₦airaland Forum

butterflyl1on:


He never gets tired of his butt being whipped. He must be a submissive


Always getting ass whupped excites him.

There are people that derive some kind of perverse pleasure from being humiliated , dominated or being made to look inferior . I tell you bro , JackBizzle is one of them

KingEbukasBlog:
There are people that derive some kind of perverse pleasure from being humiliated , dominated or being made to look inferior . I tell you bro , JackBizzle is one of them

You can say that again

When I began calling him Jumbo Dumbo he so loved it and even said he prefers I call him JUMBO JACK and he said it with such gusto.

KingEbukasBlog:
Science has been to buttress religious beliefs , history can also be used to buttress religious beliefs . What are you even saying Science can be used to discover some truths , not all truths .

Science can be used to buttress witch religious belief that has universal acceptance?

KingEbukasBlog:
Hey .... richirich713 , its been long man , where have you been bro

Doing great bro, just been busy with studies, have loads of assignments to complete and will be writing exams soon.

Great to see u back refuting the the same old arguments against Catholicism, I mean Christianity.

Dalam0n:
How many atheist there through their comments agree with childhood indoctrination? So far you've only been able to post the comment of on while I've posted the comments of about 5 that totally disagree. Majority of the comments there totally disagree with indoctrination so why are you telling lies?

You want more?

Enjoy


No it is not. It is a perfect example of something you don't let your children make up their minds about.

No, it's your job.

Your job is to prepare them and arm them to meet the world the best you can, whether or not they follow your advice is up to them.

Do you think that con artists, i.e. priests and other cultists, take your approach? No, arm your children them against them.

This whole "let the children decide" is a meme spread by religion. Children are too young to decide. When they are grown and have the intellectual capacity to be skeptical, then they can decide. Before that they are vulnerable.


MORE

It's not a straw man at all, you teach your children what you know to be true in every other domain, why does religion get a bye? Why is it that alchemy doesn't compete with chemistry? Because we have determined that alchemy is not factual, as we have with religion, so why is it that we have to leave our children open to superstition and lies?

This is not just you, it accepted in society, but it isn't accepted in any other course of knowledge. It's time to stop coddling religion by pretending that it's rational and that our children should 'make up their minds' about superstitious nonsense.


MORE

I firmly hold atheism or non-affiliation to be the true way of life. I know i'm right. And I want my children to live the same life. But isn't that one of the things that we as atheists despise of religion? If I were to do this, am I no better? What do you think?

MORE

I guess you are speaking of so-called "weak/negative atheism" while Positive/strong atheists hold a belief that there are no deities. Which would be a doctrine

MORE


Atheism has a range of definitions. An explicit/positive atheism is the assertion that no deities exist. There are those, even in this thread, that have made the same assertion and this is a doctrine which can be used for indoctrination and indeed is already being used.

WHO NOW IS THE LIAR?

butterflyl1on:
When people like you see A you call it B and when you are corrected you resort to insults as a last line of defence with the assumption that it would make you look more intelligent when in reality you are not.

From your own post

A Medical Doctor is a PERSON who has been trained in medical science, whose job is to treat people who are ill/sick or injured.

The focus is not on THE PERSON but WHO HAS BEEN TRAINED IN MEDICAL SCIENCE in the comment shows what has MADE THAT PERSON a doctor.

Training is not jogging and is not swimming for a doctor, even jogging and swimming are taught. For a doctor his training is in ACADEMIC KNOWLEDGE which IS TAUGHT EITHER PRACTICALLY OR THEORETICALLY.

if you still wish to display further ignorance after this then knock yourself out.

No, I will knock you back into your pool of stupidity, so that you can go deep down in it and crawl back beneath the stone from whence you came.

You argued that the meaning of indoctrination never changed, despite evidence to the contrary, and also insisted that since it contains the Latin word, "DOC", which means "to teach", indoctrination will always mean TEACHING, and all forms of teaching will always be INDOCTRINATION.

To cure you of this ignorance, I showed you that Medical Doctor has the word, "DOC" in it, yet has an entirely different meaning, proving two things: 1) The meaning of words is not always tied to their root 2) The meaning of words can change overtime, and they can even come to mean the opposite of what they used to mean. That definitively disproves your claim that every word that contains "DOC", must involve TEACHING.

However, instead of admitting your error [admitting that you're wrong DOESN'T KILL neither does it do you any harm, well, unless you have a very fragile ego ], you went and take more stupidity pills, and became more stupid, spewing nonsense like "a doctor is not a person" [Then what is he? A stone] , and pointing out the IRRELEVANT fact that doctors were TAUGHT by TEACHERS. What has that got to do with the meaning of "doctor"? Weren't Engineers TAUGHT by TEACHERS too? Weren't Lawyers taught by teachers too? Do "Lawyer" and "Engineer" contain "DOC"? Never go full retarrd, bruh. Eat an apple a day, for it keeps retardation away. Why do you think Eve was so eager to eat one?

Even after proving how wrong you were, I went further to show you that even though indoctrination involves teaching, ITS DEFINITION GOES BEYOND THAT.

Assassination involves KILLING, but so does execution. However, does that mean assassination and execution are the SAME THING? Of course not! The definition of both GO BEYOND KILLING, the same way the definition of indoctrination GOES BEYOND TEACHING.

ToVictoriaZ:


No, I will knock you back into your pool of stupidity, so that you can go deep down in it and crawl back beneath the stone from whence you came.

You argued that the meaning of indoctrination never changed, despite evidence to the contrary, and also insisted that since it contains the Latin word, "DOC", which means "to teach", indoctrination will always mean TEACHING, and all forms of teaching will always be INDOCTRINATION.

To cure you of this ignorance, I showed you that Medical Doctor has the word, "DOC" in it, yet has an entirely different meaning, proving two things: 1) The meaning of words is not always tied to their root 2) The meaning of words can change overtime, and they can even come to mean the opposite of what they used to mean. That definitively disproves your claim that every word that contains "DOC", must involve TEACHING.

However, instead of admitting your error [admitting that you're wrong DOESN'T KILL neither does it do you any harm, well, unless you have a very fragile ego ], you went and take more stupidity pills, and became more stupid, spewing nonsense like "a doctor is not a person" [Then what is he? A stone] , and pointing out the IRRELEVANT fact that doctors were TAUGHT by TEACHERS. What has that got to do with the meaning of "doctor"? Weren't Engineers TAUGHT by TEACHERS too? Weren't Lawyers taught by teachers too? Do "Lawyer" and "Engineer" contain "DOC"? Never go full retarrd, bruh. Eat an apple a day, for it keeps retardation away. Why do you think Eve was so eager to eat one?

Even after proving how wrong you were, I went further to show you that even though indoctrination involves teaching, ITS DEFINITION GOES BEYOND THAT.

Assassination involves KILLING, but so does execution. However, does that mean assassination and execution are the SAME THING? Of course not! The definition of both GO BEYOND KILLING, the same way the definition of indoctrination GOES BEYOND TEACHING.

thinking the present meaning of a word must be its original meaning us called Etymological Fallacy The etymological fallacy is a genetic fallacy that holds that the present-day meaning of a word or phrase should necessarily be similar to its historical meaning

there are various examples of words today that meant something slightly different originally and some that actually contradicts its original meaning

The word hound originally simply meant "dog" in general. This usage is now archaic or poetic only, and hound now almost exclusively refers to dogs bred for hunting in particular.

The meaning of a word may change to connote higher status, as when knight , originally "servant" like German Knecht , came to mean "military knight" and subsequently "someone of high rank".

Conversely, the word knave originally meant "boy" (as the equivalent German Knabe ) and only gradually acquired its meaning of "person of low, despicable character".

The word "Awful" originally meant "Awe-inspring" and "Full of awe" but now means something bad

The word "Moody" originally meant "Courageous" but now means something totally different

The word "Bully" actually originated from Dutch word "Boele" which actually means "Lover"

The word lady derives from Old English hlæf-dige ("loaf-digger; kneader of bread" ), and lord from hlafweard ("loaf-ward; ensurer, provider of bread" ). No connection with bread is retained in the current meaning of either word.

Dalam0n:
Science can be used to buttress witch religious belief that has universal acceptance?

There are some religious beliefs about a finite universe and all scientific evidence lends credence to that . There are some religious beliefs about intelligent design and we through science we discovered the complexity of nature Eg cell , dna , genetics etc all points to an intelligent source . Our knowledge of mathematics (There are mathematical truths ) points to the existence of a mind behind the universe since mathematical objects are mind-dependent and our universe is mathematically structured . If you believe reason is a source of knowledge , we have through reason able to justify religious beliefs . We have archaeology to verify events and characters in religious books . Again , what are you saying

butterflyl1on:
You can say that again

When I began calling him Jumbo Dumbo he so loved it and even said he prefers I call him JUMBO JACK and he said it with such gusto.

We can't expect anything less

Richirich713:
Doing great bro, just been busy with studies, have loads of assignments to complete and will be writing exams soon.

Damn , Ive been there Thank God Im out . Lol. Jokes aside , I wish you the best in your exams man

Great to see u back refuting the the same old arguments against Catholicism, I mean Christianity.

Nice one

KingEbukasBlog:
There are some religious beliefs about a finite universe and all scientific evidence lends credence to that . There are some religious beliefs about intelligent design and we through science we discovered the complexity of nature Eg cell , dna , genetics etc all points to an intelligent source . Our knowledge of mathematics (There are mathematical truths ) points to the existence of a mind behind the universe since mathematical objects are mind-dependent and our universe is mathematically structured . If you believe reason is a source of knowledge , we have through reason able to justify religious beliefs . We have archaeology to verify events and characters in religious books . Again , what are you saying

Where is the scientific consensus that shows that the universe is finite? Will there ever be a time when the universe will cease to exist and there will be nothing?

Where is the universal scientific consensus on intelligent design?


Again which religious claim has scientific backing that has universal acceptance ? You are yet to name any.

ToVictoriaZ:


No, I will knock you back into your pool of stupidity, so that you can go deep down in it and crawl back beneath the stone from whence you came.

You argued that the meaning of indoctrination never changed, despite evidence to the contrary, and also insisted that since it contains the Latin word, "DOC", which means "to teach", indoctrination will always mean TEACHING, and all forms of teaching will always be INDOCTRINATION.

To cure you of this ignorance, I showed you that Medical Doctor has the word, "DOC" in it, yet has an entirely different meaning, proving two things: 1) The meaning of words is not always tied to their root 2) The meaning of words can change overtime, and they can even come to mean the opposite of what they used to mean. That definitively disproves your claim that every word that contains "DOC", must involve TEACHING.

However, instead of admitting your error [admitting that you're wrong DOESN'T KILL neither does it do you any harm, well, unless you have a very fragile ego ], you went and take more stupidity pills, and became more stupid, spewing nonsense like "a doctor is not a person" [Then what is he? A stone] , and pointing out the IRRELEVANT fact that doctors were TAUGHT by TEACHERS. What has that got to do with the meaning of "doctor"? Weren't Engineers TAUGHT by TEACHERS too? Weren't Lawyers taught by teachers too? Do "Lawyer" and "Engineer" contain "DOC"? Never go full retarrd, bruh. Eat an apple a day, for it keeps retardation away. Why do you think Eve was so eager to eat one?

Even after proving how wrong you were, I went further to show you that even though indoctrination involves teaching, ITS DEFINITION GOES BEYOND THAT.

Assassination involves KILLING, but so does execution. However, does that mean assassination and execution are the SAME THING? Of course not! The definition of both GO BEYOND KILLING, the same way the definition of indoctrination GOES BEYOND TEACHING.

Na wa o. What manner of foolishness is this please?

I never and have never focused on any word which was not DERIVED from the Latin word DOC or DOCERE.

how then is it that you are seeing what I never said? I am not talking about Lawyers or engineers or any other profession whose root word was not gotten from DOC.

I even said this earlier

They should also go through the words that came from DOC its Latin source here and see how they are all linked to TEACHING


">">http://wordinfo.info/unit/660/ip:4/i

Why are you deliberately trying to say what I NEVER said?

If you do not understand what ROOT SOURCE means then ask.

Dalam0n:
Where is the scientific consensus that shows that the universe is finite? Will there ever be a time when the universe will cease to exist and there will be nothing?

Where is the universal scientific consensus on intelligent design?


Again which religious claim has scientific backing that has universal acceptance ? You are yet to name any.

Not all scientific truths are universally accepted - yu do realize that you agreed to this .

KingEbukasBlog:
Not all scientific truths are universally accepted - yu do realize that you agreed to this .

Sure, but some are . Compared that to religuon that has none at all. NO religious truth is universally accepted.

Dalam0n:
Sure, but some are . Compared that to religuon that has none at all. NO religious truth is universally accepted.

Religion agrees that man is a moral agent and morality in humanity is a universally accepted truth . Can I rest now ?

KingEbukasBlog:
Religion agrees that man is a moral agent and morality in humanity is a universally accepted truth . Can I rest now ?

butterflyl1on:

You save the best for the last

KingEbukasBlog:
You save the best for the last

Yup!

You just have to love how they NEVER SEE certain things coming when they make some emphatic statements like NO RELIGIOUS TRUTH IS ACCEPTED WORLDWIDE.

it just makes my laughter stronger


This is what I observed about these Atheitards whenever anyone debates them. When they discover they are losing they now try to gain some leverage by resorting to insults like STUPID, NONSENSE, LIAR, MO/RON, BRAINLESS MOFO , etc. When they do that, just know that they have lost and they know it and are simply now reacting to their loss in anger.

KingEbukasBlog:
Religion agrees that man is a moral agent and morality in humanity is a universally accepted truth . Can I rest now ?

Man being a moral agent isn't a religious claim but a philosophical one.

butterflyl1on:
Na wa o. What manner of foolishness is this please?

I never and have never focused on any word which was not DERIVED from the Latin word DOC or DOCERE.

how then is it that you are seeing what I never said? I am not talking about Lawyers or engineers or any other profession whose root word was not gotten from DOC.

I even said this earlier



Why are you deliberately trying to say what I NEVER said?

If you do not understand what ROOT SOURCE means then ask.

My point morphed into a butterfly and flew over your head.

Did YOU just call ME foolish? Despite being an insult to human intelligence? You should have come as a turtle instead!

Waste of time.

butterflyl1on:
Yup!

You just have to love how they NEVER SEE certain things coming when they make some emphatic statements like NO RELIGIOUS TRUTH IS ACCEPTED WORLDWIDE.

it just makes my laughter stronger

Lol . I just dey tear laugh here right now . I was holding it for long baiting him slowly , expecting him to repeat the statement and he fell into the trap

They never see things coming because of their limited perspective and emotions boiling within that cloud their judgement . The hatred for God and religion have always led to their downfall .

Dalam0n:
Man being a moral agent isn't a religious claim but a philosophical one.

Religion came before philosophy . Religion came as man became a moral agent . Morality has been a part of religious doctrines since ab initio mundi

hopefulLandlord:
let me say this for the umpteenth time, Evolution has NOTHING to do with atheism, NOTHING!

everything I'm taught in university I can go on my own journey to find out if its true or not, in fact I'm encouraged to do that in my field; doesn't sound like what indoctrinators would allow, does it?

when it comes to religion however, are children told to go on their personal journey and question the tenets of their religion?

BTW, you still haven't told us how atheism is being indoctrinated

So why call yourself an Athiest , what makes you an Athiest ?

You said your field makes you think outside the box right ? May I ask what field and let's see if you actually think outside the box

I'm not trying to attack you btw

KingEbukasBlog:
Religion came before philosophy . Religion came as man became a moral agent . Morality has been a part of religious doctrines since ab initio mundi

The claim that man is a moral agent isn't a religious one but a philosophical one so fail. Morality being part of belief is not the same as the philosophical claim that man is a moral agent. Saying that man is a.moral agent is not a religious claim but a philosophical one.

KingEbukasBlog:
Lol . I just dey tear laugh here right now . I was holding it for long baiting him slowly , expecting him to repeat the statement and he fell into the trap

They never see things coming because of their limited perspective and emotions boiling within that cloud their judgement . The hatred for God and religion have always led to their downfall .

This is what I observed about these Atheitards whenever anyone debates them. When they discover they are losing they now try to gain some leverage by resorting to insults like STUPID, NONSENSE, LIAR, MO/RON, BRAINLESS MOFO , etc. When they do that, just know that they have lost and they know it and are simply now reacting to their loss in anger.

butterflyl1on:
You can say that again

When I began calling him Jumbo Dumbo he so loved it and even said he prefers I call him JUMBO JACK and he said it with such gusto.

Jack Dumbo actually.

Dalam0n:
The claim that man is a moral agent isn't a religious one but a philosophical one so fail. Morality being part of belief is not the same as the philosophical claim that man is a moral agent. Saying that man is a.moral agent is not a religious claim but a philosophical one.

Morality- the sense of right and wrong- was defined by moral laws and rules set forth by different gods in religion (a God-given ability ) . Its a common religious belief that man's morality points towards the existence of God and God is a moral law giver as an epitome for moral goodness . Man being moral has been dealt with from a religious perspective before philosophy came on board . Philosophy only scrutinizes the moral principles of a culture or religion or whatever in a branch called Ethics .

JackBizzle:
Jack Dumbo actually.

Kingebukasblog do you see it?

The guy is a submissive perve. He derives some insane pleasure through humiliation.

KingEbukasBlog:
Morality- the sense of right and wrong- was defined by moral laws and rules set forth by different gods in religion (a God-given ability ) . Its a common religious belief that man's morality points towards the existence of God and God is a moral law giver as an epitome for moral goodness . Man being moral has been dealt with from a religious perspective before philosophy came on board . Philosophy only scrutinizes the moral principles of a culture or religion or whatever in a branch called Ethics .

Again I repeat the claim that man is a moral agent is a philosophical one.

It is NOT true that all religions believe that morality points towards the existence of God because there are some religions that lack a God figure. So another fail.

The claim that morality points to the existence of God is not universally accepted by all religions because some religions lack a God figure. You've failed.

ifenes:
So why call yourself an Athiest , what makes you an Athiest ?

You said your field makes you think outside the box right ? May I ask what field and let's see if you actually think outside the box

I'm not trying to attack you btw

I'm a building technologist

and I have no idea how you mean by your first question, are you saying any atheist that doesn't accept evolution is not really an atheist or what?

Dalam0n:
Again I repeat the claim that man is a moral agent is a philosophical one.

It is NOT true that all religions believe that morality points towards the existence of God because there are some religions that lack a God figure. So another fail.

The claim that morality points to the existence of God is not universally accepted by all religions because some religions lack a God figure. You've failed.

Of course there are religions that are non-theistic who have no God figure as their reason or source of morality but this does not change the fact morality has been from a religious standpoint not a philosophical one since the beginning of human existence .

In fact , morality from a non-theistic religious standpoint stemmed from an already existing theistic religious standpoint as we can see in non-theistic religions like Buddhism , Confucianism etc aeons after theistic religions .

You have made no reason , not even one just an empty claim that man being a moral agent is a philosophical one

butterflyl1on:
Kingebukasblog do you see it?

The guy is a submissive perve. He derives some insane pleasure through humiliation.

He even corrected you . Chai . It proves that he is not really seeking truth from his threads , its just a way of satisfying his perverse pleasures of being humiliated and made inferior .