Comments by "Debany Doombringer" (@debanydoombringer1385) on "The Spectator" channel.

  1. It's not a disagreement. It's an intentional changing of the definition to disrupt communication and confuse regular people. It's double speak.
    3
  2. I guess it depends on where you were. I was educated on how to think and encouraged to interpret things myself. I will say I had some college professors who didn't believe in that. For instance my literature teacher tried to tell us Romeo and Juliet was a story about not disobeying your parents. If we answered differently or tried to correct her our grades would be lowered. I don't think anyone left that class believing that to be the case however.
    1
  3.  @merbst  You didn't watch the video.
    1
  4. Religion came to be in conjunction with human evolution from being purely driven by instinct into questioning the world around us. It goes hand in hand with our development of logical thinking. It's evidenced in seeing some apes now building what appear to be small monuments and partaking in some form of ceremony in conjunction with it. We know that even Neanderthals engaged in ritual burials. Whether atheist like or not religion is required for civilization and society to function properly. It is the foundation of morality which sets enforceable boundaries within a society. It's because early humans noticed when certain things occurred it created bad results. They believed they were being punished for those actions and thus morality was born. As we continued to evolve and our ability to reason increased we began to understand that the rain didn't come because we didn't make enough sacrifices, but it didn't come due to natural occurring forces at work in nature. Then our religion evolved to encompass more about the impact certain actions had upon society as a whole. New morals were created to deal with our new level of understanding. The mistake is believing our level of understanding has dramatically increased since then. It has not. Science still has not answered the questions religion answers. Why am I here, what is my purpose. As much as atheists like to claim they don't need a God to be moral, they fail to understand that the reason they have the morals they do is because they come from the prominent religion the society they were raised in held. Logic can't dictate why murder is wrong. The entire concept of it being murder stems from religion. Those morals from that religion became law. Those laws benefited society because society shared a common core religious belief system. The other issue with believing a society can be based on pure logic comes from not fully understanding the lack of intelligence by the general population. The majority of any population does not have the intelligence or inclination to spend hours analyzing everything around them to try to determine if they're being purely logical. Frankly it's a ridiculous demand to be made upon them and looking down on and belittling people who aren't capable or interested is just more proof most don't have the morality or empathy they claim they don't need a religion to achieve. Edit: Science is limited by the technology available to observe the world around us. So many things believed to be factual by our previous level of observation have been proven later to be untrue. This new demand that what's "true" be the end all doesn't recognize that what's true today could easily be proven false in a new experiment tomorrow. It doesn't acknowledge there's a limit to our own current understanding. That's the gap religion fills. Destroying religion doesn't get rid of the gap, it just exposes it. It's that gap that wokeness fills. It's that gap that allows the idea that truth is subjective to thrive because that preys on the fact the truth can change with more research. It's that gap that allowed research to be coopted because research is now the key to "truth" and societal morality.
    1
  5. I've seen that a lot with the those who claim they don't need God to be moral. They fail to understand their morals come from the society they were raised in and that's a Christian one. I have seen a resurgence in religion from young people as this has continued. Apparently they prefer Latin services and the more ceremonial driven sects of Christianity.
    1
  6.  @APandBS  No that's not an expected response from a professors. What previous intent behind that question are you referring to? Did you attend the same college and courses to know that question had been asked before with ill intent? Considering that particular word is considered a slur by many it absolutely makes sense why the use of it would be questioned. It also has a wide range of uses beyond sexuality or identity depending on the age of the person using it (which is part of the problem). Changing the meaning of words is what was being described in the section on it being introduced into non English speaking countries. It's how this ideology weasels it's way in. It subverts current definitions to confuse communication.
    1