"quote where i said that atheism has nothing to be correct about BECAUSE it isn't a religion, didnt even say it's a religion, nice false facts u got there, now rage some more 
how could i be taken seriously by retards like u? LOL.
learn what IF clauses are, you do that please"
..waiting
"See that? If it ISN'T RELIGION, it DOESN'T MEAN it's right. In actuality, you should be saying: If it isn't religion, it doesn't mean it's incorrect, OR: If it is religion, it doesn't mean it's incorrect. See how that is? Makes way more sense."
LOL, u kidding me right? "right" was meant as "correct", so it doesnt make it "no sense" if u'd read my whole post. this was just a sentence from my whole post, if you connect the parts of the post together it does make sense.
so don't u judge me on my own statement, because i had just made a reply on YOUR false statement as u could tell. the whole post is (read it next time) :
"whenever i mentioned facts , they werent proofs that proved God but for e.g. saying that if it isn't religion then it has nothing to be correct about, Science isn't religion aswell and it obviously has to be correct about loads of things and has to PROVE those things so ur statement failed, no matter what u say now. at the same time, if it isnt religion it doesnt mean it's right. u can go read my posts now, my "facts" were always making the incredibility of Religion bigger, facts should actually do that in a debate, but didnt say they prove specific things such as existance of God"
u can also explain it : if it isn't religion it doesn't mean it's right - that's perfectly normal. doesn't HAVE to be right, where from that could u tell that i was saying that religion is CORRECT straight from that (even if i did say that, would be just my opinion, im not one of those "cuz i say so" guys)? my post was a reply to ur false statement
ur statement did fail in general (read my previous post, u didn't even reply to it, u just focused on ONE sentence, nice one), ive explained it briefly why it does, u didnt explain urself on that so i take it as a confirmation. don't say it fails just for me because otherwise u'd reply on my view of ur statement. you, talking about facts.. cant even get them well explained
how could i be taken seriously by retards like u? LOL.learn what IF clauses are, you do that please"
..waiting
"See that? If it ISN'T RELIGION, it DOESN'T MEAN it's right. In actuality, you should be saying: If it isn't religion, it doesn't mean it's incorrect, OR: If it is religion, it doesn't mean it's incorrect. See how that is? Makes way more sense."
LOL, u kidding me right? "right" was meant as "correct", so it doesnt make it "no sense" if u'd read my whole post. this was just a sentence from my whole post, if you connect the parts of the post together it does make sense.
so don't u judge me on my own statement, because i had just made a reply on YOUR false statement as u could tell. the whole post is (read it next time) :
"whenever i mentioned facts , they werent proofs that proved God but for e.g. saying that if it isn't religion then it has nothing to be correct about, Science isn't religion aswell and it obviously has to be correct about loads of things and has to PROVE those things so ur statement failed, no matter what u say now. at the same time, if it isnt religion it doesnt mean it's right. u can go read my posts now, my "facts" were always making the incredibility of Religion bigger, facts should actually do that in a debate, but didnt say they prove specific things such as existance of God"
u can also explain it : if it isn't religion it doesn't mean it's right - that's perfectly normal. doesn't HAVE to be right, where from that could u tell that i was saying that religion is CORRECT straight from that (even if i did say that, would be just my opinion, im not one of those "cuz i say so" guys)? my post was a reply to ur false statement
ur statement did fail in general (read my previous post, u didn't even reply to it, u just focused on ONE sentence, nice one), ive explained it briefly why it does, u didnt explain urself on that so i take it as a confirmation. don't say it fails just for me because otherwise u'd reply on my view of ur statement. you, talking about facts.. cant even get them well explained
![[Image: tourney-25.png]](http://i295.photobucket.com/albums/mm153/Mark_Vido/tourney-25.png)