “Con” means “with”. Con-Science means “With Science” so what is “With Science”? What is with science and has a moralizing influence on science? What is the connotation (con-notation) of the word “Conscience”?
Do you remember that movie about how Awesome it is to be an Atheist? Do you remember that Awe-Inspiring book about Atheist Morals & the Philosophy behind them? Do you Remember that once Great Atheist Civilization? Atheism isn’t New it is old. Socrates was accused in court of being an Atheist & eventually given the death penalty. He denied it vehemently and defended himself brilliantly. There is a reason you don’t remember these things and that reason is because they never happened. Atheism has never succeeded and will never succeed and I know why.
Atheists can’t make Moral Judgements because they are not a Religion. If they were aMoral Authority they would be a Religion. This would be Self Falsifying.
There are no Universal Atheist Morals & if there are please direct me to them.
Atheists can’t create a Government because they can’t agree on any Morals which would create the Laws for that Nation.
Atheism is not Science.
Being an Atheist doesn’t make you more Intelligent than other people.
Atheists have nothing in common but the absence of the presence of a belief in God.
If Innate Morality exists it was created through a Religious Force that people exerted on themselves which created the Neural Myelination which was passed on through Epigenetics, creating that Innate Morality.
Atheists suggest that Atheism is not a belief. This is how they avoid Criticism while Criticizing. They don’t want to believe that they live in a Glass House while being Rock Throwing Enthusiasts, they prefer to believe that they live in an Invisible House, but the WANNABE TYRANT is wearing no clothes.
Atheists use the Argument that Atheism is not a belief. They, Stupidly try to Justify this by suggesting that not believing God exists is not a Belief. If they were Linguistic Philosophers they would know how Stupid they sound to Intelligent ears.
I (+) believe God does not (-) exist.
is a Rhetorical Tautology of…
I do not (-) believe God (+) exists.
Atheism is a belief, PERIOD.
Richard Dawkins said, “I am 99.9% positive that God doesn’t exist.” because he can’t state scientifically with any credibility that he is 100% sure God doesn’t exist. If he could state that, he would possess all knowledge in the Universe, thus being Omniscient, in which case he would be God, and therefore he would Falsify his own statement by being God. Omniscient, Omnipresent, and Omnipotent.
If Humans are Innately Moral it is because we exerted a Religious influence on ourselves to become Moral and that Neural Myelination was passed on down to us through Epigenetics.
Innate Morality is a Tacit Moral Equivocation. If humans are innately moral all human morals are equal. Cannibalism in Papua New Guinea is moral. Human Sacrifice is moral. Muslim genocide, slavery, child rape, sex slavery, & Terrorism is moral.
Atheism is not a Moral Authority and if it was it would be a Religion. Atheism is Moral and Philosophical Anarchy. There are no Atheist Morals because Atheists have nothing in common but the absence of a belief in God or the hatred of God.
A muslim who converts to Atheism still wants Israel destroyed and is comfortable with Christian Genocide.
It is the Laws & Punishments of a Society that make us Moral. And those can’t be agreed upon by Atheists because they have no Highest Form of the Good or God that they Reveal. Which is why their has never been & never will be a Great Atheist Civilization. The most secular nation is Israel with almost 50% Atheists and they’re Constitution is still is inspired by the Talmud.
This Liberal insanity isn’t even funny. These idiots are going to get us all killed. Highly educated, Useful Idiots, they conceal their rhetoric, argue that other people’s resources should be used for the benefit of people that hate them, and that one group of people should not protect themselves from another group of people. They presuppose their correctness and superiority while at the same time ignoring the results of their own stupidity and refusing to falsify themselves or marginalize their dogmatic prejudices.
This is a pet peeve of mine, ad hominem is not a falsification if a person is also supporting their arguments with reason and evidence. The person that operates on this tacit judgment is presupposing a Meritocracy of Pleasantness in which being pleasant is a virtue, while precluding the unpleasant truth or reality. This is not only delusional it is evil. A person can lie pleasantly. The Moslem psychosis is based on being pleasant while lying pathologically and serially about one’s intentions. These Useful, Liberal, Idiots are enabling the Invasive War Cult that is Islam. As such they are also responsible for every evil done in the name of Islam and in the very near future they should suffer the consequences of Justice for the Evil they were protecting and promoting.
In spite of having been falsified over and over again, some atheists continue on insisting that all religions are the same, in spite of the fact that the vast majority of violence on earth is done by Muslims. Atheists continue to assert that both Judeo-Christianity and Islam have reprehensible practices mentioned in them ignoring both time and logic. The parts of the bible that they complain about were written in the Abrahamic Law Code not the Mosaic or Messianic Law Codes. They were written IN BABYLON when that kind of behavior was the norm and when the Jews were individuating from the Tyrannical, Genocidal mentality which is now Iran & Iraq.
Atheists and Muslim apologists argue that Muslims in general are peaceful (ignoring that 1 of the 5 pillars of Islam is Zakat which funds the mujahedeen) and that violent Muslims are doing it incorrectly. We are going to examine this premise logically. You might consider this Arabic exegesis:
Naskh (نسخ) is an Arabic language word usually translated as “abrogation“; It is a term used in Islamic legal exegesis for seemingly contradictory material within or between the two primary sources of Islamic law: the Quran and the Sunna. Several Qur’anic verses state that some revelations have been abrogated and substituted by later revelations.[1][2] Which are understood by most Muslim scholars as pertaining to the verses of the Quran itself.
The principle of abrogation of an older verse by a new verse of Quran, or within the Hadiths is a well established principle in Sharia.[3][4][5] The possibility of abrogation between these two primary sources of Islam, though, has been a more contentious issue.[6] The allowability of abrogation between sources has been one of the major differences between the Shafi’i and Hanafi fiqhs, with Shafi’i sect of jurisprudence forbidding abrogation by the Sunna of the Qur’ān, while Hanafi sect allowing abrogation by the Sunna of the Qur’ān.[7][8]
Let’s examine the logic of this practice, if you are going to use the philosophy of Islam you are making a tacit appeal to the Authority of Mohammed. In doing so you have to admit that Mad Moe knew himself better than anyone else, he also knew what he thought when he was younger. So if he contradicted himself you have to assume that the last thing he said was more correct than the first thin he said or else you have to offer some explanation for the disparity which would presuppose the person making the judgment has more authority than the prophet that they follow which would be illogical.
In the same vein Atheists and Muslim apologists have to admit and acknowledge that while the Judeo-Christian scriptures started off more violent than they ended (after all Jesus was not a murderer and didn’t condone murder, while Mohammed was a child raping genocidal, serial, murderer) that Judeo-Christianity is peaceful and therefore actually a religion of peace as are most other major religions in the world.
Anyway, the Muslim apologists might be able to fool the weak minded Atheists and Lib-tard progressives but in their heart of hearts they know that they are lying and that Islam is not a religion of peace and can never evolve. I call on all Atheists to drop this line of reasoning and I condemn Richard Dawkins for the first chapter of his book The God Delusion.
So I while back I mentioned that Atheists were part of a global agenda to use psychological warfare to get Jews and Christians to convert to Scientism. I mentioned that Obama was hiring behavioral psychologists to start a violent IslamoNazi revolution in the United States but also throughout the civilized world. I mentioned that Obama was trying to influence black and Latino minorities to convert to Islam through certain subtle, nuanced, manipulations.
Well I just ran into this delightful character on twitter tonight who is posting Pro-Muslim, anti-Israel, and Nazi propaganda.
Atheist Logic Fail 