I just read the News: Anonymous Declares War On Religion, Attacks Church Sites, Calls religion a sickness to this world at: http://www.webpronews.com/anonymous-dec … on-2012-03
What is your opinion?
As an atheist I can't agree with them considering the fact that using less logical ways of getting rid of religion. As atheists we must come together to understand everyone's choices and thoughts and learn to live together more so then just attacking one another.
As a Christian, thank you for this response. I don't think people should attack people on one side or the other. I do think that there should be discussion and even debate. I think it is totally fine to disagree and be passionate about issues. But why attack the person? Two people can strongly disagree in matters of ideas, thoughts, actions, etc. and still retain a healthy respect for the other's right to choose.
I think the issues become complex when one's free will infringes on another's. For example, Atheists may not want their children learning about God in school--just as people of faith may not want their children learning anti-God concepts in school. What's the best answer? I don't know. But if people can respect one another and dialogue to find solutions, that would be much better than the insults and attacks and fighting--where does that get anybody?
It's about time... If they can attack the beliefs and lives of others, are not the few justified in doing the same? Though I think sinking to that level openly, is a form of savagery in it's own right. But we are petty creatures and the tit for tat B.S. is common among all of us.
Anonymous is a group of peole who were previously insignificant dweebs, but now that there is an internet that the dweebs can hide behind and feign courage and bravery, they like to make trouble for the sake of pretending that now, they matter. How anyone can claim they believe in freedom while simultaneously working to deny freedom to others is baffeling. To make the claim that religions "attack the the beliefs and lives of others," so therefore it is okay to destroy them because of a disagreement is tyranny, not opposition to tyranny. Religions today aren't trying to persecute others. It is a bit disingenious to use 600+ year old history to justify an attack today. Use todays reality and you can't justify the actions. That is why recent history demonstrates the greatest oppression is perpetrated by those political groups and governments most opposed to religious freedom. All people should be free to disagree and criticize. No person should be free to pass judgement and shut up the opposition. Again, Anonymous are cowards and obviously not strong enough or articulate enough to disagree, but are weak-minded enough to support and become yet another socialist tyrant.
I don't agree with Anonymous' tactics of attacking websites and servers, regardless of whether they are Christian sites or Sony. They do more harm to themselves than anything else.
BTW, could you please leave out the giant question mark in your threads? It's very annoying and rather pointless.
Perhaps they shouldn't have chosen the one aspect of humanity that has survived since man first walked the Earth. There's nothing physical about it to attack.
Christianity hasn't been around since man started walking the earth.
Gospel of John: 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning.
Hmmm. I'd have to disagree with you there. But I was referring to religion in general, not Christianity, as stated in the OP.
Don't quote the bible to me. Science and History dictates Christianity to not exist until Jesus came around preaching to the masses, that being said, Mankind didn't invent religion until they became intelligent enough to understand there surroundings as is. Religion itself is false anyhow, Science has already denounced a large chunk of christian teachings as false and while you huddle in the churches and pray to the bearded man in the sky, scientists and logical men and women are making this world a better place unlike the holy rollers.
What exactly does that mean, "Don't quote the Bible to me?" I'll do as I please on these forums, thank you very much.
If I were preaching to you or trying to convert you, perhaps you'd have a right to protest what I wrote. You have no right to protest what I actually did write.
The bible has no foothold in the realm of reality and fact. thus, you are wrong.
Fine. But please respect my right, and the rights of fellow religious persons to use our rule books as references on these forums when our beliefs are attacked or challenged. Because we already reserve that right. Right?
Touche and I apologize if I offended you but you must understand as an atheist, what the bible says has no meaning to me. That being said, I do respect your choice as a Christian.
I do understand your stance toward Christianity, and I respect it. Thanks for understanding and respecting mine.
My issue is with any group attempting to disrupt freedom of religion, not you, of course.
And I agree, we shouldn't attack others based on their religious beliefs. sitting down and having a reasonable discussion will do just fine.
Awesome point you made with that Scripture.
Thank you. You and I know scriptures and biblical texts are rules and guidelines for believers. I see no benefit to anyone if people were successful in deterring others from using scripture as references for decisions or answers we've come to. And now I guess I'll be reading the religion topics a little more often, lest a bully come along that needs correction.
Matthew 5:11 says that Christians are blessed when other people persecute them for his name's sake. So while Anonymous thinks that they are hurting these Christians, they are only providing them with eternal rewards instead.
There is not really much they can do to harm Christians. If they say bad things about them or try to destroy their web sites or property, they are only providing them with heavenly blessings. If they go to their houses and shoot them in the head, they're only changing their address. Either way, Christians win.
I don't know how I feel about this. No one was harmed, and it's very funny they posted a video of Richard Dawkins that continually plays when anyone goes to the Church websites. However, will it achieve the impact they want? Will it eradicate religion, or just give right-wing nutjob pastors a chance to talk about how ''satan'' is attacking and the end is near?
For once I actually support the actions of Anonymous.
Yes, Christians should only be attacked on a personal level. And as a group.
But attacking their websites is going to far! Anonymous needs to follow the example of ATM and simply post online constantly that all religious people are delusional and stupid.
Misguided, not stupid. Delusional? Possibly, but we all have delusions to some degree. There is the delusion of self, graniose delusions and I could go on forever. We're all nut's, we just see ourselve's as normal. Defining normal by human standards is near impossible...
Or, they could act like believers and post lies.
Why on earth do the beliefs of others make you so mad? Anger is a secondary eotion. What is the source for you? Fear? Confusion? Can't help but wonder
Anonymous is probably a bunch of pubescent nerds sitting in their parent’s basement threatening the world.
They are a bunch of cyber terrorists who should be caught, spanked, and sent to bed without their pimple medication
(unless they are reading this post, in which case I say keep up the good work guys.. with you 100%!!)
Nothing new. Marxists are always against religion. They want to replace the "Opiate of the People" with their version of the state.
that's not the JFK motorcade in Dallas, is it??
I always thought Jackie was taller
Oh yes, Marxists focus entirely on religion and nothing else.
They definitely spend an inordinate amount of their time and effort on feeble attempts to discredit honest faith.
No, the don't, they spend a lot of time on so many other avenues of socialist and communist ideals that are far more important than faith.
You reap what you sow
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/03/02 … cktivists/
We do not forgive. We do not forget!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKPw2Te5 … re=related
It was kind of amusing when it was just Scientology they were attacking.
'Course, I don't view Scientology as a real religion. Even if you think that the founders of all religions were fiction authors you've got to admit, Scientology is fairly unique in that its founder actually wrote "fiction author" on his tax returns.
See this is where my morals and my personality clash...
Morally, I know that interfering in another's right to believe what their faith dictates is wrong.
Personally, I find it funny as hell.
I think the conflict comes from an overdeveloped belief in karma (the philosophical kind, not the religious kind). Christians have been attempting to convert the masses by any means necessary for ages...
Their sites have now been forcefully converted to atheism...
There's something poetic about that... even if it is wrong. So yes, I'm laughing...even though I'll be very contrite about it later. I'll ask for strength to align my values and my sense of irony next time I pray.
Io credo che ognuno e' libero di professare la propria religione e di credere nel proprio Dio. Sono sicuro che ci sia qualcosa di piu' grande degli uomini.
I believe that each and' free to profess his/her own religion and to believe in his/her own God. I am sure that there am more something' great of the men.
Usually I fully support Anonymous, but this is a bit much.
We all need to respect each other. That goes for Christians and Atheists both. I'm an Atheist, by the way, in case that has any significance to anything.
It's just a title used to refer to belief. Atheist, religious, spiritualist, witness, whatever. It's just a title used to fit in with a group of like minded individuals, it's a social mask. We put on the face and act the part, in the end it's all about communication with others of the species.
Here's the truth. They are the words of Earnest.
Anonymous is like any liberal/commie organization, they want to silence opposition. Nothing liberal or tolerant about them at all.
by G. Diane Nelson Trotter 5 years ago
Why can't people on Hubpages disagree without attacking others?Opposing positions can lead to a better understanding. Personal attacks say a lot about the commenters' inability to discuss a matter intelligently.
by Mmargie1966 6 years ago
I am a Christian, and an American. I believe in the freedom to believe in anything you choose to (or not). What I don't understand is why Christianity is under attack.I don't necessarily believe in everything the "Church" teaches, but I don't bash other religions, and frankly,...
by Elizabeth 5 years ago
In debates, what do you think constitutes a personal attack?With debates spanning the full spectrum from civilized and polite discussions to blatant screaming and name calling, I've noticed that a lot of people are quick to claim that they're being attacked, when the other party has done nothing of...
by Holle Abee 7 years ago
on Romney for the PAC attacks. Paul attacked Romney, too, but Newt doesn't feel threatened by Paul. Wake up, Newt! Paul has more honesty, integrity, and loyal supporters than you'll EVER have!Newt needs to go away. Who wants a bitter, angry, attack dog in the WH?? And if he thought the attacks from...
by lykurdwn 8 years ago
value 1917 newspaper front page us declares war on germany
by Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years ago
Why do some people insist on making attacks, even personally attacking others for postingposting questions &/or answers because such questions &/or answers are different from, even opposite to theirs? Why do some people have the audacity to cyberstalk those who they disagree...
Copyright © 2019 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|