Comically enough it is that you also did only come with assertions.
I just want to point out you made no comment whatsoever to any of my actual facts.
Also, the correlation between better-ness and secularism is the opposite. Rich people tend to trust their wealth, not God.
Christianity created Europe, Europe made everything the world loves today, Europe became rich and Europe left God.
I do not believe we should base our nations on religion, but the underlying philosophy of Christianity has been so positive, that there is almost no similarities between a secular person and a Christian when it comes to nonreligious matters - secularism adopted the Christian values, just as the world did the human rights.
Tell me, what are the richest, most free, least oppressive, most scientifically advanced and most insistent on following the human rights?
The middle east? India? Asia, Afrika? Anywhere without a Christian presence or influence?
It was Europe and the countries where Europeans settled. This is a basic fact, and no rhetoric of yours can unsettle this.
Now, should we be racist like they were while conquering the globe? Are Europeans better than all other people?
NO OF COURSE NOT!!!
What was the difference then? Colonialism? Every continent had its own empires all of the time!
The difference was these beliefs:
- All men are created equal and with certain inalienable rights
- In the eyes of God, "There is no difference between slave or free, man or woman, greek or jew, they are all equal" as Paul claimed
- The universe is not a spirit, god, supernatural, unknowable, irrational, determined or a soul. The universe is ours to administrate and explore
You are bullying me for no reason:
it meas that I give a shit about people, unlike you, who seem to have no problem with the Nazis except for them "Not loving god"
I used it to show that the worst ideology in history was created by a hater, not lover, of God.
Who also hated God and religion? Stalin, Mao and co (co as in communism)
You are misinterpreting my arguments.
I never claimed that the Bible should be the law, you are confusing "stability" with "absolute"
My argument is not that the moral specifically presented in the Bible should be chosen.
I claim that we should make an objective moral code, and not change it every single opportunity we get.
People get mad when morality is changed, they riot, they engage in activities to stop the rapid changes, this destroys stability, and is bad even from the perspective of someone that did not have any moral code.
Also, why are you attacking the church?
Listen, it might be hard to realise it, but NOBODY in the dark ages had a "good" or "not suppressive" regime.
Tell me about a single part of the world were gay people were not "oppressed", were people could live better lives than in oppressive Europe.
Life was awful, but the church was the first entity in history know to be a constant force that enforced "morality" (though I admit their morality is far inferior to the one we have in the present, post-catholic west)
Tell me, WHO actually created human rights?
I know you are not going to answer any of my questions, just throw a bunch of accusations at me.
I genuinely want to know the truth, and trash-talking me wont help you convert me to the light side of the force