It was, of course, sad to hear that Ms. K had been slowly raped and murdered by a common thug over the course of one hour and fifty-five minutes; but when I found out that the ordeal had taken place in plain sight of twelve fully-armed off-duty police officers, who ignored her terrified cries for help, and instead just watched until the act was carried to its gruesome end, I found myself facing a personal crisis. You see, the officers had all been very close friends of mine, but now I found my trust in them shaken to its core. Fortunately, I was able to talk with them afterwards, and ask them how they could have stood by and done nothing when they could so easily have saved Ms. K.

"I thought about intervening," said the first officer, "but it occurred to me that it was obviously better for the murderer to be able to exercise his free will than to have it restricted. I deeply regret the choices he made, but that's the price of having a world with free agents. Would you rather everyone in the world were a robot? The attacker's choices certainly weren't in my control, so I can't be held responsible for his actions."

"Well," said the second officer, "my motivation was a little bit different. I was about to pull my gun on the murderer when I thought to myself, 'But wait, wouldn't this be a perfect opportunity for some unarmed bystander to exercise selfless heroism, should he chance to walk by? If I were to intervene all the time like I was just about to, then no one would ever be able to exercise such a virtue. In fact, everyone would probably become very spoiled and self-centered if I were to prevent every act of rape and murder.' So I backed off. It's unfortunate that no one actually showed up to heroically intervene, but that's the price of having a universe where people can display virtue and maturity. Would you rather the world were nothing but love, peace, and roses?"

"I didn't even consider stepping in," said the third officer. "I probably would have if I hadn't had so much experience of life as a whole, since Ms. K's rape and murder admittedly seems pretty horrible when taken in isolation. But when you put it into context with the rest of life, it actually adds to the overall beauty of the big picture. Ms. K.'s screams were like the discordant notes that make fine musical pieces better than they would have been had all the notes been flawless. In fact, I could scarcely keep from waving my hands around, imagining that I myself was conducting the delicious nuances of the orchestra."

"When I first arrived on the scene, I actually drew my gun and pointed it right at the rapist's head," confessed the fourth officer, with a very guilty look on his face. "I'm deeply ashamed I did that. Do you know how close I came to destroying all of the goodness in the world? I mean, we all know there can't be any good without evil. Fortunately, I remembered this just in time, and a wave of such strong nausea came over me when I realized what I had almost done, that it knocked me to my hands and knees. Man, was that a close one."

"Look, there's really no point in my trying to explain the details to you," said the fifth officer, who we had nicknamed 'Brainiac' because he had an encyclopedic knowledge of literally everything and an IQ way off the charts. "There's an excellent reason for why I did not intervene, but it's just way too complicated for you to understand, so I'm not even going to bother trying. I mean, you admit you are nowhere near as knowledgeable as I am, so what right do you have to judge? Just so there's no misunderstanding, though, let me point out that no one could care about Ms. K. more than I did, and that I am, in fact, a very good person. That settles that."

"I would have defended Ms. K," said the sixth officer, who was notoriously careful about staying out of the public eye, "but it simply was not feasible. You see, I want everyone to freely choose to believe in me. But if I were to step in every time someone was about to be raped or murdered, then the evidence would be so clear-cut that everyone would be forced to believe in me. Can you imagine a more diabolical infringement upon their free wills? Obviously, it was better for me to back off and let Ms. K be raped and murdered. Now everyone can freely choose to believe that there is this extraordinary cop out there who loves them like his own children."

"What are you complaining about?" exclaimed the seventh officer when I turned to him, his eyebrows shooting up in exasperated disbelief. "I just saved a woman from getting raped and murdered last week! Do I have to jump in every time I see something like that about to happen? I would say the fact that more women are not raped and murdered in this city is almost miraculous testimony to my goodness."

The eighth officer, too, looked frustrated. "Nothing I do is good enough! Do you know how much worse it could have been? The thug actually had a blowtorch with him when he started out, but I said 'No way, not on my watch,' and knocked it away from him with my nightstick. Sure, I let him keep the switchblade, the pliers, the coat hanger, and the vial of acid, but think how much worse it would have been with a blowtorch! Ms. K should have thanked her lucky stars that someone so loving was there to watch over her."

"I'll let you in on a secret," said the ninth officer."Moments after Ms. K. flatlined, I had her resuscitated, and flown to a tropical resort where she is now experiencing extraordinary bliss, and her ordeal is just a distant memory. I'm sure you would agree that that's more than adequate compensation for her suffering, so the fact that I just stood there watching instead of intervening has no bearing at all on my goodness."

The tenth officer gave us all quite a start when he revealed a surprising secret about Ms. K. "I genetically engineered her from scratch. I made her, therefore she's my property, and I can do whatever I want with her. I could rape and murder her myself if I were so inclined, and it would be no worse than you tearing up a piece of paper you own. So there is no question of my being a bad person for not helping her."

The eleventh officer chimed in, gesturing at the tenth officer "I hired him to create Ms. K for me, because I wanted someone to love and worship me. But when I approached Ms. K about the matter, she actually turned away from me, as though she could find meaning and happiness with someone else! So I decided the loving thing to do would be to break her spirit by arranging to have her raped and murdered by a common thug, so that she might turn to me in her extraordinary suffering, thereby fulfilling the purpose for which she had been created. Well, mission accomplished, I'm happy to say! A few seconds before she died, she was so insane with terror and pain that she actually convinced herself she loved me, since she knew that only I could end her ordeal. I'll never forget the love in her eyes when she looked up at me the last time, begging for mercy, right before the thug bent over and slit her throat. It was so beautiful it still brings me to tears. Now I just have to go to that island so she can claim her prize of servitude."

"Well, this is quite a coincidence," chuckled the twelfth officer. "It looks like the thug got himself double pay, because I actually hired him to carry out the murder, too! Why? Oh, well it was just a test. Ms. K and I had been dating for some time (no offense, I didn't know she was someone else's property), and one beautiful night she finally told me she loved me. So, naturally, I wanted to see whether this was indeed love - that is, whether she would continue to adore me even while drowning in a pool of her own tears and blood, with me standing before her doing nothing."

By now, it had become clear to me that any difficulty I might have had in reconciling the presumed goodness of the officers with their behavior that day was unfounded, and that anyone who sided against them could do so only for love of evil over good. After all, anyone who has experienced their friendship in the way I have knows that they are good. Their goodness is even manifest in my life - I was in a shambles before I met them, but now everyone remarks on what a changed person I am, so much kinder and happier, apparently possessed of an inner calm. And I have met so many others who feel exactly the same way about them - so many who, like me, know in their hearts the truth that others try to rationalize away with their cold reason and sterile logic. I am ashamed that I ever doubted the entitlement of the twelve officers to my loyalty and my love.

As I was getting ready to leave, the first officer spoke up again. "By the way, I also think you should know that when we stood there watching Ms. K. get raped and stabbed over and over, we were suffering along with her, and we experienced exactly the same pain she did, or perhaps even more." And everyone in the room, myself included, nodded his head in agreement.

Postscript

Religious readers, do not take offense. I have made this parable as brazen as I could, but my purpose is not to insult or blaspheme. I have found that religious believers are often conditioned to accept trite solutions to the problem of suffering, and that it is all but impossible to shake that conditioning through dry analysis. The temptation to offer to an entity a moral blank check simply because it sports a nametag with "God" written on it, is overwhelming in our theistic culture. Hence, this attempt to make the point through a medium as far removed from dry analysis as possible. But again, it is all to make a point, not to cause anyone harm. I have not written anything that I would not have wanted directed at me when I myself was a believer.

Acknowledgements: http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/mark_vuletic/five.html

^

"There is no God" my friend, stop westing your time on the none existence things.

Get a Job.

*sigh*

truthislight: ^

"There is no God" my friend, stop westing your time on the none existence things.

Get a Job.

*sigh*

Lol. This guy.. It's just a story...

brilliant story!

truthislight: ^

"There is no God" my friend, stop westing your time on the none existence things.

Get a Job.

*sigh*

if you've not been told before, then let me be the first person to tell you, you're one ignorant son of a gun,

@op, very interesting story and a touching one too, it's really sad what how people have continually deceived themselves with the "God delusion" very sad, nice one mann, keep them coming you have my respect and support.

bolaino: if you've not been told before, then let me be the first person to tell you, you're one ignorant son of a gun,

@op, very interesting story and a touching one too, it's really sad what how people have continually deceived themselves with the "God delusion" very sad, nice one mann, keep them coming you have my respect and support.

*silent is the best answer for a .......*

truthislight:

*silent is the best answer for a .......*

if so, then why did u bother responding?

plz summarise, too long

Great story.

All christian excuses for God debunked!

The god hypothesis and the special pleadings of religious apologist completely debunked. . .

You do wonder what sort of smoke apologists enjoy

Nicely demolishes arguments for God's love or rationalizations for the contradictions posed by the reality of evil in a world created by an all-good God. Now here's what a reasonable_let's call him the 13th officer_ would say: 'I dislike what I deem evil. I deem rape evil because it is an infringement on a person's right on when on whom to have sex with. I empathize with the woman and am disgusted at the reasons you (ie the 12 officers) have given for your actions. So sad I wasn't there to be of help.'

This honorable court will pass judgement on the case brought to it,

The accuser brought a series of claim which can be summed up by the God stood idly while a certain ms K was being murdered!

Having seen the initial defense brought by a certain counsellor T, which wondered the age long wonderment of all theist, God does not exist, so why the endless tears and blood over nothing by atheist? Why spend an eternity crying over a tooth fairy you believe does not exist and still conviently claim it exist when it suit your itch? Why blame the same entity on lack of electrical power in Nigeria? Why blame the same entity on the non availability of more pure water factory compared to churches!

This single line of defense literally undermined the entire accuser argument because it questions the compos mentis of the accuser, it scratches the very heart of the endless drama, which is if God don't exist why do you spend more time of your life questioning a fact you apparently assert? Why make cases against an entity that does not exist?

The jugement is as follows;

1. Because the accuser have asserted before the entity in question does not exist, the accuser cannot at the same time accuse a non existing entity of being responsible of the death of a certain ms K.

2. Because 1 above, the accuser opens up a new meaning to the term non compos mentis, that fact establishes are:
A. The accuser claims entity G did nothing but watch while ms K was killed, thereby in effect causing her death.

B. The same accuser have repeatedly claim entity G does not exist

C. The soundness of the case is questions the rationality of the mind that brought them, this court would not go shopping for evidence to make the accuser case rock solid, if entity G does not exist according to the accuser, then entity G in all sense of soundness of the mind, cannot be at the same time be accused by the same accuser who claims he does not exist, for a crime of deliberately not saving ms K.

3. Because of 1 & 2, the court is forced by reason of maintaining a sound mind to dismiss this case as the accuser have flip flop over the simple fact, that entity G cannot by the account of the accuser be responsible for crime he did not exist to commit! The accuser unfortunately undermined his case by simultaneously exiting and staying, in legal jargons, making opposing claims which no court of repute can overlook out of sympathy for the accuser!

6 hours later, . . .

Legal opinion

The accuser once again made a huge gaffe, despite claiming entity G does not exist, the accuser was wrong to compare entity G to 12 individuals who according to the general knowledge on those who hold he exist, is clearly comparing chalk to cheese, the accuser is in no position to define the actions, intention or characteristics of entity G making his case invariably faulty and frivolous and at most building a case to suit you own opinions!

vedaxcool: This honorable court will pass judgement on the case brought to it,

The accuser brought a series of claim which can be summed up by the God stood idly while a certain ms K was being murdered!

Having seen the initial defense brought by a certain counsellor T, which wondered the age long wonderment of all theist, God does not exist, so why the endless tears and blood over nothing by atheist? Why spend an eternity crying over a tooth fairy you believe does not exist and still conviently claim it exist when it suit your itch? Why blame the same entity on lack of electrical power in Nigeria? Why blame the same entity on the non availability of more pure water factory compared to churches!

This single line of defense literally undermined the entire accuser argument because it questions the compos mentis of the accuser, it scratches the very heart of the endless drama, which is if God don't exist why do you spend more time of your life questioning a fact you apparently assert? Why make cases against an entity that does not exist?

The jugement is as follows;

1. Because the accuser have asserted before the entity in question does not exist, the accuser cannot at the same time accuse a non existing entity of being responsible of the death of a certain ms K.

2. Because 1 above, the accuser opens up a new meaning to the term non compos mentis, that fact establishes are:
A. The accuser claims entity G did nothing but watch while ms K was killed, thereby in effect causing her death.

B. The same accuser have repeatedly claim entity G does not exist

C. The soundness of the case is questions the rationality of the mind that brought them, this court would not go shopping for evidence to make the accuser case rock solid, if entity G does not exist according to the accuser, then entity G in all sense of soundness of the mind, cannot be at the same time be accused by the same accuser who claims he does not exist, for a crime of deliberately not saving ms K.

3. Because of 1 & 2, the court is forced by reason of maintaining a sound mind to dismiss this case as the accuser have flip flop over the simple fact, that entity G cannot by the account of the accuser be responsible for crime he did not exist to commit! The accuser unfortunately undermined his case by simultaneously exiting and staying, in legal jargons, making opposing claims which no court of repute can overlook out of sympathy for the accuser!

6 hours later, . . .

Legal opinion

The accuser once again made a huge gaffe, despite claiming entity G does not exist, the accuser was wrong to compare entity G to 12 individuals who according to the general knowledge on those who hold he exist, is clearly comparing chalk to cheese, the accuser is in no position to define the actions, intention or characteristics of entity G making his case invariably faulty and frivolous and at most building a case to suit you own opinions!

[img]http://i.qkme.me/3ojtj2.jpg[/img]


"if god exists then......"(startfrom there, vedaxcool)

vedaxcool: This honorable court will pass judgement on the case brought to it,

The accuser brought a series of claim which can be summed up by the God stood idly while a certain ms K was being murdered!

Having seen the initial defense brought by a certain counsellor T, which wondered the age long wonderment of all theist, God does not exist, so why the endless tears and blood over nothing by atheist? Why spend an eternity crying over a tooth fairy you believe does not exist and still conviently claim it exist when it suit your itch? Why blame the same entity on lack of electrical power in Nigeria? Why blame the same entity on the non availability of more pure water factory compared to churches!

This single line of defense literally undermined the entire accuser argument because it questions the compos mentis of the accuser, it scratches the very heart of the endless drama, which is if God don't exist why do you spend more time of your life questioning a fact you apparently assert? Why make cases against an entity that does not exist?

The jugement is as follows;

1. Because the accuser have asserted before the entity in question does not exist, the accuser cannot at the same time accuse a non existing entity of being responsible of the death of a certain ms K.

2. Because 1 above, the accuser opens up a new meaning to the term non compos mentis, that fact establishes are:
A. The accuser claims entity G did nothing but watch while ms K was killed, thereby in effect causing her death.

B. The same accuser have repeatedly claim entity G does not exist

C. The soundness of the case is questions the rationality of the mind that brought them, this court would not go shopping for evidence to make the accuser case rock solid, if entity G does not exist according to the accuser, then entity G in all sense of soundness of the mind, cannot be at the same time be accused by the same accuser who claims he does not exist, for a crime of deliberately not saving ms K.

3. Because of 1 & 2, the court is forced by reason of maintaining a sound mind to dismiss this case as the accuser have flip flop over the simple fact, that entity G cannot by the account of the accuser be responsible for crime he did not exist to commit! The accuser unfortunately undermined his case by simultaneously exiting and staying, in legal jargons, making opposing claims which no court of repute can overlook out of sympathy for the accuser!

6 hours later, . . .

Legal opinion

The accuser once again made a huge gaffe, despite claiming entity G does not exist, the accuser was wrong to compare entity G to 12 individuals who according to the general knowledge on those who hold he exist, is clearly comparing chalk to cheese, the accuser is in no position to define the actions, intention or characteristics of entity G making his case invariably faulty and frivolous and at most building a case to suit you own opinions!

Pls don't tell me you actually spent some mins typying this NONSENSE. . . . . . .I am seriously laughing here. . .

vedaxcool: This honorable court will pass judgement on the case brought to it,

The accuser brought a series of claim which can be summed up by the God stood idly while a certain ms K was being murdered!

Having seen the initial defense brought by a certain counsellor T, which wondered the age long wonderment of all theist, God does not exist, so why the endless tears and blood over nothing by atheist? Why spend an eternity crying over a tooth fairy you believe does not exist and still conviently claim it exist when it suit your itch? Why blame the same entity on lack of electrical power in Nigeria? Why blame the same entity on the non availability of more pure water factory compared to churches!

This single line of defense literally undermined the entire accuser argument because it questions the compos mentis of the accuser, it scratches the very heart of the endless drama, which is if God don't exist why do you spend more time of your life questioning a fact you apparently assert? Why make cases against an entity that does not exist?

The jugement is as follows;

1. Because the accuser have asserted before the entity in question does not exist, the accuser cannot at the same time accuse a non existing entity of being responsible of the death of a certain ms K.

2. Because 1 above, the accuser opens up a new meaning to the term non compos mentis, that fact establishes are:
A. The accuser claims entity G did nothing but watch while ms K was killed, thereby in effect causing her death.

B. The same accuser have repeatedly claim entity G does not exist

C. The soundness of the case is questions the rationality of the mind that brought them, this court would not go shopping for evidence to make the accuser case rock solid, if entity G does not exist according to the accuser, then entity G in all sense of soundness of the mind, cannot be at the same time be accused by the same accuser who claims he does not exist, for a crime of deliberately not saving ms K.

3. Because of 1 & 2, the court is forced by reason of maintaining a sound mind to dismiss this case as the accuser have flip flop over the simple fact, that entity G cannot by the account of the accuser be responsible for crime he did not exist to commit! The accuser unfortunately undermined his case by simultaneously exiting and staying, in legal jargons, making opposing claims which no court of repute can overlook out of sympathy for the accuser!

6 hours later, . . .

Legal opinion

The accuser once again made a huge gaffe, despite claiming entity G does not exist, the accuser was wrong to compare entity G to 12 individuals who according to the general knowledge on those who hold he exist, is clearly comparing chalk to cheese, the accuser is in no position to define the actions, intention or characteristics of entity G making his case invariably faulty and frivolous and at most building a case to suit you own opinions!

;

I'm gonna pop some tags only gat twenty naira in my pocket, I'm hunting, looking for a come up, this is mess*ng awesome,

vedaxcool's argument fails because the atheist is assuming God exists for the purpose of His argument; disbelieving God doesn't make his argument less true.

Case 1 falls because the defendant is assuming God's existence for the purpose of making his argument against the rationalizations for evil permitted by an all-good God.

Case 2 simply states the OP's argument and your earlier assertion that he can't argue against an entity since he doesn't believe the entity exists. This assertion fails because God's existence is assumed for the purpose of argument.

Case 3 again restates the, by now, worn-out argument but this is undermined by the fact that the rebutter believes God to exist and we are making an argument against certain traits of an assumed God.

Legal opinion fails on account of the fact that human intelligence can and does (as shown by Christians & Muslims) in fact CLEARLY state the actions & characteristics of the said entity, G, and it is this that is being evaluated in the tale.

Bottom line: Your case fails particularly because it doesn't address the OP's argument. You merely bring in a fat red herring.

Hahahaha, what do they feed these Muslims?

Bump 3

musKeeto: Bump 3

where u dey since sef?

bolaino: where u dey since sef?

Lots of stuff to attend to offline.. How you dey?

musKeeto: Bump 3

Motor Jam you ?

Dohohohohoohohohoho

Oh! Vedaxcool, why o why? Who did this to you?

^
I hope u know the position of annoying talking donkey in the religion section has already been taken by muskeeto, father of odd noises!

vedaxcool: ^
I hope u know the position of annoying donkey in the religion section has already been taken by muskeeto, father of odd noises!

Well, intelligence isn't the forte of Allah's slaves...

^^^^
But I thought you agreed that your mission in Life is to troll NL? eh, slave of nothingnes that mission is adequately captured by Donkey!

musKeeto:
Lots of stuff to attend to offline.. How you dey?

I dey oO, I just dey miss your traffic for here since, welcome back sire.

vedaxcool: ^^^^
But I thought you agreed that your mission in Life is to troll NL? eh, slave of nothingnes that mission is adequately captured by Donkey!

Better nothing than Allah. Did his donkey ride him or was it the other way round? Rumors going round has it you're gay btw.... And you have a fetish for guys that are atheist.

^^^^

You mean your dad right?

vedaxcool: ^^^^

You mean your dad right?

Aww, did I touch a nerve?

vedaxcool: ^
I hope u know the position of annoying donkey in the religion section has already been taken by muskeeto, father of odd noises!

Is it really possible that you're worse than I thought?