3 votes

Not the red pill. Not the blue pill. The pink pill.

The red pill and its opposite, the blue pill, are pop culture symbols representing the choice between embracing the sometimes painful truth of reality (red) and the blissful ignorance of illusion (blue).

I think there must be another pill, a pink pill. The pink pill embraces all the truths of reality except it blocks out the ability of the user to devolop rational explanations about the origins of religion nor finds anything logically inconsistent about an all knowing, all powerful, invisible being that reins supreme above all of mankind.

The only way primitive religion exists today is through the child abuse of forcing it into minds of very, very young children. However, thanks to the internet, better education and growing intellects, many people are discovering that the bible is just another book and that organized religion has always worked behind the scenes with rulers and kings to manipulate the masses.

The whole hierarchical structure of a supreme being is used against us by people in power that want us to believe that there is always someone above us that is more powerful and deserves to be worshiped.

We are to always remain subservient…if not to our state rulers, then at least to the Gods. If you must use the word God at all, it should be in recognition of yourself being the ultimate power and authority in your life. You are the "one", not Allah, not Yahweh, not the flying spaghetti monster. It’s YOU!

If you think freeing yourself from the indoctrination of the state was liberating...try throwing off all the shackles of religious dogma and stepping into the real world!

Most ignorance is vincible ignorance. We don't know because we don't want to know. ~ Aldous Huxley.

Take the red pill.

The Story of Suzie
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vM5n8jESUEk&feature=player_de...

The God Delusion (full length)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8nAos1M-_Ts&feature=player_de...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

The white pill

that you took before writing must be for hubris?

Wow.

I read that through several times, and literally all you did was insult those you don't agree with, accuse us of child abuse (WTF?!), and declare that there is no authority to decide morality beyond the individual human. All of it cleverly disguised through the use of philosophical language and an allegory.

Congratulations. And I'm sure you'll be endlessly upset when this is down-voted into oblivion, even though you said *nothing.* At all.

Say, if "indoctrinating" children with religion is child abuse, doesn't that mean that "indoctrinating" children with atheism is abuse? What about politics - is "indoctrinating" your child with liberalism, conservatism, libertarianism child abuse?

"Organized religion" - define it. Christianity, for one, actively subverted authority in its earliest stages, with the Roman Empire trying to stamp it out... and failing miserably. Then, again, in the Reformation, Protestants began to subvert the power structure, including the over-grown Catholic Church, eventually leading to the freedom of religion we hold so dearly today.

Sir/madam, you have it exactly backwards. The State takes religion and uses it as an excuse, no matter what it actually says. The State takes many things to use as an excuse. The excuse of the hour is "national security," not religion. The excuse in the "Enlightenment" era was essentially "strengthen the empire."

I should also note that you COMPLETELY ignore adult converts to various religions, which are INCREDIBLY common. Of course, you being an arrogant little condescending snot, you'll just write those off as "stupid people" and say they don't count.

I have no issue with fighting for freedom alongside atheists, or Muslims, or Mormons, or what-have-you. I have issues fighting for freedom alongside ignorant, arrogant, condescending @$$holes like you, so get your crap together.

Would you mind describing your god to me?

Thanks

Also: Gladly.

He is the Almighty, the Beginning and the End. The Creator of the universe, Savior of mankind.

He is both just and merciful, infinitely wise. He exists outside of time; past, present, and future are meaningless to Him.

He is all-powerful, yet He gave His creation free will. He is omnipotent and omnipresent; He manipulates events to match His plan, the scope of which is cosmic in scale - and yet He allows us to choose to follow Him or not.

His perfection is so great that any more than the slightest hint of His presence would destroy us utterly, yet He offers redemption. Sin cannot exist in His presence, and so He offers an escape from sin. In our imperfection we are inevitably destined for eternal separation from Him, yet He freely offers us an escape, though we did nothing to merit it.

We are His creation. As we have the right to do what we wish with our own creations, so He does as well. He could have easily destroyed humanity, and still can, as we continue to live in rebellion - and yet He doesn't.

==============================================

You and those like you constantly seek to equate God with mortal tyrants. Do these earthly tyrants create lands and subjects from nothingness? I think not! Do these earthly tyrants understand every single consequence of every single action they take to the end of time? No! Do these earthly tyrants voluntarily restrain their power to allow their subjects free will? NO! Do these earthly tyrants offer salvation, eternal life and endless joy? Ha! They can't think beyond mortal power. Do these earthly tyrants willingly allow the existence of those who oppose them? Absolutely not! Do these earthly tyrants possess infinite wisdom, justice, and mercy? No!

What support do you have of your claim that god exsists?

If god exsists, who created god?

Never answer questions from

Never answer questions from beggars.

Andrew Napolitano for President 2016!
http://andrewnapolitano.com/index

"Patriotism should come from loving thy neighbor, not from worshiping Graven images." - ironman77

Simple: Everything that has a point of origin MUST also have

have a cause. Since God has no point of origin (HE has always existed), he also has no cause. This is known as the Kalam Argument:

1. What begins to exist must have a cause.

2. The universe has a beginning,

3. Therefore, the universe must have a cause.

Evidence for the validity of the argument comes from:

The evidence for the Big Bang and the theory of Relativity, as well as the background temperature of the universe, and the origin of the lighter elements.

as for support for the existence of a Creator:(from Renowned Scientists)

Allen Rex Sandage, The Grand Old Man of Cosmology and a protege' of Edwin Hubble, said to a debate audience: "It was my science that drove me to the conclusion that the world is much more complicated than can be explained through science." He would later tell a reporter:" It was only through the supernatural that I can understand the mystery of existence." (Sharon Begley," Science Finds God",Newsweek, (July 20, 1998)

Consciousness and the Mind of God, Talliferro, Charles

Darwin's Black Box , Michael Behe

Icons of Evolution, Johnathan Wells

Evolution, A Theory In Crisis, Nature's Destiny Michael Denton

Theism, Atheism, and the Big Bang, William Lane Craig & Quentin Smith

The Privileged Planet, Guillermo Gonzalez & Jay Wesley Richards

"Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern." ~~C.S. Lewis
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

Have to jump in here...

You were asked for proof of god's existence and you gave generalities that were based on massive assumptions. IMO, you lose credibility in doing so.

Since there's no proof that god exists, saying that he always existed is irrelevant.

However, since just about no one disagrees that the universe exists, this also doesn't prove that it had a beginning.

Your same argument can be used against you and in doing so, it bolsters the opposite case. We don't KNOW (as in it hasn't been PROVEN) that the universe has a beginning. We have theories of big bangs and others but not proof. Some of us believe that it has always existed, just in a form that may not have been recognizable or measurable by us so many years later. For example:

Among other things, we know with certainty that:
...planets come from coalesced dust in orbits, both by static and gravity.
...heavy elements come from super novas.
...super novas come from failed stars.
...stars come from lots of gravity and mass and fusion.
...helium and the lighter elements come from fusion of hydrogen.
...hydrogen come from.....god???

We know extremely viable ways that we could have evolved to our current universe from nothing more than a sea of floating hydrogen atoms in otherwise empty space. We may not be able to prove which exact path or order of steps took place along the way but the individual steps have been tested (to the scale possible) and proven not only possible but likely.

What we don't have an 'accepted' theory of, YET, is how the original H2 came into existence. Did a big bang create it all in a single instant from pure energy? If so, we don't know, yet, of a medium where that energy existed prior to the substance being created to hold it. It is this point in the investigation that people often diverge from investigating and posit some spiritual rationalization that removes them from the culpability of NOT BEING ABLE TO EXPLAIN MORE. This has been the case all throughout history from even the greatest minds of all.

"We know how this much worked but since we don't know the rest, it must be divine." (... otherwise we would have failed in our abilities) All the greats have halted science at their knowledge levels and subjected the rest to a god. We're no different except that today, many more people are recognizing this pathology and admitting that "we know 99 of the steps but just haven't learned the rest yet - but that doesn't mean it was magic".

In other words, there is a verifiable, potential, scientific explanation for everything EXCEPT a god. There is also proven motive, opportunity and means for the entire religion/god adventure to be a long-running hoax. Anyone who disagrees with either of these statements is simply denying reality. Does this PROVE OR DISPROVE the existence of a god? Well, history shows that others have believed so in the past and ALWAYS been proven wrong, so that answer delineates the most obvious difference between agnostics and atheists. Another major difference lies in how much damage to society they attribute to allowing such conspiracies to perpetuate.

I beg to differ:

First: these are not 'massive assumptions'. The theory of Relativity and the Big Bang are both widely accepted by the scientific community as fact, and more evidence to confirm the validity of the theories comes in all the time. The evidence for the Big Bang and a beginning of the universe comes from respected scientists and mathematicians such as Allen Rex Sandage, Albert Einstein, George Lamatre' and others.

1915- Albert Einstein discovers the theory of Relativity, which does not allow for a static universe.

1929- Edwin Hubble discovers that light coming from distant galaxies is redder than it is 'supposed' to be, Hubble's explanation: The galaxies are moving away from us, evidence of an expanding universe.

1940- George Gamow predicts that the background temperature of the universe should be just a few degrees above absolute zero if the Big Bang actually occurred. Guess What?!

1965- Two scientists, Penzias and Wilson, accidentally discovered that the universe's 'background temperature was about 3.7 degrees above absolute zero.

There is also plenty of evidence for 'fine tuning' of both the 'Big Bang' and other events, such as the Cambrian Explosion. Nobody is arguing for magic here except for those that argue that something can come from nothing.

This gives evidence for the first point of the 'kalam' argument:
What begins to exist has a cause, and the second point, the universe has a cause.

Second:
Even Atheist Kai Nielsen has said: "Suppose you suddenly hear a loud bang...and you ask me, "What made that bang?" and I reply, "Nothing,it just happened." You would not accept that. (and rightly so, I might add)

The universe began to exist, and as evidenced by the points above, therefore it has a cause. It is not self- existing.
Proof of the third point, the universe has a cause.

"Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern." ~~C.S. Lewis
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

It boggles the mind

So you KNOW for sure that prior to the big bang the universe wasn't simply populated with quarks or something smaller that they're made of, and as a result of some action we don't yet understand, that it resulted in them forming into protons, neutrons and electrons, which then stuck together the only way they could, which became a universe of Hydrogen? You know this? I find that hard to believe since no one knows this. It's conjecture with the knowledge we have.

Sure, there is evidence that SUGGESTS, perhaps very strongly, that everything simply created itself from nothing in one big pop but no one is certain that this wasn't just a universe-wide chain reaction that transformed everything from some unknown state into the conditions we know to have followed. You have heard the estimates that if you stacked all the atomic particles tightly together with no space (orbits, etc.) between them, the entire universe could be compressed into something the size of a grapefruit, haven't you? Well, maybe that can be extended by a factor of 10 times more? Maybe 10 billion? Maybe much much more than that? The answers are not there yet.

My point is that we don't know with ANY certainty that nothing existed previously. We estimate it and many people believe it, but that doesn't make it proven, now does it? Thus, it doesn't prove that a magic man in the sky waved his wand and zapped it all into existence. And honestly, I don't understand the thinking that allows one to believe a magical being can exist forever with no beginning from zero evidence but can't believe that about everything known to exist with unlimited proof that it has existed for the entire time frame we know of. It boggles the mind.

I could post a number of theories that offer an explanation to how things came to be as we know them. One in particular shows how everything eventually devolves into a single, central black hole and then is regenerated into the very expanding universe we see today via the exact big bang you suggest is proof of no prior existence. If true, this action may have been repeated any number of times with absolutely no information being carried from one to the next. In that case, everything may simply have always existed with no beginning.

Since you're into citing obvious and uncontested info to others, maybe you could come back with your interpretation of Occam's Razor, complete with how simple it is for genuine omnipotence to exist throughout every spin of every orbit of every molecule of every bit of matter of every planet of every solar system of every galaxy of every direction of the universe. Can't wait to hear that one.

Answer me.

.

just another attack on God and His true religion

I do realize that what I say, it may not move you. However, it Is my duty to preach the Word, that who hears it might believe and receive everlasting life.

The Bible says clearly that a fool says in his heart there is no God. We are blinded for many reasons, but essentially is because we want to be blinded. We love darkness rather than light. We love sin rather than righteousness, and we love ourselves before all else. We are perverted. We are bound by sin, we are dead in sin, spiritually we are dead already, and soon to be dead physically.

However God do not want to see His creations seperat from Him forever. Because of who God is, Just, righteous, loving, kind, He has a Way to demonstrate throught out all eternity His Characters. He send His own Son to die, to pay the price of Sin, and to justify all those who would believe and come to Him.

If you feel the burden of sin on your back, if you feel guilty for what you have done, if the life you lead give you sleepless nights, then be of good cheer, for salvation is close at hand. When you are hopeless, when you are weary, when you are at the end of yourself, then look up to the One Who has prepared a way for you. Seek Him, cry out to Him, until you come to meet Him at that Cross, and your burden will roll away.

This is not fairy tale, this is not make believe, or a scheme to make you subservient to an earthly power. It is the Truth. Hundreds of millions of people who walked before you testified to the Saving Grace of Christ. And it is available to you, too.

And yes. It will require you to give up your lifestyle, your sin and it's pleasures and yourself, but in exchange, you will receive life eternal! And in His presence is fullness of joy and in His right hand is pleasure forevermore. Believe today, believe now.

I don't believe go213mph said there is no God.

I don't believe go213mph said there is no God.

There are so many religions claiming the path to righteousness--thousands of perceptions of one God--What is one to make of all the interpretations created by man. Millions upon millions of people all around the world, and throughout time, can not be wrong. Religion is only the "story" of a group of peoples interpretation of God. As history shows the story changes all the time--as it should, with many choices at any given point in time. The story is only temporary but not God. The dogma of religion is what prevents us from truly perceiving God and is quite often the seed of prejudice and the root of anger. We need to remember that there is one God and he/she/it is more important than the religious story we choose to experience.

Humans for Ron Paul !

I loathe evangelical Christians...

...almost as much as I loathe evangelical atheists.

Militant do-gooders, zealots, and busy-bodies all

I'll take a Catholic over a fundamentalist and a Voltaire over a Bakunin

"Alas! I believe in the virtue of birds. And it only takes a feather for me to die laughing."

Better to...

...love them (and help them see the error of their ways) than to loathe them? 'Loathing' a person; hating a person -- :|

I loathe broadbrushes :)

A Pink (also known as a Pink Boy, a Normal, a Human,

a Mediocretin, or a Glorp) is someone who is NOT a dues-paying member of the Church of the SubGenius. They are all part of the Conspiracy of Normals, trying to make everyone else Normal just like them, and trying to steal away our Slack. They think the name of "Bob" Dobbs is just Bob Dobbs, without the quotes, and are interested in things like giraffes. They will all get fried by the lasers of the Pleasure Saucers on X-Day. Here is a video of a typical Pink and how retarded they act in everyday life:


http://youtu.be/Yavx9yxTrsw

Don't feed the pandas. Ever.

Dude, we both got trolled. Check this out

Here is "Boxxy" as a "normal":


http://youtu.be/-WVvOU1r2sM

She's actually a MEME GENIUS!

OMG she actually compares Boxxy to My Little Pony... Ok Universe, you're still creepy!

"We are not human beings having a spiritual experience; we are spiritual beings having a human experience"—Pierre Teilhard de Chardin

I suppose I'll just stick with my green and purple pills...

Oops - forgot to source:
http://subgenius.wikia.com/wiki/Pink

Don't feed the pandas. Ever.

Bahahahahahaha! What in the...

Ok, first of all, I would totally love to Shmokeafatty and sit with this chick... for like 5 min tops. She's a live action cartoon.

A new term just popped into my mind watching this: Memeple = Meme + People.

"Boxxy" seems like her vocabulary comes from a book of emoticons and internet jargon! Hahaha.

You're right though, if she was really a "Red-piller" she wouldn't care about the trolls, would she?

This is a type of person who goes too far to one extreme where they really put a lot of effort in eliminating the negatives in their lives not understanding that any focus on unwanted brings more of the unwanted. They try not to use profanity in the way they speak because it's "bad"—again, misplaced focus.

I consider myself a spiritual person but I don't go prancing around like My Little Pony. If I really like something, I'm going to say, "That's is so f***ing sick, man!!" I will use whatever mouth noises I feel are best suited for that particular need for expression.

+1 for that cc!

"We are not human beings having a spiritual experience; we are spiritual beings having a human experience"—Pierre Teilhard de Chardin

It appears that you are

It appears that you are conflating religion and God. I find this post to be quite distasteful and arrogant. I adhere to no religion but I believe in God. Religions want us to be subservient and hierarchical, not God. The state tries to replace God. We, as the created, cannot comprehend the mind of the creator. It is outside of our existence and experience. That is simple logic. So to say there are logical inconsistencies in the existence of God is to say that you yourself are all-knowing and supreme, right? Man created religion and uses it as a tool to control the masses, on that we can agree. Take a good look around and look at how we violate the word of God on a daily basis. Our entire society does it. It is no accident. You may trivialize the word of God but the people running the show are very aware of it and are using it against the masses.

Where did you learn/read/hear these words of God you speak of?

The bible I assume. Knowingly lying to youself rather than accepting unpleasant truths is unhealthy. You may think living based on lies is harmless, but the fact is, living in error through false and irrational thinking does have consequences. You know the saying...You can ignore reality...but you cannot ignore the consequences of ignoring reality. Remember GW Bush said god told him to invade iraq.

Perpetuating lies and ignoring reality is an incredibly selfish act. You are literally sacrificing your children and grandchildren by leaving them to suffer the consequences of your own cowardness to face reality. How do you think children feel when they find out santa clause is just a fun little game but are then expected to believe an even more outlandish lie...like the exsistence of god?

Stop allowing yourself to be manipulate by others and by fear of the unknown. There is absolutly nothing wrong with not having an answer to the questions how did we get here and what happens when we die?

Its whats next....

So you think that reality is

So you think that reality is limited to only what we can see and touch and understand. With those constraints I guess you would be right. To me, evidence of the creator is present in the creation. It is all around us. You don't believe that but I do. I see it as self-evident. I don't know how we got here, besides that we were created, and I don't claim to know what happens when we die. I have never read the bible. I know that it feels good to help people and it feels bad to harm people. I have no cowardice to face reality. I am facing my reality and you are facing yours. We all have our own 'truth' that we believe. I was an atheist for most of my life and used to say the same things as you. One day you may see something that changes your entire perspective.

You said: "So you think that

You said: "So you think that reality is limited to only what we can see and touch and understand.(?)"

Reality refers to the state of things as they actually exist, as opposed to how they could possibly exist.

You said: "I have never read the bible."

Why not? You should. The more time I spent reading the bible – the more I started seeing that things didn’t add up and there are many, many things written in that book that no moral human being could be okay with. For instance:

Leviticus 21:9
A priest’s daughter who loses her honor by committing fornication and thereby dishonors her father also, shall be burned to death.

Isaiah 13:15-18
Anyone who is captured will be run through with a sword. Their little children will be dashed to death right before their eyes. Their homes will be sacked and their wives raped by the attacking hordes. For I will stir up the Medes against Babylon, and no amount of silver or gold will buy them off. The attacking armies will shoot down the young people with arrows. They will have no mercy on helpless babies and will show no compassion for the children.

Ezekiel 9:5-7
“Then I heard the LORD say to the other men, “Follow him through the city and kill everyone whose forehead is not marked. Show no mercy; have no pity! Kill them all – old and young, girls and women and little children. But do not touch anyone with the mark. Begin your task right here at the Temple.” So they began by killing the seventy leaders. “Defile the Temple!” the LORD commanded. “Fill its courtyards with the bodies of those you kill! Go!” So they went throughout the city and did as they were told.”

So, as we "awaken", its not just the illegitimacy of government and the state that needs to be recognized...its all irrational thinking that needs to be countered.

Those of us who are free of the constraints imposed by dogmas on their ability to think and to process information have a huge responsibility in trying to expose the massive deception of organized religion.

Politics and religion are both elitist philosohys that want to run the world. I will not be ruled by priests, bishops, or scriptures any more than I will be ruled by kings or queens.

And yet, just as the mainstream media calls truthseekers "conspiracy theorists", people who have invested much of there time and money into supernatural mythlogoy, regularly resort to calling non-believers things like asshole.

The story religion tells is incredibly fantastic, yet questioning these fantastic assertions is seen by the religious as being stupid and/or dumb.

I know how to think. Reason and rationality is superior to superstitution and mythlogy.

Tsk tsk, atheistkult at it's finest.

I'm not going to reiterate the massive distortions in logic that are in the original post you shared with us (scan down to my lower comment if you feel so inclined), but you sound about as brain-dead as The Amazing Atheist does when he puts up anti-Ron Paul material. Your entire argument here rests on the product of Anglican political absolutism with a trace of Fundamentalist kookery in George W. Bush.

If you want some cold reality, you can try to explain away how one of your likely inspirations Christopher Hitchens gets off celebrating the same Iraq War and actually helped Bush promote it, and continually justified the mass slaughters that took place in the Soviet Union on the grounds that it "modernized a backward culture". And spare me the No True Scotsman fallacy of saying "I don't agree with Hitchens". You've conflated every dissenting Christian who agrees with you on the issue of the Iraq War with it's chief proponent as if we're pushing the exact same product, so let's see some consistency here.

If you want to feel proud over your selective skepticism, be my guest, but don't pretend that you're more enlightened than the rest of us, because you're quite far from being so.

“My attitude toward progress has passed from antagonism to boredom. I have long ceased to argue with people who prefer Thursday to Wednesday because it is Thursday.” - G.K. Chesterton

Religion entails a belief in God

I never got the whole distinction between spirituality and religion.
Way I see it is spirituality is an individualistic expression of religion and "organized spirituality" is a collectivist expression.
Both can be tainted by human nature. Both can be forces of good.
Hierarchy is not such a bad thing. I trust a long-standing ancient religion over someone's personal interpretation of the Bible.
but that's just my opinion.

"Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle." - Anonymous
http://youtu.be/cjkvC9qr0cc

+1 And I'm just going to leave this right here...

http://www.iawwai.com/TruthBehindReligion.htm

"We are not human beings having a spiritual experience; we are spiritual beings having a human experience"—Pierre Teilhard de Chardin

How is...

...believing that Person and Love always existed logically inconsistent? What I find really hard to swallow is the idea that non-personal deterministic or random reactions would ever give rise to real Person, real Reason, real Knowing.

My rational side compelled me to down-vote this.

"If you must use the word God at all, it should be in recognition of yourself being the ultimate power and authority in your life. You are the "one", not Allah, not Yahweh, not the flying spaghetti monster. It’s YOU!"

- A man decides to take a Sunday walk and gets beat to death by a flash mob for being the wrong color. Who was the ultimate authority in his life at that time?

- A Pakistani goat herder in the Waziristan region is doing his daily work and has no realization that he's in close proximity to a drone target until he's cooking in an American created inferno. Who was the ultimate authority in his life at that time?

- A single woman sleeps in her room peacefully when 2 hulks in masks kick through her door and proceed to have their way with her. Who was the ultimate authority in her life at that time?

My point here isn't to argue for or against the existence of God, but to point out the extremely asinine logic behind the sort of bizarre pseudo-libertarian logic at work in the rhetoric of this post. Laboring under the delusion that you control every cell in your body by your own will and that no other person or circumstance exerts any level of influence upon your actions is equally as crazy as the many cults that have sprung up like cancerous polyps in last several centuries.

Furthermore, no individual person simply comes into being by pulling himself up by his own boot-straps. Everyone enters this world a helpless inferior at the mercy of their parents and the laws of nature. Your very ability to breathe in contingent on certain genetic anomalies being absent from your body, and your rational faculty actually being functional presupposes direct genetic influences from your fore-bearers.

Using God to subvert the liberties of others is a crime, but so is spreading the delusion that people are not accountable to each other or that they are endowed with powers that they don't actually possess.

“My attitude toward progress has passed from antagonism to boredom. I have long ceased to argue with people who prefer Thursday to Wednesday because it is Thursday.” - G.K. Chesterton

I signed in just to +1

... and to quote this

No one saves us but ourselves. No one can and no one may. We ourselves must walk the path.
Buddha

Life is a sexually transmitted disease with a 100% fatality rate.
Don't Give me Liberty, I'll get up and get it myself!

I did the same

But sadly like any post that criticized religion people will flood in to downvote it.