@jayjackson A lot of people would disagree with you because they're of the "bad apple spoils the bunch" school of thought.

While I a prone to agree with you, this did remind me of an old joke:

What's the difference between an attorney and a catfish?
One is a scum-sucking bottom-dweller, and the other one is a fish.

@michaelinlivonia Please learn to comprehend what I write and what you read. I wrote that morality is an individuals choice. Religion isnt immoral no more than a comic book that give the thunder god his powers. Its a persons interpretion of a written text and their implementation of that text. Immoral traits assigned to a set of ideas is nonsense. Ideas are nothing without interpretation and it takes a individual or group of individuals to interpret and then create a "religion". Those individuals are immoral not the text/religion.

Lastly, I have NEVER been offended nor accosted by a text or religion. I certainly have ran across zealots whos interpretation of certain texts borders on the idiotic and certainly are immoral.

@Melbates A lot of people can disagree if they choose to, I am ok with that. My point still stands and I believe in individual accountability not damning the whole for the actions of the few. Throughout history blame can be assigned to various groups and races for horrible crimes and actions. I am of the school of thought that those responsible should be held to account and not "everyone". "Everyone" is too vague and dilutes focus on the real culprits.

@JayJackson but, you do realize that the text they base their beliefs upon is wholly immoral from cover to cover, right? Therefore, that makes the whole of the religion immoral.

@Melbates How can a "text" be immoral? Any and all text/writings are open to interpretation. The only immoral conclusion is YOUR interpretation. You may read a passage and have a consideration and thought about it and I will think about it in a wholly different way. You do realize that we are free to accuse anyone of being immoral and yet its just YOUR opinion and not fact. When you use, "they" as a reference to a group then YOU are being immoral by judging everyone associated with that group. Are all atheists judgemental or is it just YOU? Are ALL white people guilty of being slave owners are were just a few? Be careful when you apply labels to the whole and not the individual.

While I think I agree with your main point regarding personal responsibility, to assert that a set of ideas and practices, which is what a religion consists of, cannot be deemed immoral is not correct, in my opinion. Religions have never been in advance of the morality of their constituency, and have historically been forced to abandon their most abhorrent and immoral precepts. As a nullifidian, I decry all religions, and view them with contempt and disgust, but I do not attack religious adherents, per se, unless they hide behind their religion when committing crimes, are hypocrites or attempt to foist their beliefs on the rest of us. I think we might both agree that morality exists outside of religion, and that child molestation, to name one behavior, is essentially a universal taboo.

@michaelinlivonia I was curious if I was the only one who thought he might be a theist. His words and responses sound too much like a believer trying to convince a non-believer than otherwise. Upon reading his first comment, I immediately deemed him to be an interloper.

@michaelinlivonia Since when is Nazism and the KKK a religion? Lets stay focused shall we? They are ideas/dogma.

Onto your other "points", when you write about comics you are once again woefully uninformed, Captain American and many other comics were written to inspire soldiers to fight against the common enemy and to carry on the " american way", thusly being nothing but dogma. Others were written to make black americans feel inferior, have you any notion of the "tarbaby" heckel and jeckel"??Whats the point of using names like "black panther, black lightening, black falcon"? You don't see names like, "white superman", "white aquaman" or "white batman" do you? There are reasons for that. Please do some research before you spout nonsense.

Now onto this concept that WRITTEN TEXTS are evil, have you or anyone been attacked by a sentence or passage or paragraph? Your insistence that words are "evil" is in of itself immoral. Being closed minded and expecting people to think and react to words the way you do is self centered and myopic. No idea or concept is "evil" and to look upon one as such is childlike and ignorant. People are "evil" to be sure and people who twist text to their advantage certainly are.

You wrote of female mutilations. Where in any religious text is it spelled out that a female must be mutilated? You have been watching too much TV.

Lastly, who are these "theists" that I am making excuses for? If you can comprehend my words you can plainly see that my argument isn't one of excuses for any group. My argument is for accountability.

@PNULL. Once more let me try to simplify my comment. What is an idea or practice without human interpretation and or action? If religion is an idea or set of practices as you claim they, what would religion be if neither were adhered to? If you answer truthfully then you would get to my point. I have NEVER been confronted by an idea or practice verbally or physically, I have been by folks who interpreted a text and twisted that text for their needs. When people begin to see evil, morality and other subjective traits in words and try to pass them off as the only truth its an interpretation. A dangerous one be you an atheist or zealot.

Onto you assertion that religion havent been in advance morally of their constituency. You are once again painting too broad of a picture. Buddhist and other sects teaches that morality is the only way to enlightenment, being humble,being of service. Interesting isnt it?

Lastly, Is it only the religious zealot that molest children? Of course not. We all know that molestation of any sort is abhorrent and to single out a religious sect as the main perpetrator is taking the onus away from the problem.

@Melbates You are starting to become what you rail against, in other words an intolerant hypocrite. Your true colors are showing and try as you might you cannot define me.

Lastly, and I know that i am going to hate myself for asking this, " what is an interloper "? Are you just using words that you don't know the definition of for effect? Its amusing that folks like yourself fall back on nonsense when confronted by a cogent argument. Continue to be that hypocrite and be looked upon as such. You do more damage by your intolerance and ignorance than anyone who takes a stand.

@pnullifidian read my comments throughly and go from there.

@JayJackson never been called intolerant but I think we all have our hypocritical moments. No one is omniscient or omnipotent. So, no one can claim pure thoughts or a pure lack of hypocrisy. Not attempting to define you but I've honestly never heard a non-believer try so hard to defend believers. I have an Associate's degree in English and three years towards my bachelor's in English and Journalism. I use big words as easily as breathing. If you're going to hate yourself for asking someone to define a word for you then, why did you? Why not go to Google to get your answer long before I arrived home from work?

@JayJackson Thank-you for your reply.

“What is an idea or practice without human interpretation and or action?”

Agreed! In fact, what is any observation, concept or statute without human beings? Following this Cartesian line of thought, what would an alien race make of our entire body of knowledge, laws and philosophy, were they to visit this planet after we’re gone? One might imagine that their concepts of morals would be different than ours, and that they would pass their own form of moral judgment on the audio-visual and written record.

“If religion is an idea or set of practices as you claim they [are], what would religion be if neither were adhered to?”

My answer, truthfully, is a dead one—which happens to be the case for most religions, and should be the circumstance for those that remain, in my opinion.

“When people begin to see evil, morality and other subjective traits in words and try to pass them off as the only truth its an interpretation.”

Words, whether in writing or speech, have meaning, which may be morally and ethically positive, neutral or negative. To bully, betray (including one’s country), slander, threaten, perjure, conspire, extort, falsely accuse, mislead and outright lie, are offenses that admit of a moral underpinning, and all could be said to consist of mere words.

“You are once again painting too broad of a picture.”

I think you’re right on this point, and accept your criticism. I was, of course, focused largely on the Abrahamic religions. And while I respect the body of teachings of Siddhartha Gautama, there remains some doubt that Buddhism is a religion, if one subscribes to Western definitions of the term. That said, good on you to bring up this example, and I will take my lumps—Buddhism is a religion. The fact that so many recognize the wisdom, if not genius, in Siddhartha’s teachings, should lead us to conclude that the Buddha himself was in advance of his contemporaries. Agreed?

“We all know that molestation of any sort is abhorrent…”

Indeed, I believe I've said as much, and we don’t need a religion to tell us so. Also, please note that I was not ‘singling out’ the Catholic religion—I reject them all. Peace.

@michaelinlivonia & @pnullifidian I'm going to stop this right now. It's becoming tiring and I'm not a fan of confrontation. It is obvious this man is of the same mindset as every believer we've ever met- I'm right, you're wrong and here's why the Bible says so. Ugh! I don't need that drama in my life stressing me out so this man is going bye-bye.

Well Said!

@of-the-mountain Thanks for the new meme!!!!! LOL