My first post: Response to Christian email about Conn. tragedy
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
30-12-2012, 07:08 PM
My first post: Response to Christian email about Conn. tragedy
My first post to an atheist board after converting from Baptist Christianity about a year ago (Long story, of course)...
I recently received a Christmas email letter in response to the Conneticut tragedy and just had to share my thoughts with someone. I am not sure if this was mentioned before, but I did not find it in a search. The conclusion I draw may be obvious to most of you, but I thought I would share anyway. Wink (old school smileys are best, imnsho)
The title of the email was "We're spending Christmas at God's House". It was a remake of "The Night Before Christmas". Here was the jist of the email:
The twenty children that were gunned down went to heaven and were met by Christ. They had forgotten all about what happened in the school (but somehow remembered everything else, like the fact that there was a Christmas). Everything was beautiful and wonderful. Jesus hugged and loved the kids. He then promises to "take care of mom and dad"...
So, I get that this is supposed to somehow comfort those hurting with the loss of little ones. However, I know that some if not MOST Christians believe that children under a certain age (or level of understanding) DO in fact go straight to heaven and this is a great example.
If that is the case, the only logical conclusion is that WE MUST SLAUGHTER ALL CHILDREN under the "age of accountability". This way, they will go right to heaven and not be bothered with all the suffereing and pain here on earth. As a matter of fact, I think this is the best possible arguement for abortion that there can be!! If there is even a fraction of a minute chance that they child will turn away from God and go to hell, a place of eternal pain and punishment, then the only humane thing to do is kill them before they get the chance to feel any pain!!!!! WTF can they possibly be thinking!??! Oh yeah, they aren't...
Anyway, thanks for the feedback. I hope I can contribute in the future.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Arm-Chair Physicist's post
30-12-2012, 08:11 PM
RE: My first post: Response to Christian email about Conn. tragedy
That is the logical conclusion of that stance on the fate of children. But Christians aren't big on logic, and all your argument will do is convince them that you want to kill babies.

E 2 = (mc 2)2 + (pc )2
614C → 714N + e + ̅νe
2 K(s) + 2 H2O(l) → 2 KOH(aq) + H2 (g) + 196 kJ/mol
It works, bitches.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Phaedrus's post
30-12-2012, 08:49 PM
RE: My first post: Response to Christian email about Conn. tragedy
Let's not forget about the gunman. He could very well be with them in heaven for all eternity as a constant reminder of the shooting and horror they felt from dying and being separated from their parents

In fact maybe he's running around trying to kill them all over again, for all eternity.
I've never heard of any rules about what you can and cannot do once you get into heaven.
God didn't care what happened to them on earth, why should he care about what happens to them in heaven ?

Insanity - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-12-2012, 08:58 PM
RE: My first post: Response to Christian email about Conn. tragedy
I heard that at the end of a Dr Phil show (I was flipping through channels, I was not watching Dr Phil..). I posted this on Facebook after:

"On Dr. Phil, they just read some horrible poem
about the kids that were killed being all happy in Heaven. I know that
this is how Christians rationalize such things and it makes them feel
better, but to me, it seems unimaginably perverse to say these kids
would rather have a bullet in the brain for Xmas than, say, some video
games or a puppy. At that age, I wanted nothing more than a Nintendo
Entertainment System. Believe in the afterlife makes people say some
really weird stuff."

Then, the few remaining Christians on my F-list started trying to defend it. But it doesn't change my mind that I think that poem was in the poorest possible taste, and could be paraphrased "Whoo! Buncha dead kids! Yay! Praise Jesus!" It further cemented the idea in my head that many Christians are wrong headed sick fucks. And I'm even talking about people I know and like, I can't understand how killing kids is a good thing. And to talk about them frolicking on a cloud with Jesus just seems to be making light of their deaths.

I realize it's because the living people are trying to make sense of it, and that's how Christians comfort themselves,but it still leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like amyb's post
01-01-2013, 09:50 PM
RE: My first post: Response to Christian email about Conn. tragedy
(30-12-2012 07:08 PM)Arm-Chair Physicist Wrote:  My first post to an atheist board after converting from Baptist Christianity about a year ago (Long story, of course)...
I recently received a Christmas email letter in response to the Conneticut tragedy and just had to share my thoughts with someone. I am not sure if this was mentioned before, but I did not find it in a search. The conclusion I draw may be obvious to most of you, but I thought I would share anyway. Wink (old school smileys are best, imnsho)
The title of the email was "We're spending Christmas at God's House". It was a remake of "The Night Before Christmas". Here was the jist of the email:
The twenty children that were gunned down went to heaven and were met by Christ. They had forgotten all about what happened in the school (but somehow remembered everything else, like the fact that there was a Christmas). Everything was beautiful and wonderful. Jesus hugged and loved the kids. He then promises to "take care of mom and dad"...
So, I get that this is supposed to somehow comfort those hurting with the loss of little ones. However, I know that some if not MOST Christians believe that children under a certain age (or level of understanding) DO in fact go straight to heaven and this is a great example.
If that is the case, the only logical conclusion is that WE MUST SLAUGHTER ALL CHILDREN under the "age of accountability". This way, they will go right to heaven and not be bothered with all the suffereing and pain here on earth. As a matter of fact, I think this is the best possible arguement for abortion that there can be!! If there is even a fraction of a minute chance that they child will turn away from God and go to hell, a place of eternal pain and punishment, then the only humane thing to do is kill them before they get the chance to feel any pain!!!!! WTF can they possibly be thinking!??! Oh yeah, they aren't...
Anyway, thanks for the feedback. I hope I can contribute in the future.
Hi Arm-Chair Physicist and welcome to the forum!

I can see how you might come to the conclusion that we should slaughter all the children according to that line of thinking. However, the problem with that is the "Thou shalt not kill" commandment which means that, if we adults did that, the children would be the only ones going to heaven with no chance of ever seeing their parents again. If I was still a Christian, that would have been my response.

"Religion has caused more misery to all of mankind in every stage of human history than any other single idea." --Madalyn Murray O'Hair
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-01-2013, 09:59 PM
RE: My first post: Response to Christian email about Conn. tragedy
(30-12-2012 07:08 PM)Arm-Chair Physicist Wrote:  My first post to an atheist board after converting from Baptist Christianity about a year ago (Long story, of course)...
I recently received a Christmas email letter in response to the Conneticut tragedy and just had to share my thoughts with someone. I am not sure if this was mentioned before, but I did not find it in a search. The conclusion I draw may be obvious to most of you, but I thought I would share anyway. Wink (old school smileys are best, imnsho)
The title of the email was "We're spending Christmas at God's House". It was a remake of "The Night Before Christmas". Here was the jist of the email:
The twenty children that were gunned down went to heaven and were met by Christ. They had forgotten all about what happened in the school (but somehow remembered everything else, like the fact that there was a Christmas). Everything was beautiful and wonderful. Jesus hugged and loved the kids. He then promises to "take care of mom and dad"...
So, I get that this is supposed to somehow comfort those hurting with the loss of little ones. However, I know that some if not MOST Christians believe that children under a certain age (or level of understanding) DO in fact go straight to heaven and this is a great example.
If that is the case, the only logical conclusion is that WE MUST SLAUGHTER ALL CHILDREN under the "age of accountability". This way, they will go right to heaven and not be bothered with all the suffereing and pain here on earth. As a matter of fact, I think this is the best possible arguement for abortion that there can be!! If there is even a fraction of a minute chance that they child will turn away from God and go to hell, a place of eternal pain and punishment, then the only humane thing to do is kill them before they get the chance to feel any pain!!!!! WTF can they possibly be thinking!??! Oh yeah, they aren't...
Anyway, thanks for the feedback. I hope I can contribute in the future.

I saw it, a couple days after it happened on fb. I replied that I hoped the parents, first responsers, or other extended friends or family never saw it. I thought it was hurtfully offensive and told them so, since I'm sure the parents would much rather have their children with them than with Jesus celebrating his birthday and exploring heaven.

Their reply was, "There's one in every group."

*shrug* Then their "other" friends came out of the woodwork saying how beautiful it was and they were sure it would be a comfort to the parents. While I normally don't unfriend people for that reason -- I really considered it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Momsurroundedbyboys's post
02-01-2013, 02:40 PM
RE: My first post: Response to Christian email about Conn. tragedy
(01-01-2013 09:50 PM)Impulse Wrote:  Hi Arm-Chair Physicist and welcome to the forum!

I can see how you might come to the conclusion that we should slaughter all the children according to that line of thinking. However, the problem with that is the "Thou shalt not kill" commandment which means that, if we adults did that, the children would be the only ones going to heaven with no chance of ever seeing their parents again. If I was still a Christian, that would have been my response.
Naturally, they would not get their own hands dirty. Angel I'm not sure how, but they would probably use the government in some manner (maybe supporting abortion??), just like they did after 9/11 to fight their "New Holy War". After all, God allowed/forced Pharaoh to due pretty much this exact thing in order to further his cause with the Egyptians...
Any way you look at it, they are screwed on this point: Either God a) Allows children to go to heaven, in which the moral thing to do is kill all of them, even if you might go to hell yourself, or b) Send children who have not done any harm to anyone (e.g. still in the womb) to hell, which is in every respect ghastly and morally incomprehensible or c) Predetermines who will go to Heaven and Hell, in which case it does not matter who lives or dies before the "age of accountability". They will go to heaven if they "Would have made the choice" for God, or Hell if they would not have, in which case we are back to killing them all and letting God sort them out.

How the frack can they believe any of these??!! Ah yes, the de facto "His ways are above our ways"....so don't you nevermind! Arg, I can't believe I fell for this shite for 20 years!
Anyway...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-01-2013, 02:46 PM
RE: My first post: Response to Christian email about Conn. tragedy
OP, your argument isn't applicable to a large number of Christians.

All a Christian as to say is, "I'm not Arminian," and your argument ceases to exist.

[Image: RHcn6pd.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-01-2013, 04:00 PM
RE: My first post: Response to Christian email about Conn. tragedy
(02-01-2013 02:46 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  OP, your argument isn't applicable to a large number of Christians.

All a Christian as to say is, "I'm not Arminian," and your argument ceases to exist.


Except that 99% of Christians wouldn't say that because they don't know that term and have no idea what it means. Drinking Beverage

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
02-01-2013, 04:17 PM
RE: My first post: Response to Christian email about Conn. tragedy
(02-01-2013 04:00 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(02-01-2013 02:46 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  OP, your argument isn't applicable to a large number of Christians.

All a Christian as to say is, "I'm not Arminian," and your argument ceases to exist.


Except that 99% of Christians wouldn't say that because they don't know that term and have no idea what it means. Drinking Beverage
Good point.

[Image: RHcn6pd.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: