Welcome to Gaia! ::

Let me just send the conversation in text. Part of the debate can be found on this youtube video (don't ask why we chose to debate on a non-religious video)

He started off by saying stuff about how religious people don't have a grip on reality, etc. The conversation went as follows:

Me: So you're saying all religious people don't have a grip on reality? We all have opinions and I will not get into an argument...but I know many religious people and they aren't crazy or anything (some are, i'll admit). They have logical and emotional reasons for believing in something. And if I'm wrong then I'm wrong. But the same goes for you. Have a nice day.

Him: Having an imaginary friend passed the age of 6 is just ******** up. Humans are naive, they'll buy into anything very fast and possess an incredibly scary lack of curiosity about the world they live in, they fear what they don't understand and are very comfortable creatures. Randomly picking an answer to explain the natural world, instead of thinking & doing research. Humans think they're the s**t but evolution ******** that over for them, so of course they'll fight tooth and nail against it.

Me: What you just said is a general statement about people who believe in God..I've met theologists and teachers who have done a lot of research and had reasonings before they believed. You are right to an extent, some people accept things blindly without giving it thought...but for me and many others we have reasons that can't all be explained in words. If you want to message me about it, feel free. I might not respond right away because i share a computer.

someone else on the youtube video said to me: you can't put god and research in the same sentence. theology.. the science of god? synonymous with the science of santa claus of you ask me.

He proceeded to send me this message on youtube:
"reasoning before they believed" That killed me LMAO. It's true, as House eloquently put it "Rational arguments don't usually work on religious people. Otherwise there wouldn't BE religious people." Of course there are a lot of smart religious people. I guess it's just fear or the lack of will or something else that prevents them from recognizing scientific fact. I've seen it many times over, people who are too afraid to see the truth, out of some fear. Usually in religious communities anyone who's different is singled out. Most people just don't know what to believe or think, so they go after the herd which is a very, very stupid thing to do. Because humans in groups are infinitely stupid for some reason. Take US politicians for example. Not ONE will admit that he or she is an atheist or agnostic, because that would be suicide, because America is all about religious and 'moral' values. Kind of ironic, cause America was founded as a Secular state. Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin and many others would be spinning in their graves if they knew the State of the Union, pardon the pun.

I have NO IDEA what to say to this...really. I know a bit about evolution but I'm not very educated on that topic. Any suggestions on what I should say? I can understand where he's coming from but...i don't know what to say back.

With me, I am terrible at arguments. Especially in person, because by the time I know what to say, the person is already gone. lol I guess I just won't say anything

well, the fact that he is acting like all religions equals belief in God shows his level of understanding of theology/religions/research, so ignore the ********. Him and the guy who said religion and research dont belong together just seem like the type of anti-theists that are common place among people who quit being christians cause their parents made them go to church or their dog got hit by a car. After all, what kind of b*****d God would let a dog get hit by a car?

I can be a die-hard bickerer, lol. But only if it suits me. 3nodding

Sounds like this guy was mad. Unfortunately, it doesn't look like much of a discussion. He's putting a lot of generic labels out there on things that have an extremely broad spuctrum.

I can see where he's coming from. And to a certain extent, I support some of his views, but he's generalizing a lot of not so general stuff.

If you really want to talk with this guy further (seeing as how he's a tad blinded by his anger or whatnot) you might try appealing to his anger and source where his issues actually are. Some people open up better at that point where discussion can take place. At present it looks like he's fighting the issue over a wall he's built up to keep from adressing certain issues. Another way might be to inquire about the things he's said with interest. This can be a perilous road, but again, assuming you want to get somewhere with this, if he sees you're interested in what he has to say, he may elaborate. Depending on how he reacts to positive input, you could feed him information from your standpoint along the way.

At the very least, if he's considerate, he just might own up to you being the exception to his rules, and that may later provoke the possibility in his mind that some of his general perception may be off.