Oh... but you do. You are your own god with the faith that humans are the answer to problems (which history, of course, showing that humans can't fix it)
Don't presume that you know my kind better than I do.
To compare America with Haiti is to compare France with America... two different animals. To equate today's socio-economic conditions with the time of slavery is to eliminate 200 years of the end of slavery in Haiti. To equate the religious conditions in Haiti as a "Christian" problem is to forget that Haiti's predominant religion was voodoo.
The synthesis of these three facts makes mute your points.
Haiti: Possessed by Voodoo
Haitian Voodoo is a mix of Christian and traditional African religions, so it's not like blaming Voodoo for Haiti's problems means that they don't have anything to do with Christianity.
Anyhow, you missed my point: Haiti is much less able to recover from things like natural disasters than wealthier countries because of its socio-economic conditions, and those socio-economic conditions were caused in large part by American trade embargoes. These embargoes were driven by American slavers - predominantly Christian, justifying slavery on the basis of religion - who were scared to death that the idea of a violent slave uprising could spread to their plantations in the US.
Then I can apply the same standard to atheists. Thanks for bringing a semblance of sanity.
You missed the point again. The label "atheist" says nothing about what I believe; it only describes what I don't believe.
In your case, I'm trying my best to only point out actions motivated by things you uphold yourself, like belief in the Bible as the word of God. For you to do the same with me, you would have to restrain yourself to the actions of people who were being motivated by what I consider true or good.
Dichotomy of positions. Atheists IS a belief system that believes there aren't any gods. But I love how atheists have morphed their position on what atheism means.
To use a tired analogy, not believing in gods is a belief system like not collecting stamps is a hobby.
I enjoy the Merriam-Webster definition "a person who does not
believe in the existence of a god or any gods : one who subscribes to or advocates
atheism" - emphasis mine. The believe system is that there is no gods.
Rather than argue your point, let's go with it for argument's sake. What do you think it implies?
When it comes to Christianity, we can build chains of reasoning like this:
- many Christians consider the Bible the word of God.
- the Bible praises slavery.
- therefore, some Christians believe that God approves of slavery.
- therefore, some Christians support slavery because they consider the Bible the word of God.
Can you do the same for atheists? Start with the premise "many atheists believe that no gods exist" and, using only steps that logically flow from this premise, end up at some nasty conclusion. Can you do it?
I would then come to the conclusion that you are creating a new faith. Faith being, in the general sense of the meaning, that it is based on something other than facts. Since you have not searched the limits of the universe to find out if there is a God, your position is not based on knowing all the facts and therefore is a faith position.
You have some serious misunderstandings of what I actually believe.
Ok... read it. A mixture of opinion (with a negative slant) and facts but one thing is glaring through it all... it doesn't address the point we were talking about, his efforts to help counter the HIV epidemic.
Except it does:
Indeed, according to a
report in these pages, Warren’s HIV-related activism in Africa has resulted in the termination of some of the continent’s most effective HIV prevention programs.
Then I will equally point to the reality that the actions of a few Christians don't reflect on the Christianity as a whole.
You're right. That's why I'm focusing specifically on the actions of Christians
that were motivated by their religion.
We will have to agree to disagree. (who ever heard of someone giving a bad resume of oneself?)
Like Christianity, Stalinism preached submission to authority; you just disagree on the specific authority. Christianity and Stalinism both devalue human beings: the Bible describes humans as "pots" that God the "potter" can do with as he pleases. In contrast, I say that authority is only legitimate based on merit and the consent of the governed, and the inherent worth of every person should be respected.
Like I said: Stalinism is closer to Christianity than it is to freethinking humanism.
No doubt SOME Christians did just that.
Not only did they do it; they used their religion - your religion - to justify their actions.
Atheists took murder to an unprecedented scale.
Atheism and Mass Murder - Conservapedia
Again: atheism is not a creed. It doesn't motivate people to do anything.
A moment ago you called freethinking secular humanism my "religion", remember? Show me a freethinking secular humanist who ever killed for his "faith". Just one.
I will not disagree that some Christians did promote slavery as I will also admit that Christians helped abolish slavery as it was that Islam promoted slavery and that slavery existed way before Christianity existed and sex-slaves exists today even though Christians and atheists alike agree that it is wrong.
And Christianity caused millions more people to be enslaved than would have been the case otherwise.
(Pope - Catholicism at the exclusion of Protestantism).
That encyclical was written about a century before the Protestant Reformation. At the time, there was no Protestantism to exclude.
... but your point is irrelevant, since so far, we've been talking about Christianity in general.
And... what does that have to do with slavery?
Slavery of "Saracens" and pagans had been authorized by the Pope much earlier:
Dum Diversas - Wikipedia
The Papal bull I quoted (Inter Caetera) extended this authorization of slavery to the Americas.
And rightly so
As you said: "who ever heard of someone giving a bad resume of oneself?"
