Is it acceptable to mock religious kids since they're gullible and listen to what their pastors tell them without critical thought?

[pascalfornalz]

Why not?

[jennifer_bloom]

When somebody first chooses to be religious, they cannot provide evidence or logic for why they believe what they do, the logic and evidence comes later after they have had time to process what they believe and think but I believe that faith in God is just as logical as science.

[Anonymous]

Atheists are gullible people who can easily be manipulated by the media with the trigger word ''science'' and ''experts'' without any critical thought, we've seen this with them being terrified of covid. With the illusion of a free press and paid studies by scientists and doctors to say or give certain results to push a narrative, the atheists can be manipulated into anything.

The critical thinkers are those that still believe in religion despite the assault on their beliefs by atheists and agnostics in the media, education and social pressure. The ones that can do their own research and come to their own conclusions without having ''experts'' tell them everything.

How did matter and anti-matter come to exist and how did life begin from non-living material, yeah science can't explain everything. How the eye and vision came into existence, how the eco systems come to work etc.

[Opinion Owner]

I find atheists and agnostics will openly insult and mock a Christians religion to their face but wouldn't dare do it to a Muslim or any other religion.

[Opinion Owner]

Science doesn't equate logic, and a policy based on science does not mean it is logical. Example what does the science of reducing the spread of covid (whether it was effective or not) have to do with if the view of let's just learn to live with it, and accept that some people will die from it? What does science have to do with the argument? Lots of atheists were completely illogical when it came to covid due to them following the ''science'' the media and these corrupt scientists and doctors. You don't need an expert for things that are self-evident or to read statistics. Talk about religious people being gullible and lacking in critical thought, go get some self-awareness.

[AndrésC64]

Horseshit. Atheists are the ones with critical thinking skills. We don't believe some absurd shit written by unknown authors in a book a thousand years ago.

You think, and I use that word loosely, that being a critical thinker is the one who believes in something without any evidence? In that case let me introduce to you my dragon. 🤦🏼‍♂️

You know what? Sometimes the best answer is, "we don't know". Because that's the truth. You know what else? Even if you could with 100% certainty disprove every scientific theory ever proposed, that wouldn't get you one centimeter closer to proving the existence of your God. You would need to provide evidence for that. You can't.

[Opinion Owner]

@AndrésC64 God created the world, the world is proof of his existence and craftsmanship, we exist out of a scientific impossibility.

[AndrésC64]

God created the world? What evidence do you have for that claim? What scientific impossibility are you speaking of?

[Opinion Owner]

@AndrésC64 Read my previous comments mister ''critical thinker''. It's going to be very hot in the afterlife for you.

[AndrésC64]

And what evidence do you have to support your claim of this "hot afterlife"? Nothing other than an old book written by anonymous authors.

[Opinion Owner]

@AndrésC64 When you'll be squealing in hell fire you will have your proof of a hot after life.

[AndrésC64]

So you have nothing and are using threats about what's going to happen after we are dead. Got it. And how do you know what happens after we are dead? Have you been dead and come back to life? Do you know anyone personally who has ever been dead and come back to life? And I'm not talking a simple resuscitation. I'm talking about dead and coming back to life like the absurd claims in the Bible. Do you know anyone like that? No. Of course you don't.

[Opinion Owner]

@AndrésC64 enjoy life.

[AndrésC64]

Thanks. Are you going to even attempt to answer my questions?

[Opinion Owner]

@AndrésC64 Why should I answer questions you already know the answer of. I already answered your first questions you might not have been smart enough to figure out because you seemed to lack critical thinking and basic scientific knowledge.

God says to love people, but I absolutely despise your kind, and I hope you never find Jesus.

[AndrésC64]

Nice Christian attitude. You are openly rebelling against what Jesus says. Nice job! I guess we'll be roommates in hell. See you there.

[Opinion Owner]

@AndrésC64 If you think I'm going to hell you don't even know how going to heaven works. I'm not a perfect Christian, all have sin and fall short of the glory of God. I will be forgiven.

Atheists be mocking a 2000 year old book when some of them can't even define what a woman is without being a biologist and think men can be pregnant hahaha sooo advanced. See ya.

[AndrésC64]

Well then I will be forgiven too. So I'll be your roommate in heaven.

Wtf are you babbling about the definition of woman? Who said anything about that?

[Opinion Owner]

@AndrésC64 You can't be forgiven unless you become a true Christian clown.

[AndrésC64]

A true Christian clown? That's easy. There are billions of those.

[Opinion Owner]

@AndrésC64 cool story bruh, you know what I meant, clown.

[AndrésC64]

You never did answer what evidence you have for the existence of your invisible friend or what scientific impossibility you are talking about. Would you care to even try to answer those? Again, it doesn't matter if you could with 100% certain tea disprove every single scientific theory ever proposed. That wouldn't get you one centimeter closer to proving the existence of your invisible friend. Disproving one thing is not the same as proving another. You would need to provide evidence for your claim. You can't

[Opinion Owner]

@AndrésC64 And you call yourself a critical thinker lol. Read my first comment last paragraph. Use your ''critical thinking'' and science to figure out what I mean. Please at least, can you define what a woman is?

[AndrésC64]

Your last paragraph in your first comment is absolutely irrelevant and I have pointed that out at least twice now. You could with 100% certainty disprove every single solitary scientific theory ever proposed. That wouldn't get you any closer to providing evidence for the existence of your invisible friend. You would actually need to provide evidence. You can't. What you are doing is committing the fallacy known as the argument from ignorance. Just because we don't know the answer to something, doesn't mean that the answer is "God did it". You need to provide evidence for that. You can't.

What a woman is, is absolutely fucking irrelevant to the topic.

[Opinion Owner]

@AndrésC64 I guess you're too stupid to figure it out, why and how did matter and anti-matter come to exist? And by the way you can't create life from nonliving material. Both are impossible, yet we exist. God create the world, the world itself is proof that he exists, through scientific impossibility we exist, thus the idea of a God is logical. Also how is did vision (being able to see things) itself come to exist from evolution?

The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.”-Psalm 14

I ask again, define what a woman is. Please tell me you can at least define what a woman is.

[AndrésC64]

God you really are dense. Just because we don't know the answer to something, doesn't mean that "God did it is the answer". You need to provide evidence for that. You have absolutely zip, zero, zilch as far as evidence.

How did you prove this scientific impossibility?

And you are incorrect. The fact that we exist is proof that my dragon exists. We wouldn't be here otherwise. See how stupid that argument sounds?

And I'm not going to answer irrelevant questions that I've already answered at least twice. I'm sorry that you're too stupid to understand my answers. But that's a you problem.

[Opinion Owner]

@AndrésC64 You really are dumb, and you still haven't given me the definition of a woman. I hope you're the kind of atheist that can at least define what a woman is without having to be a biologist.

[AndrésC64]

The definition of what a woman is, is absolutely 100% fucking irrelevant. You're just trying to change the subject.

[Opinion Owner]

@AndrésC64 LOL don't tell you're one of those atheists hahaha.

[AndrésC64]

One of which atheists? One of the ones who doesn't get distracted and dragged into the weeds by irrelevant crap? Because the definition of a woman is absolutely unrelated to atheism.

[Opinion Owner]

@AndrésC64 Lots of atheists can't define what a woman is without being a biologist, they are soooo advanced don't you think?

[AndrésC64]

I'm sure that you can give me citations for your claim above, right? I can't wait to see what you've got.

[AndrésC64]

But again, that's fucking irrelevant. I am not those people, and the definition of a woman is absolutely fucking unrelated to atheism.

[Opinion Owner]

@AndrésC64 I'll give you quick examples look up on youtube (living waters Gender Is Fluid Until You Bring THIS Up), (Liberty hangout Psychologist Doesn't Know What a Woman Is), (The telegraph Ask the public: How would you define a 'woman' in one sentence?) (Kentaji brown jackson U. S supreme court nominee can't define what a woman is because she's not a biologist.) See this in the 21st century? That 2000 year old book will always be relevant, and this is what happens when people become less Christian as the west further decays due to liberal democracy. The world has always advanced with that book, the world declines when people lose Christianity.

You can't tell that they are atheists in most cases, but they are all clearly left wingers and most left wingers are the ones who are atheist and agnostic. If any liberal ''Christian'' can't define what a woman is, I highly doubt they are an actual believing Christian for them not being able to define something so simple with common sense.

I ask again, can you define what a woman is?

[AndrésC64]

Goodbye. You're more interested in gender than you are religion. Feel free to have that discussion with someone else.

[Opinion Owner]

@AndrésC64 See ya.

[pascalfornalz]

Becuase a person can be for science and religion. THey're not distinct. BUt then kids who believe everything their pastors tell them without thinking are idiots and deserve mockery.

[Adam1978]

Mocking is never acceptable, the whole nature of it is to make the other person feel bad. If you want to get them to reject their religion do so with the right questions, that forces them to think.

[pascalfornalz]

but then you go anonymous to tell people they were bullied, and then act like the best guy out. only cos your church told you loool.

[Adam1978]

You are clearly not a good person since you can't even stand by your own ideas, and need to try to hide by being anonymous.

[pascalfornalz]

Where am I anonymous? i've not used it on this point.
Though your attempt to gaslight hasn't worked.
I'm just calling you out. I love it when strangers have unrealistic expectations of other strangers. but he claims he's so enlightened because of some subjective shit his church taught him,. lool.

[Anonymous]

I think the first step should be to try and have a good, rational talk with them and help them try to find their own thoughts and beliefs on subjects, because kids are kids and can’t really be blamed for the faults of the adults around them.


Once they become adults though, and you know that they are more interested in just preaching, rather than having an honest convo, then it’s fine to mock them now and again. Not cruelty, mockery or jest. There’s a difference.

[pascalfornalz]

I disagree. at any age they get this conduct.

[Anonymous]

That’s pretty low I feel bad for them tbh

[gag6474]

no thats just wrong (im religious)

[Paul_in_Indy]

Grow up