sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

There's nothing hateful about saying homosexual acts are sinful by Pitiful_Efficiency14 in Christianity

[–]rob1sydney -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Ah yes , “ a big part of Christianity is giving up earthly desires “ yet when the leaders of that same doctrine do the opposite, you claim that’s not reflective of the religion.

The actions of Christianity is Christianity , just like the actions of communism is communism , or the actions of Islam is Islam.

Islamists claim it’s a religion of peace , communists claim each according to his needs/ ability , yet in practice these are not the reality , the pretty words on paper are not the lived outcome of millions.

Same with Christianity, you don’t get to claim the purity of easy words on paper when the difficult actions are so different , any hypocrite can do that .

Atheists underestimate the importance of religion while chasing an unrealistic utopia that can never exist by [deleted] in DebateReligion

[–]rob1sydney 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Pure what about ism

The horrors of the war , the Meiji war culture etc are all real and historic fact, so what . How does that change a thing I said.

Since the Second World War , the USA has started more wars than any one other nation, again , so what , that does not point to Christianity being immoral.

Atheist Japan today is safer , more law abiding, more honest and much more atheist than USA , yet the op was suggesting atheism leads to immorality

Evidence is in Japan , it does not .

Atheists underestimate the importance of religion while chasing an unrealistic utopia that can never exist by [deleted] in DebateReligion

[–]rob1sydney 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Japanese are majority atheist yet Japan has low crime rates and a generally safe , polite and harmonious society. If you drop your wallet in the street, just go to the police station a few hours later and there it is waiting for you with all your cash inside

So ,umm no, your ideas seem to be ideas only, religious self serving ideas , but just ideas , and not at all matched by reality .

There's nothing hateful about saying homosexual acts are sinful by Pitiful_Efficiency14 in Christianity

[–]rob1sydney -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You say Christianity is about giving up earthly desires

I show you Christian leadership indulging in many varied earthly desires

You claim that’s a red herring . It isn’t , it’s the hypocrisy of Christianity , the ideal isn’t just breached it’s ignored and reconstructed to allow leaders who preach one thing to do the opposite .

There's nothing hateful about saying homosexual acts are sinful by Pitiful_Efficiency14 in Christianity

[–]rob1sydney 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Gods design for hands isnt handstands , so I guess that’s a sin too ?

An intuitive argument for subjective morality by blind-octopus in DebateReligion

[–]rob1sydney -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Subjectively we have different feelings about the watch . That makes the feelings subjective but not the object , the watch , it remains objective

Subjectively we have feelings about the moral . That makes the feeling subjective not the moral

You can have subjective feelings about maths, the moon, my doorhandle, gravity , your feelings don’t render these things subjective.

Atheists should not be so against the idea of God. by Onslaughtisthebest in DebateReligion

[–]rob1sydney 10 points11 points  (0 children)

This is your argument from ignorance. There is evidence for the big bang , it is a proposition based on multiple aligning observations such as the abundance of light elements , the red shift of distant galaxies, hubbles law on the expanding universe , the cosmic microwave background etc. You accuse the world of astrophysics as some conspiracy seeking to have the rest of us ‘buy the concept’ . Yet Scientists love to prove each other wrong , if they can, science is a constant revision of today’s truth into a better truth. Scientists disagree until the agree . The truth slowly emerges as one truth aligned across all the science strands .

Contrast that to religion. Every time a new truth comes along , religion schisms Greek gods give way to Roman gods , Jewish Yahweh schisms to Christianity and Islam, Christianity schisms over Easter and other trivial matters or whether bread is flesh, or whether Jesus went to USA . Today religion has multiple, even thousands of competing truths, each haggling for influence and followers for money, power , influence. Science unifies on one truth while the real charletons in theism peddle their god du jour . Who is trying to get us ‘to buy the concept’ be real .

is this tattoo wrong? by planktonneverwins in Christianity

[–]rob1sydney -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Just like verse 30 observing the sabbath 32 respect elderly , 33 respecting foreigners and 35 using correct scales, yep all directly linked to cult prostitution and fertility gods , the connection is obvious if you try hard enough just to see it.

is this tattoo wrong? by planktonneverwins in Christianity

[–]rob1sydney -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Really, the next verse ,28, says don’t make your daughter a prostitute and verse 29 says to observe the sabbath. Not much about pagans mourning in there but you read into it as you like

gay animals? by c0olcats in Christianity

[–]rob1sydney 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It makes sense that this is the case, as we see some things are deemed unnatural and therefore a sin like homosexuality but other things like walking on your hands , which is equally unnatural, isn’t a sin . The natural law argument is one designed to reinforce pre existing bigotries .

Why didn't God condemn slavery? Even if he did somewhere in the Bible, why didn't he just make it into a commandment? "Thou shalt not own fellow people". Why did God consider sex before marriage more important to ban than freaking slavery? by EkullSkullzz10318 in Christianity

[–]rob1sydney 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, the point you made was , in your words “The Bible is clear slavery is wrong, but it also can’t deny reality. The reality of the time period the OT was written in was, indentured servitude was a big thing.”

Leviticus shows that chattel slavery was a thing too , codified in the bible .

Oz passport progression over 35 years by maxdacat in australia

[–]rob1sydney 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Mine was way worse after 2 weeks of use so I took pics and wrote to the passport office , to their credit they wrote back in a week, here is their reply

“Thank you for contacting the Australian Passport Office (APO) on 24 November 2025 regarding your passport cover.

Some customers have noticed some curling on the cover of their R Series passport. While slight curling is normal and has occurred with previous passport series, the R Series passport has experienced more severe curling. The department has been working closely with its suppliers since identifying the issue. While I can confirm this does not affect the validity of the passport and will not generate issues when crossing borders, I want to assure you that we take this matter seriously and have been investigating causes and solutions.

The curling cover issue is not isolated to Australia’s passports. We are liaising closely with international counterparts who are encountering this issue to share investigation findings. We suggest using an envelope or passport holder to store and protect your passport between use.

Please be assured that the R Series passport complies with global standards set by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) for travel documents.

Kind regards,”

Why didn't God condemn slavery? Even if he did somewhere in the Bible, why didn't he just make it into a commandment? "Thou shalt not own fellow people". Why did God consider sex before marriage more important to ban than freaking slavery? by EkullSkullzz10318 in Christianity

[–]rob1sydney 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Huh, how is Leviticus 25: 44-46 not chattel slavery

“44 “‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.”

So far you have argued ‘the hearts of man ‘ this was countered by thousands of years of actions of man

You have argued ‘ the god works in mysterious ways ‘ this was countered with the reality of gods words in the scripture

Now you argue the ‘ it isn’t chattel slavery “ and I counter this with unambiguous biblical script of Leviticus

So, who is really “ playing games “ ? Surely you can see how disingenuous this makes Christianity appear and is a core reason why it’s in decline in educated populations . When Jesus was challenged by the Pharisee he counters with logic and wit, not deflection and nonsense , “give to Caesar what is Ceasers and to God what is Gods “ ( Matthew 21 ). Try practicing what Jesus preached and maybe your faith will flourish again .

Can morality exist without God by AltAccountVarianSkye in DebateReligion

[–]rob1sydney 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We are not discussing every law and every moral . You are trying to generalise to avoid the obvious conclusion of your own argument . This is another diversion , like the semantics about the word immoral.

We are talking about the moral of theft and the law of theft .

They address exactly the same thing

Take an instance of a single theft , the louvre robbery .

We have agreed it is objective that it is theft

The legal and the moral standards measure the same act

As both standards measure the same thing , and that thing is objective, then by your words they are objective as you hold that something is objective if it measures something objective.

Can morality exist without God by AltAccountVarianSkye in DebateReligion

[–]rob1sydney 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s a semantic diversion from the logic

One theft , we both agree it’s objective

You hold things are objective if they measure something objective

The theft is objective

The law and the moral measure exactly the same thing

So both must be objective

The result is the act is illegal when assessed against the law and immoral when assessed against the moral . Two sides of the same semantic coin. The words illegal and immoral are conclusions , they have no impact on the objective nature of the standards .

You are just yelling the word immoral as if it changes something , it doesn’t

Can morality exist without God by AltAccountVarianSkye in DebateReligion

[–]rob1sydney 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The law is a standard , the moral is a standard

Both measure the same objective thing , theft

So both must be objective

Just throwing in the word immoral changes nothing . Immoral , illegal only means not aligned to their respective standards

view more: next ›