The call me Fearless...

[Lon]

People can fully persuade themselves to believe in anything, that doesn't make it true.

Yes, but that doesn't make them false either.

And frankly claims of the holy spirit I think are nothing more than a figment of human imagination.

(and I'll repeat this) too jaded!

Prayers being answered or not is not a much a matter of coincidence as it is a matter of confirmation bias.

You'll have to tell that to my thousands of unique/specific answers to very specific prayers. Either there is a God or I'm magic (literally). You won't believe 'me' but they are real. You are too jaded!

We tend to accept as evidence that which confirms our preconceived notions and either ignore or rationalize that which debunks them.

You mean like $148 in my pocket that wasn't there before, no name from who (came in an envelope with just "to God be the Glory") and never mentioned but to God in silent prayer?
Go ahead. I'd like to see you debunk this opcorn:

Not only that, but time and again science has demonstrated that while prayer may have some beneficent effects on psychology, it has no tangible effect on outcome, and furthermore meditation without the invocation of a supernatural being has the same effect as prayer.

There are plenty of ones that aren't demonstrative. The problem is this: "Miracle" means it isn't scientifically 'repeatable' or it'd not be the definition of a miracle in the first place. There are plenty of reports. We had a man in Tacoma with debilitating (wheel chair) Multiple Sclerosis. He no longer has it. There were doctors reports at the time. Ask a few more doctors or nurses in hospitals if they believe prayer works. My sister works in one and says "definitely."

Was the blind man the recipient of eye surgery? If not, how many documented cases of this can you provide (that aren't the result of a charlatan faith healing preacher)?

Too jaded. I've had more than 1 chair fall out from under me but I still trust chairs near 100% Wouldn't "one" be a sufficient answer?

 

[Fearlessly Express]

Have you an iron will?

It depends on the subject.

My opinions do change with new information though.

Yes, but that doesn't make them false either.


(and I'll repeat this) too jaded!

You'll have to tell that to my thousands of unique/specific answers to very specific prayers. Either there is a God or I'm magic (literally). You won't believe 'me' but they are real. You are too jaded!

You mean like $148 in my pocket that wasn't there before, no name from who (came in an envelope with just "to God be the Glory") and never mentioned but to God in silent prayer?
Go ahead. I'd like to see you debunk this opcorn:

There are plenty of ones that aren't demonstrative. The problem is this: "Miracle" means it isn't scientifically 'repeatable' or it'd not be the definition of a miracle in the first place. There are plenty of reports. We had a man in Tacoma with debilitating (wheel chair) Multiple Sclerosis. He no longer has it. There were doctors reports at the time. Ask a few more doctors or nurses in hospitals if they believe prayer works. My sister works in one and says "definitely."


Too jaded. I've had more than 1 chair fall out from under me but I still trust chairs near 100% Wouldn't "one" be a sufficient answer?

Anecdotal evidence aside, and aside from the fact that even debilitating illness can go into remission, your accusation of me being jaded is based upon what exactly?

The fact that I am skeptical? It has nothing to do with being jaded. I have not been harmed by religion personally.

I do, however, see the harms that have been done historically in the name of one religion or another. And my views are not based upon how I feel in any case. My opinion is based upon logical evaluation of the available evidence and critical inquiry as to what I believe and why I believe it.

Frankly, for me at least I see no rationale justification for faith, appeal to emotion aside.

 

[Town Heretic]

Theology exists whether or not god does, and has an impact on the real world. You need look no further than the New York skyline for proof of that.

Two relatively quick points (I meant to be in bed already and have a two year old to entertain in the morning) and I'll leave you alone for the night.

First, I hope you aren't the sort who is so invested in a quiet or not so disdain/anger regarding the idea of God that you can't bring yourself to use the proper noun. It's a thing I've noted often in discussing things with anti-theists, however initially presented. I've noticed you do that a couple of times already. It's one thing to discuss the notion of a god and another to speak to the idea of God in a singular sense.

Second, in noting the impact of religion why is it that instead of the marked charitable contributions to those in desperate need around the world or the benefit to those within the various faiths as they go about their lives you choose an act of perversion within a faith that mostly rejects that particular? In light of that you can perhaps understand the reservation in my initial question.

Frankly I don't think that I would be able to do so even if I tried in much the same way I doubt any of you will change my mind, but I do enjoy debating the points and hearing what others have to say on the subject. I enjoy good conversation, and theology interests me on a very personal level.

I think you're confusing the tendency of some to use any credo as a means to power and to exercise a depraved lust for its more destructive application. You don't need religion for that. You could look to the millions upon millions that Stalin or Pol Pot or Mao interred in their native soil, without a whisper of faith outside of whatever they invested in themselves.

If I am able to undermine someone's faith, then I would say that their faith was not very strong to begin with and that would not be my fault, but again I doubt it will happen and it is not why I am here I assure you.

I agree to the former and am hopeful as to the latter.

No, I wasn't abused and I am not jaded. I became an atheist through introspection and critical inquiry of myself, what I believe, and why?

Could make for an interesting conversation then. I had a road to Damascus conversion, though I'm a rationalist at heart and find my faith at all points defensible by that faculty.

One of the pivotal things that swayed my doubt is having read the bible itself from cover to cover on numerous occasions. Ah, yes, the old nature vs. nurture argument. It has always been my nature to be critical, and I was able to overcome the nurture. LoLz

You infer that familiarity with the Bible is at the root of your apostasy, coupled with the idea that nurture/conditioning was overcome by critical assessment. Yet you have to (or should) be aware that any number extraordinary minds, renown for that ability haven't had or found your trouble or seen in that process a divorce from either reason or faith.

There would seem to be a problem in that somewhere, wouldn't you say?

Welcome aboard. :e4e:

 

[Tambora]

They call me Fearless

You'll probably pick up a few more names while you're here.

Welcome to TOL.

 

[Fearlessly Express]

Two relatively quick points (I meant to be in bed already and have a two year old to entertain in the morning) and I'll leave you alone for the night.

First, I hope you aren't the sort who is so invested in a quiet or not so disdain/anger regarding the idea of God that you can't bring yourself to use the proper noun. It's a thing I've noted often in discussing things with anti-theists, however initially presented. I've noticed you do that a couple of times already. It's one thing to discuss the notion of a god and another to speak to the idea of God in a singular sense.

Second, in noting the impact of religion why is it that instead of the marked charitable contributions to those in desperate need around the world or the benefit to those within the various faiths as they go about their lives you choose an act of perversion within a faith that mostly rejects that particular? In light of that you can perhaps understand the reservation in my initial question.

I think you're confusing the tendency of some to use any credo as a means to power and to exercise a depraved lust for its more destructive application. You don't need religion for that. You could look to the millions upon millions that Stalin or Pol Pot or Mao interred in their native soil, without a whisper of faith outside of whatever they invested in themselves.


I agree to the former and am hopeful as to the latter.


Could make for an interesting conversation then. I had a road to Damascus conversion, though I'm a rationalist at heart and find my faith at all points defensible by that faculty.


You infer that familiarity with the Bible is at the root of your apostasy, coupled with the idea that nurture/conditioning was overcome by critical assessment. Yet you have to (or should) be aware that any number extraordinary minds, renown for that ability haven't had or found your trouble or seen in that process a divorce from either reason or faith.

There would seem to be a problem in that somewhere, wouldn't you say?

Welcome aboard. :e4e:

I'll only address your final question and say good night to you.

No, I don't see a problem with it provided they keep their faith out of legislation that effects others based upon that faith.

But even beyond this I think that there is a harmful penchant, a predisposition to harm others indelibly and inextricably embedded into the Abrahmic faiths that need be confronted not only by non-believers, but believers also. I think, for example, raising children to believe that they are horrible beings worthy of being tortured forever is an immoral and antiquated, unnecessary, and harmful practice on the outset, and this is before we begin assessing examples of harm such as people being burned alive in Africa right now as a result of Christian fundamentalism fostered by American missionaries.

I have no doubts that people of faith with good intentions are charitable. But I would argue they would be so with or without their faith, and furthermore one cannot honestly assess the good that people do in the name of faith without also addressing the harm done in the same vein.

With that said, I hope you sleep well and I look forward to lively discussion later. Take care.

 

[Fearlessly Express]

You'll probably pick up a few more names while you're here.

Welcome to TOL.

No I won't. If ya'll ban me, I'll go my own merry way content that you don't like free speech where dissenting opinion is allowed, and that would be your failure and not my problem.

I won't sock puppet my way back as I find that childish and stupid. Far be it from me to stay where I am unwelcome!

But thank you for the welcome!!!! We'll see how it plays out.

 

[Lon]

furthermore one cannot honestly assess the good that people do in the name of faith without also addressing the harm done in the same vein.

With that said, I hope you sleep well and I look forward to lively discussion later. Take care.

After we separate faith from fanaticism (fanaticals), then give me that list. I claim there is absolutely no harm being done by christianity and even 'with' our fanaticals (not really supporting our values but wanting to be a part of us) such is negligable in comparison with any other religion or nonreligion.

Frankly, I assert boldy that christianity is the very best thing that has ever happened to any people group and culture.

 

[Fearlessly Express]

After we separate faith from fanaticism (fanaticals), then give me that list. I claim there is absolutely no harm being done by christianity and even 'with' our fanaticals (not really supporting our values but wanting to be a part of us) such is neglegable in comparison with any other religion or nonreligion.

Frankly, I assert boldy that christianity is the very best thing that has ever happened to any people group and culture.

Christianity has a history of violence that continues even today. Take for example African children being murdered as witches. Perhaps Christians do not do as much harm here in the US, but the bible absolutely commands the deaths of witches and primitive people will carry that command out.

And I would argue that there is a certain amount of psychological harm done to people when you raise them as children to believe that they are detestable sinners deserving of being tortured forever.

I would also argue that denying people equal protection under the law based upon what you perceive subjectively as immoral is harmful also.

I could go on and on, but you get the point. And while you might think that Christianity is the best thing to ever happen (while ignoring the fact that it gained its unearned place of prestige at the point of a sword) I would disagree. I would argue that the Constitution and Bill of Rights, based upon secular moral values, is the best thing that ever happened to people, and is a much more worthy document of praise than is the bible.

 

[Tambora]

No I won't. If ya'll ban me, I'll go my own merry way content that you don't like free speech where dissenting opinion is allowed, and that would be your failure and not my problem.

I won't sock puppet my way back as I find that childish and stupid. Far be it from me to stay where I am unwelcome!

But thank you for the welcome!!!! We'll see how it plays out.

I wasn't talking about a sock puppet.

I was talking about you being called other names.
It happens.

 

[Fearlessly Express]

I wasn't talking about a sock puppet.

I was talking about you being called other names.
It happens.

Jaded comes to mind... lol.

I suppose you're right, but I won't let that bother me.

 

[Lon]

Christianity has a history of violence that continues even today. Take for example African children being murdered as witches. Perhaps Christians do not do as much harm here in the US, but the bible absolutely commands the deaths of witches and primitive people will carry that command out.

Did you even read the article? I did. I told you that the exception would be fanaticals. Did you not read how their denomination was telling them to stop? Did you not read that they were shocked that those teachings would go to that extreme? Did you not read that it was a rather small charasmatic denomination that started those from the States? Next time I ask you to list any Christian group barring a small group of fanaticals, please do so. You will find no denomination out there today of any reputable size that will condone this.

And I would argue that there is a certain amount of psychological harm done to people when you raise them as children to believe that they are detestable sinners deserving of being tortured forever.

I know what the Southern Baptists are capable of. I would spearhead any reform in that area against it. Why didn't you write to the SBC about what you were seeing? Why didn't you go to another denomination before leaving God altogether? You still seem rather reactionary but maybe I haven't gotten the whole picture from you? What appropriate steps did you take?

I would also argue that denying people equal protection under the law based upon what you perceive subjectively as immoral is harmful also.

What law? What are you talking about here?

I could go on and on, but you get the point. And while you might think that Christianity is the best thing to ever happen (while ignoring the fact that it gained its unearned place of prestige at the point of a sword) I would disagree. I would argue that the Constitution and Bill of Rights, based upon secular moral values, is the best thing that ever happened to people, and is a much more worthy document of praise than is the bible.

Look: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights..."
When they rebelled against King George, they didn't throw their bibles away :doh: They were all, everyone of them Christians and deists at the very least! Take a trip to Philadelphia or Washington. The amount of bibles of notable government historical figures in museums, verse displays, churches with these same artifacts where they attended, and artistic works depicting Christianity will astound you!

 

[Fearlessly Express]

You will find no denomination out there today of any reputable size that will condone this.

Perhaps so, but so long as the bible commands the deaths of people, the propensity to do so remains irrespective of popular condemnation of the practice, and that is my point.

I know what the Southern Baptists are capable of. I would spearhead any reform in that area against it. Why didn't you write to the SBC about what you were seeing? Why didn't you go to another denomination before leaving God altogether? You still seem rather reactionary but maybe I haven't gotten the whole picture from you? What appropriate steps did you take?

I can only decide for myself what I believe. Beyond that I leave it to others to follow their own conscious.

What law? What are you talking about here?

Take for example the current struggle of the LGBT community to have equal right to marry.

There are a few examples in our history. Prior to the emancipation the bible was used to justify slavery in the south by southern preachers. Interestingly it was the Declaration of Independence that largely lead to the emancipation itself with its "all mean are created equal" proclamation. Speaking of which....

Look: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights..."
When they rebelled against King George, they didn't throw their bibles away :doh: They were all, everyone of them Christians and deists at the very least! Take a trip to Philadelphia or Washington. The amount of bibles of notable government historical figuresin museums, verse displays, and artistic works depicting Christianity will astound you!

First of all the Declaration was NOT a foundation document of law, but this is an aside. Assuming for a moment that their assertion about the endowment by the creator of certain inalienable rights, then would that not mean that we would have enjoyed these rights all along and not had to struggle throughout history against god, the government, and the crown to secure them? I would say that if god does exist, and did in fact endow us with inalienable rights, then the entire declaration itself would have been rendered unnecessary, but reality belies this with historical precedence.

Rights have been endowed by us to each other and as our moral values have evolved we have extended that "god given" equality to more and more people. I'd argue that we endowed ourselves, and the particular religious opinions of our founders are rather irrelevant to the facts of history as it played out.

 

[Totton Linnet]

Theology exists whether or not god does, and has an impact on the real world. You need look no further than the New York skyline for proof of that. Frankly I don't think that I would be able to do so even if I tried in much the same way I doubt any of you will change my mind, but I do enjoy debating the points and hearing what others have to say on the subject. I enjoy good conversation, and theology interests me on a very personal level.

If I am able to undermine someone's faith, then I would say that their faith was not very strong to begin with and that would not be my fault, but again I doubt it will happen and it is not why I am here I assure you.



No, I wasn't abused and I am not jaded. I became an atheist through introspection and critical inquiry of myself, what I believe, and why? One of the pivotal things that swayed my doubt is having read the bible itself from cover to cover on numerous occasions. Ah, yes, the old nature vs. nurture argument. It has always been my nature to be critical, and I was able to overcome the nurture. LoLz

Everyone becomes Atheist through introspection and self inquiry.

Hi

 

[Fearlessly Express]

Everyone becomes Atheist through introspection and self inquiry.

Hi

I'm not so sure about that.

Sweeping generalizations tend to not be true.

A pleasure.

 

[Yorzhik]

Christianity has a history of violence that continues even today. Take for example African children being murdered as witches. Perhaps Christians do not do as much harm here in the US, but the bible absolutely commands the deaths of witches and primitive people will carry that command out.

And I would argue that there is a certain amount of psychological harm done to people when you raise them as children to believe that they are detestable sinners deserving of being tortured forever.

I would also argue that denying people equal protection under the law based upon what you perceive subjectively as immoral is harmful also.

I could go on and on, but you get the point. And while you might think that Christianity is the best thing to ever happen (while ignoring the fact that it gained its unearned place of prestige at the point of a sword) I would disagree. I would argue that the Constitution and Bill of Rights, based upon secular moral values, is the best thing that ever happened to people, and is a much more worthy document of praise than is the bible.

You seem to say that like torture and murder is a bad thing.

 

[Yorzhik]

I'm not so sure about that.

Sweeping generalizations tend to not be true.

A pleasure.

It's true sweeping generalizations are, by definition, not true in every case. But it's also true that if you talk with someone that cannot discuss a topic in general terms, they are probably either lying to you or are trying to lie to you.

 

[Town Heretic]

I'll only address your final question and say good night to you.

That doesn't seem particularly fearless.

No, I don't see a problem with it provided they keep their faith out of legislation that effects others based upon that faith.

And that was only addressing my inquiry in the way a politician addresses a question asked during a debate. The problem I'm nudging you to is the recognition that it isn't inherently critical thinking or reading the Bible that produces the effect you're speaking to. It was only that way for you. Now it might be that the problem is in the material or that the problem is in how you approached it. Given those minds I'd hope you might at least entertain the notion.

That was the point.

But even beyond this I think that there is a harmful penchant, a predisposition to harm others indelibly and inextricably embedded into the Abrahmic faiths that need be confronted not only by non-believers, but believers also.

I got you think that. I think it's a hard case to make. I'd also still like an answer on the god/God business and why you chose to focus on the negative impact of a sliver of a fringe group in Islam instead of the overwhelming good done daily when addressing the impact of religion. And I'm equally curious about your response to my notes on a few secular leaders and why you don't then advance a similar line against that part.

I think, for example, raising children to believe that they are horrible beings worthy of being tortured forever is an immoral and antiquated, unnecessary, and harmful practice on the outset,

I don't rear my child to believe he's a horrible being. I don't know many who do. But why are we arguing over the particulars of a religion when you're not even a theist at this point? Seems a bit like arguing over drapes when you aren't sure if there's a house.

:e4e:

 

[Lon]

Perhaps so, but so long as the bible commands the deaths of people, the propensity to do so remains irrespective of popular condemnation of the practice, and that is my point.

Boo Hiss. First of all, those tribes were already killing their children in the name of evil spirits. It doesn't really matter because you seem to not really want to think past your thin veneers. I'm glad you are not in charge of a judges chamber, you are far too quick to toss it all out, innocent or not.

I want to believe. I want there to be a god of love and justice who will pay evil for evil and good for good. I want there to be a heaven, and want absolute justice to be served. It's a comforting way to think of things.

I'm not having such a hard time between these anymore. One was true, the other wasn't, as far as I can tell. You are looking more and more like the second paragraph and you just barely got here. I honestly am not seeing integrity in your assessments at this point and greatly question your disillusionment. I don't know how one gets this jaded whether you realize you are or not.

Eh, there was some cognitive dissonance I had to deal with, but all in all my journey has been positive and uplifting. I'm a happy atheist in most respects.

Take for example the current struggle of the LGBT community to have equal right to marry.

My jury is out. I'm convinced that going against our created purpose is no good for individuals or society as a whole.

There are a few examples in our history. Prior to the emancipation the bible was used to justify slavery in the south by southern preachers. Interestingly it was the Declaration of Independence that largely lead to the emancipation itself with its "all mean are created equal" proclamation. Speaking of which....

Yeah, but you didn't just change denominations, you changed your view on if God exists or not :doh:

First of all the Declaration was NOT a foundation document of law, but this is an aside.

Are you crazy? Yes it is. It guarantees you freedoms and gives 'legal' precedence to hold them, pursue them, and defend them. I don't even know where this comment came from. I think you a bit bizzare.

Assuming for a moment that their assertion about the endowment by the creator of certain inalienable rights, then would that not mean that we would have enjoyed these rights all along and not had to struggle throughout history against god, the government, and the crown to secure them?

What are you talking about? "Against God" what???
▼I'm wondering what happened to this guy & if he ever really existed▼

I want to believe. I want there to be a god of love and justice who will pay evil for evil and good for good. I want there to be a heaven, and want absolute justice to be served. It's a comforting way to think of things.

Rights have been endowed by us to each other and as our moral values have evolved we have extended that "god given" equality to more and more people. I'd argue that we endowed ourselves, and the particular religious opinions of our founders are rather irrelevant to the facts of history as it played out.

▼In fact, I don't really see this guy at all. Are you sure he exists? ▼

I want to believe. I want there to be a god of love and justice who will pay evil for evil and good for good. I want there to be a heaven, and want absolute justice to be served. It's a comforting way to think of things.

It doesn't sound, at the moment, like you want any of this.

 

[Fearlessly Express]

You seem to say that like torture and murder is a bad thing.

You don't say...

It's true sweeping generalizations are, by definition, not true in every case. But it's also true that if you talk with someone that cannot discuss a topic in general terms, they are probably either lying to you or are trying to lie to you.

Non sequiter.

That doesn't seem particularly fearless.

I didn't feel like breaking down your post line by line, but not because I am afraid to do so.

And that was only addressing my inquiry in the way a politician addresses a question asked during a debate. The problem I'm nudging you to is the recognition that it isn't inherently critical thinking or reading the Bible that produces the effect you're speaking to. It was only that way for you. Now it might be that the problem is in the material or that the problem is in how you approached it. Given those minds I'd hope you might at least entertain the notion.

I concede that it is my personal experience and that other's arrive at different conclusions. Is that what you want to hear?

As far as being open to the notion of god's existence, I am in fact. I even hope that such a being would in fact exist and have the qualities of love, mercy, and justice in mind to administer. The problem is I don't see any evidence for that, no proof. All is mere conjecture based upon a hope, and this a truth does not make.

I got you think that. I think it's a hard case to make. I'd also still like an answer on the god/God business and why you chose to focus on the negative impact of a sliver of a fringe group in Islam instead of the overwhelming good done daily when addressing the impact of religion. And I'm equally curious about your response to my notes on a few secular leaders and why you don't then advance a similar line against that part.

As far as capitalization of god, I see no reason to do so unless the word begins a sentence. There is no shortage of focus being placed upon the rosy colored perceptions of religion by the religious. Pardon me while I present the other side of the equation. I promise to acknowledge the positives in all honesty, but I will do so while pointing out they could be done equally without need to invoke the supernatural. As far as your ref to secular leaders, etc, I don't recall exactly what you said, but don't find it particularly relevant to a theological discussion. Perhaps you can refresh my memory and I'll have some feedback?

I don't rear my child to believe he's a horrible being. I don't know many who do. But why are we arguing over the particulars of a religion when you're not even a theist at this point? Seems a bit like arguing over drapes when you aren't sure if there's a house.

Perhaps you don't, but that is what popular Christian culture teaches. We are all sinners destined for hell, and we deserve it cause god says so, and that's why we need a savior. Are you saying this is not what you have been taught, and teach to your children? Why debate it? I have my reasons. For one thing, I love to debate the points and discuss things. Conversation is a pass time I enjoy, and for me that is reason enough. Why theology? It's an interest, and certainly not my only one. I actually debate on several forums on a variety of topics.

Boo Hiss. First of all, those tribes were already killing their children in the name of evil spirits. It doesn't really matter because you seem to not really want to think past your thin veneers. I'm glad you are not in charge of a judges chamber, you are far too quick to toss it all out, innocent or not.

I'm not having such a hard time between these anymore. One was true, the other wasn't, as far as I can tell. You are looking more and more like the second paragraph and you just barely got here. I honestly am not seeing integrity in your assessments at this point and greatly question your disillusionment. I don't know how one gets this jaded whether you realize you are or not.

If you are done talking about me personally, perhaps we can stick stick to the subject?

My jury is out. I'm convinced that going against our created purpose is no good for individuals or society as a whole.

And who defines our purpose? I say I am the one who defines the purpose and meaning of my life, not some celestial dictator. In that respect you have no case.

Yeah, but you didn't just change denominations, you changed your view on if God exists or not :doh:

I came to the conclusion that I don't know whether or not god exists, but regardless of that I decided to reject the bible as divinely inspired. That is my opinion to which I have every right to change at my own discretion. Do you have a problem with that?

Are you crazy? Yes it is. It guarantees you freedoms and gives 'legal' precedence to hold them, pursue them, and defend them. I don't even know where this comment came from. I think you a bit bizzare.

WRONG. The Declaration of Independence was a only a letter to the king of England as a statement of intent, not a legal foundation. I am not diminishing its historical significance, only pointing out the fact that it is not in any way the law of the land and never was. The DoI in no way guarantees freedoms although it does hold philosophical precedence. I find the fact that you, like many others, do not understand this fact to be a failure of the educational system, or perhaps just a failure to think critically. Either way, the fact remains that the DoI did not in any way establish a government, and therefore is not a foundational legally binding document.

 

[Sherman]

I browsed this thread and suspect are here to soap box and deride Christians. If that is true then you are in for one bumpy ride. You will earn an assortment of not so nice nicknames.--yes they are allowed if they are earned.

This statement:

I would also argue that denying people equal protection under the law based upon what you perceive subjectively as immoral is harmful also.

earns you your first nickname: Toad. I could call your worse things, but I am too polite to do so.