atheists talk about god and jesus too much [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : atheists talk about god and jesus too much


Diesel McBadass
08-28-2012, 08:25
i swear i log onto facebook and every atheist there just has a ton of posts making fun of jesus or yelling out to everyone there atheists. What are they seeking attention, trying to get people to comment on them? The religious types i know just go about there day and dont try to rub it in anyones face. just an observation......

simotek
08-28-2012, 08:27
Maybe they have some really religious friends and are just trying to counter their FB advertisements.

Geko45
08-28-2012, 08:37
I seriously doubt your objectivity in making such declarartions. I've never had an atheist knock on my door to spread the subjectively neutral news.

Diesel McBadass
08-28-2012, 08:39
I seriously doubt your objectivity in making such declarartions. I've never had an atheist knock on my door to spread the subjectively neutral news.


Yeah havent had a christian try n about 10 years though. Also many younger people seem to be doing it cause its "cool" and rebellious and all that, just sick of a wall full of religious stuff no matter aha side its from, ust seems its the atheist types 99 percent of the time

Geko45
08-28-2012, 08:47
Yeah havent had a christian try n about 10 years though. Also many younger people seem to be doing it cause its "cool" and rebellious and all that, just sick of a wall full of religious stuff no matter aha side its from, ust seems its the atheist types 99 percent of the time

All I see on FB are christian inspired truisms and bible quotes. Can't ever remember seeing a status update that endorsed atheism. Plus, here on this forum it seems about 50/50.

:dunno:

Diesel McBadass
08-28-2012, 08:56
im guessing the poeple who you are on fb with are a different demographic however. I just saw someone post that he is plkanning to get drunk and piss on a cross, im guessing even atheists would be disgusted.

GreenDrake
08-28-2012, 09:08
The religiots on FB continuously spew passages and scripture, they are the first ones to get ignored. But I support their right to believe in magical men in the sky. Have at it.

Bren
08-28-2012, 09:35
i swear i log onto facebook and every atheist there just has a ton of posts making fun of jesus or yelling out to everyone there atheists. What are they seeking attention, trying to get people to comment on them? The religious types i know just go about there day and dont try to rub it in anyones face. just an observation......

You must have a lot of atheist freinds who spend a lot of time on facebook. None of my friends post anything about religion, one way or another. I don't even know how many are or are not religious. Also, unlike many, I know all of my facebook "friends" in the real world.

Diesel McBadass
08-28-2012, 09:45
usually not friends, just people i went to high school with, my friends are quiet and respectful about their beliefs or lack of

Lone Wolf8634
08-28-2012, 10:21
I solved the problem before it started.

I'm not on Facebook.

Gunhaver
08-28-2012, 12:25
Whenever you're complaining about Facebook you're really complaining about your own inability to groom your friends list down to only people that you can tolerate. Every retarded thing that you have to look at from someone more than once is your fault. I really can't think of a more controllable environment in which to interact with people than FB yet it's the one that people gripe the most about which makes me think those gripers are mostly drama queens looking for something to complain about. Do you think maybe the fact that you brought it over here confirms that a little bit?

Do you have any idea how much I would love to shut dip****s out in real life as easily as I can in FB? It would be like some sort of mutant superpower. Click click click and the force field is up for the dumb MF'er. Have a nice life.

I have 51 people on my list and bump one or two a week from there. No complaints about FB from me.

JBnTX
08-28-2012, 12:29
Atheists act as if they know they're wrong, and have to criticize religion just for validation.

It makes them feel better about their sins.

simotek
08-28-2012, 12:37
Atheists act as if they know they're wrong, and have to criticize religion just for validation.

It makes them feel better about their sins.

It's a two way street. Some religious folk like to bash atheists to make themselves feel better about believing what they do.

I don't speak for anyone else, but I know that as an atheist, I feel no need to prove to believers that I am right and they are wrong. Believe whatever you want. It doesn't matter to me.

That said, if I find something funny at the expense of religion I will laugh.

Altaris
08-28-2012, 12:38
Atheists act as if they know they're wrong, and have to criticize religion just for validation.


Do you have any evidence that we are wrong?

Altaris
08-28-2012, 12:49
i swear i log onto facebook and every atheist there just has a ton of posts making fun of jesus or yelling out to everyone there atheists. What are they seeking attention, trying to get people to comment on them? The religious types i know just go about there day and dont try to rub it in anyones face. just an observation......

Your FB is the opposite of mine then. Of my 258 "friends" on facebook I would say about 75% of them are Christian, and the other 25% are atheist.
On a daily bases I typically see around 10-20 posts about God, Jesus, the bible, or some prayer verse from the Christians. I have never once in all the time I have had FB, seen one of my Atheist friends make a comment about religion. We talk about it in person, but never post about it.

High-Gear
08-28-2012, 14:10
I solved the problem before it started.

I'm not on Facebook.

THIS :goodpost:

High-Gear
08-28-2012, 14:12
Atheists act as if they know they're wrong, and have to criticize religion just for validation.

It makes them feel better about their sins.

So, when you bash gay people is that your way of feeling better about your latent homosexuality?:rofl:

It sucks when people make judgements about motives doesn't it?

Berto
08-28-2012, 14:32
Diesel,

I see what you did here.





:supergrin:

Smacktard
08-28-2012, 15:16
Atheists act as if they know they're wrong, and have to criticize religion just for validation.

It makes them feel better about their sins.


You're dreaming, again.



...

Kingarthurhk
08-28-2012, 15:44
It is ironic. Atheists don't usually rail against Buddha, Vishnu, Allah, Brahmin, Odin, or Zeus.

In fact, I have never heard one of them declare, "Odin dammit!" Not once.

Altaris
08-28-2012, 15:51
It is ironic. Atheists don't usually rail against Buddha, Vishnu, Allah, Brahmin, Odin, or Zeus.

In fact, I have never heard one of them declare, "Odin dammit!" Not once.

Odin also isn't in the classroom trying to teach kids about his son Thor and how we all need to live our life by his way. Buddhists aren't trying to control my life on a daily basis. Zeus is described and taught in schools properly as Greek Mythology. If Christianity and Islam and the rest were taught correctly as mythology, which they are, no one would be saying anything.
All are Myths, we just tend to focus on the ones that are in our face the most claiming they aren't, and trying to force us to live our lives differently.

Kilrain
08-28-2012, 15:59
It is ironic. Atheists don't usually rail against Buddha, Vishnu, Allah, Brahmin, Odin, or Zeus.

In fact, I have never heard one of them declare, "Odin dammit!" Not once.

Odin was a mythical(like all of them) god, no? Therefore the term "god damnit" or any iterations of it could equally apply to Odin as any other god.

Wouldn't it be "Jehovah damnit" that you find offensive?

:dunno:

Kingarthurhk
08-28-2012, 16:03
Odin also isn't in the classroom trying to teach kids about his son Thor and how we all need to live our life by his way. Buddhists aren't trying to control my life on a daily basis. Zeus is described and taught in schools properly as Greek Mythology. If Christianity and Islam and the rest were taught correctly as mythology, which they are, no one would be saying anything.
All are Myths, we just tend to focus on the ones that are in our face the most claiming they aren't, and trying to force us to live our lives differently.

Actually, Christianity isn't taught in the classroom but Atheism and Darwinsim is.

It more resemebles this the following than what you are describing:

Coal Chamber - Shock The Monkey - YouTube

Altaris
08-28-2012, 16:14
Actually, Christianity isn't taught in the classroom but Atheism and Darwinsim is.

It more resemebles this the following than what you are describing:

Coal Chamber - Shock The Monkey - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMk-8pmTpgU)

So the Creationist myth that is being shoved in the classroom isn't Christianity?

Atheism isn't taught anywhere. The very principle of the idea doesn't even make sense. That is like me having an after school hobby group to teach people how to not collect stamps.
Darwinism/Evolution, IS science, so of course it belongs in school just like any other scientific field.


Nice video. I have seen them in concert before :supergrin:

Gunhaver
08-28-2012, 16:20
i swear i log onto facebook and every atheist there just has a ton of posts making fun of jesus or yelling out to everyone there atheists. What are they seeking attention, trying to get people to comment on them? The religious types i know just go about there day and dont try to rub it in anyones face. just an observation......

Perhaps they just like to show off their (as opposed to "there") superior spelling and grammar. I'm often guilty of that myself.

cowboywannabe
08-28-2012, 16:31
the expression of thou protests too much comes to mind.....a true athiest wouldnt care what a believer thinks or says especially on the internet.....unless theyre still trying to convince themselves......

Gunhaver
08-28-2012, 17:03
the expression of thou protests too much comes to mind.....a true athiest wouldnt care what a believer thinks or says especially on the internet.....unless theyre still trying to convince themselves......

It's not ourselves that we're trying to convince. Have you ever been undecided on an issue that you weren't very informed on and then listened to two people debate over it? When one side consistently makes valid and well thought out arguments backed by independently verifiable facts and the other sounds like a bunch of petulant children spouting the same refuted garbage over and over again it will lead an objective person in a particular direction.

I often link GTRI posts to other forums as an example of theist lunacy and I've influenced more than a few undecideds.

Kingarthurhk
08-28-2012, 17:04
So the Creationist myth that is being shoved in the classroom isn't Christianity?

Atheism isn't taught anywhere. The very principle of the idea doesn't even make sense. That is like me having an after school hobby group to teach people how to not collect stamps.
Darwinism/Evolution, IS science, so of course it belongs in school just like any other scientific field.


Nice video. I have seen them in concert before :supergrin:

I thought it was funny, and might break the tension. Anyway, I was never taught creationsim is school growing up. It was only Atheism and how we evolved from primates.

Gunhaver
08-28-2012, 17:05
I thought it was funny, and might break the tension. Anyway, I was never taught creationsim is school growing up. It was only Atheism and how we evolved from primates.

Ah yes, Darwin's theory of atheism. I remember that one. :upeyes:

Kingarthurhk
08-28-2012, 17:20
Ah yes, Darwin's theory of atheism. I remember that one. :upeyes:

It is part of the philosophy that is taught in higher education and secondary education. To put it succinctly:

Science is committed to philosophical naturalism and therefore science must assume that no Creator, and no purposeful intelligence, is behind our existence ... All that science can address is the question of: 'granted that we are here as a result of purposeless material mechanisms, what's the most plausible purposeless material mechanism that we can imagine?'"<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
Phillip E. Johnson, author, attorney; quoted on UCTV

<o:p></o:p>

Altaris
08-28-2012, 17:26
It is part of the philosophy that is taught in higher education and secondary education. To put it succinctly:

[/FONT]

<o:p></o:p>

So does that mean, Math, Physics, Chemistry, Biology, Geology, Engineering, etc... all promote Atheism, since they are science fields? Should we not teach any of them then?

Kingarthurhk
08-28-2012, 18:37
So does that mean, Math, Physics, Chemistry, Biology, Geology, Engineering, etc... all promote Atheism, since they are science fields? Should we not teach any of them then?

My point is this is the position of people who teach science. So, it doesn't have to exclude God. It is only that those who teach it want to exclude God and promote instead Atheism. A religious view point in its own right.

ksg0245
08-28-2012, 21:25
My point is this is the position of people who teach science. So, it doesn't have to exclude God. It is only that those who teach it want to exclude God and promote instead Atheism. A religious view point in its own right.

Teaching science isn't promoting atheism.

Animal Mother
08-28-2012, 21:29
It is part of the philosophy that is taught in higher education and secondary education. To put it succinctly:

[/FONT]

<o:p></o:p>
To be fair, you should really identify Phillip E. Johnson as a founder of the Discovery Institute and head IDiot. He also doesn't think HIV causes AIDS.

Animal Mother
08-28-2012, 21:31
My point is this is the position of people who teach science. So, it doesn't have to exclude God. It is only that those who teach it want to exclude God and promote instead Atheism. A religious view point in its own right.Atheism still isn't a religion and science doesn't promote a viewpoint on the supernatural, it simply doesn't take it into consideration because there's no evidence it exists, rending such consideration unnecessary.

Syclone538
08-28-2012, 21:37
Actually, Christianity isn't taught in the classroom but Atheism and Darwinsim is.
...

How would you teach atheism, what is there to teach.

NMG26
08-29-2012, 03:58
Atheism still isn't a religion and science doesn't promote a viewpoint on the supernatural, it simply doesn't take it into consideration because there's no evidence it exists, rending such consideration unnecessary.

Do you think that the super natural can be studied scientifically?

Animal Mother
08-29-2012, 04:08
Do you think that the super natural can be studied scientifically?I don't know. First, it needs to be demonstrated that the supernatural exists. That hasn't been accomplished as yet.

Bren
08-29-2012, 04:45
the expression of thou protests too much comes to mind.....a true athiest wouldnt care what a believer thinks or says especially on the internet.....unless theyre still trying to convince themselves......

That's a bad argument for your side. Especially given the religious requirement for "faith" it applies much more strongly against christians.

a true christian wouldnt care what an atheist thinks or says especially on the internet.

Yet here you are - you and every christian who posts in these threads, trying to prove god and religious beliefs, instead of relying on faith.

Thanks for the irony, by the way, of caring enough to pop in and post.:rofl:

Geko45
08-29-2012, 07:27
a true athiest wouldnt care what a believer thinks or says especially on the internet.....unless theyre still trying to convince themselves......

As Norske has said (IIRC) previously, religion costs us vital resources, time and lives. It is a drag on society. A parasite. I can think of no better use of my time than to try to convince people to avoid this lunacy.

There are many here that are lost causes. They have to much invested in the myths to ever let them ago, but others come here because they have questions and it is for those individuals that we present the argument of reason.

dbcooper
08-29-2012, 08:44
Well he did build my hotrod, it's a love affair.

Ministry - "Jesus Built My Hot Rod" - YouTube

Altaris
08-29-2012, 08:59
Well he did build my hotrod, it's a love affair.

Ministry - "Jesus Built My Hot Rod" - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuk62WtK4sk)


Obama to Jesus: "You didn't build that!" :supergrin:

scccdoc
08-29-2012, 09:17
i swear i log onto facebook and every atheist there just has a ton of posts making fun of jesus or yelling out to everyone there atheists. What are they seeking attention, trying to get people to comment on them? The religious types i know just go about there day and dont try to rub it in anyones face. just an observation......

Forgive them, for they know not what they do.........................................................

Diesel McBadass
08-29-2012, 10:43
I honestly cant stand anyone agressively into any religion who trys to force it on everyone or talk about it constantly. (atheism is a religion). Just seems atheists talk about it more. And yes i have been exposed to christians who are pretty bad, but aint been to church since middle school so its been a while

Of course this being religious issues a topic will get a million pages if mods dont lock it for people fighting lol. There are so many better issues to get worked up on.

High-Gear
08-29-2012, 14:03
I honestly cant stand anyone agressively into any religion who trys to force it on everyone or talk about it constantly. (atheism is a religion). Just seems atheists talk about it more. And yes i have been exposed to christians who are pretty bad, but aint been to church since middle school so its been a while

Of course this being religious issues a topic will get a million pages if mods dont lock it for people fighting lol. There are so many better issues to get worked up on.

Yeah you are probably right...there are better things to rail against...religion is harmless...
http://counterpsy.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/wtc-9-11.jpg
i normally only bring it up as a consiousness builder, when someone is pushing their religion, or discimination based on their religion.
This being a forum for discussing religious matters, it is an open arena.

Kilrain
08-29-2012, 14:39
(atheism is a religion).

Sure, like bald is a hair color.........

Kingarthurhk
08-29-2012, 16:30
How would you teach atheism, what is there to teach.

What is currently taught in public schools now, that a list of unprovable things happened and then we came about and that this was not done by any divine intervention. Ergo, teaching Atheism. Outright teaching that there is no God and all these amazing events simply happened for no particular reason.

So, doctrinal Atheism is taught everyday in public schools throughout the United States.

Kingarthurhk
08-29-2012, 16:33
Yeah you are probably right...there are better things to rail against...religion is harmless...
http://counterpsy.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/wtc-9-11.jpg
i normally only bring it up as a consiousness builder, when someone is pushing their religion, or discimination based on their religion.
This being a forum for discussing religious matters, it is an open arena.

This and odd photo considering your usual pro-Islamic, anti-Christian stance.:supergrin:

High-Gear
08-29-2012, 17:00
This and odd photo considering your usual pro-Islamic, anti-Christian stance.:supergrin:

The truth according to Snowbird. :supergrin:

High-Gear
08-29-2012, 17:02
What is currently taught in public schools now, that a list of unprovable things happened and then we came about and that this was not done by any divine intervention. Ergo, teaching Atheism. Outright teaching that there is no God and all these amazing events simply happened for no particular reason.

So, doctrinal Atheism is taught everyday in public schools throughout the United States.

Evolution has been proven, to say otherwise shows ignorance of the current science.

Elliot Sober argues we have a better understanding of evolution than we do about the theory of gravitation.
http://fora.tv/2010/04/22/Elliott_Sober_Darwin_and_Intelligent_Design

Teachers do not say there is no god, and teaching a scientific concept without mentioning God does not equate to teaching atheism.

Syclone538
08-29-2012, 21:39
What is currently taught in public schools now, that a list of unprovable things happened and then we came about and that this was not done by any divine intervention. Ergo, teaching Atheism. Outright teaching that there is no God and all these amazing events simply happened for no particular reason.

So, doctrinal Atheism is taught everyday in public schools throughout the United States.

I would be very surprised if this is actually happening in the U.S.

Anyway, this post makes it look like you don't understand the difference between science and atheism.

This is atheism, in it's entirety...

Theist "God exists."
Atheist "I don't believe you."

That is it, that is all there is to it.

IhRedrider
08-30-2012, 21:32
As Norske has said (IIRC) previously, religion costs us vital resources, time and lives. It is a drag on society. A parasite. I can think of no better use of my time than to try to convince people to avoid this lunacy.

These are the words of a true socialist. "You don't get to believe what you believe, you cannot believe what I don't want you to believe. AND you don't get to spend your time and resources doing what you want, you can only do what I agree with."

Geko45
08-30-2012, 21:53
These are the words of a true socialist. "You don't get to believe what you believe, you cannot believe what I don't want you to believe. AND you don't get to spend your time and resources doing what you want, you can only do what I agree with."

:animlol:

I would fight to the death to defend your right to be epically wrong (and I've actually taken that oath). This is just the same red herring theists always pull out when this point comes up.

I never said I wanted to force anyone to live by what I think is right, but when I want to exercise my own right of free speech to try to persuade others then suddenly I'm a socialist?

:upeyes:

nmk
08-31-2012, 00:00
i swear i log onto facebook and every atheist there just has a ton of posts making fun of jesus or yelling out to everyone there atheists. What are they seeking attention, trying to get people to comment on them? The religious types i know just go about there day and dont try to rub it in anyones face. just an observation......

Most of my FB friends are from academia. Most of them come from biology departments. Many of them teach evolution on some level. I don't see what you claim to see. :dunno:

Animal Mother
08-31-2012, 00:54
These are the words of a true socialist. "You don't get to believe what you believe, you cannot believe what I don't want you to believe. AND you don't get to spend your time and resources doing what you want, you can only do what I agree with."How do you reach this conclusion from what Norske wrote? Convince does not equal require or force, it implies showing someone their error not controlling their choices.

Gunhaver
08-31-2012, 01:33
These are the words of a true socialist. "You don't get to believe what you believe, you cannot believe what I don't want you to believe. AND you don't get to spend your time and resources doing what you want, you can only do what I agree with."

How exactly do you prevent anyone from believing anything?

High-Gear
08-31-2012, 03:41
These are the words of a true socialist. "You don't get to believe what you believe, you cannot believe what I don't want you to believe. AND you don't get to spend your time and resources doing what you want, you can only do what I agree with."

Ultra-Conservative Rhetoric 101. If you are losing a debate, call the other person a 1) Socialist or Communist 2) Nazi 3) Supporter of Islamic Jihad

Then bring up a different issue (facts are optional) and go on the attack.


Btw...
One of my proudest moments was to be called all three in one post by Snowbird! :supergrin:

Kingarthurhk
08-31-2012, 04:41
As Norske has said (IIRC) previously, religion costs us vital resources, time and lives. It is a drag on society. A parasite. I can think of no better use of my time than to try to convince people to avoid this lunacy.

There are many here that are lost causes. They have to much invested in the myths to ever let them ago, but others come here because they have questions and it is for those individuals that we present the argument of reason.

I could argue the same thing about Marist Atheism that led to Communism that has led to millions of deaths. There is no Communist regime that has not slaughtered its own people wholesale, usually with the same philosophy you are expousing here.

RC-RAMIE
08-31-2012, 06:22
Ultra-Conservative Rhetoric 101. If you are losing a debate, call the other person a 1) Socialist or Communist 2) Nazi 3) Supporter of Islamic Jihad

Then bring up a different issue (facts are optional) and go on the attack.


Btw...
One of my proudest moments was to be called all three in one post by Snowbird! :supergrin:

I don't know what you are so proud of Snowbird calls everybody that.


....

Geko45
08-31-2012, 07:27
I could argue the same thing about Marist Atheism that led to Communism that has led to millions of deaths. There is no Communist regime that has not slaughtered its own people wholesale, usually with the same philosophy you are expousing here.

You could, but I'm not a godless communist. I'm a godless capitalist. The whole point is moot as atheism and communism are not inextricably intertwined no matter how much theists attempt to portray it that way.

Communism killed millions, not atheism.

Kingarthurhk
08-31-2012, 10:57
You could, but I'm not a godless communist. I'm a godless capitalist. The whole point is moot as atheism and communism are not inextricably intertwined no matter how much theists attempt to portray it that way.

Communism killed millions, not atheism.


Irrelevant to the fact that Communism was based on the teachings of Karl Marx whose philosophy was Atheism. Ergo, the foundation of Coummunism is Atheism. This is why every Communist regime has either repressed or slaughtered the religious.

Geko45
08-31-2012, 12:25
Irrelevant to the fact that Communism was based on the teachings of Karl Marx whose philosophy was Atheism. Ergo, the foundation of Coummunism is Atheism. This is why every Communist regime has either repressed or slaughtered the religious.

Communism tends to adopt atheism as the worst enemy of a communist regime would be anyone claiming to know better than the state. However, communism is not the logical result of atheism as the only logical political system that derives out of atheism would be libertarianism. If there is no objective moral code then the only sensical approach is a live and let live philosophy.

Kingarthurhk
08-31-2012, 13:52
Communism tends to adopt atheism as the worst enemy of a communist regime would be anyone claiming to know better than the state. However, communism is not the logical result of atheism as the only logical political system that derives out of atheism would be libertarianism. If there is no objective moral code then the only sensical approach is a live and let live philosophy.

Without Karl Marx there wouldn't be communism. Karl Marx set the tone for the philosophy fo communism, often referred to as Marxism interchangably. Marx was an Atheiest and said that religion oppressed people. So, as a result Marxist Communists went about slaughtering the religious and and oppressing religion. Every Marxist regime has done this consistantly. So, Atheism is not the panacea as its adherants claim. Rather, it is just as bloody and corrupt as all the other religions of the world that have engaged in carte blanch violence.

Geko45
08-31-2012, 14:01
Without Karl Marx there wouldn't be communism. Karl Marx set the tone for the philosophy fo communism, often referred to as Marxism interchangably. Marx was an Atheiest and said that religion oppressed people. So, as a result Marxist Communists went about slaughtering the religious and and oppressing religion. Every Marxist regime has done this consistantly. So, Atheism is not the panacea as its adherants claim. Rather, it is just as bloody and corrupt as all the other religions of the world that have engaged in carte blanch violence.

But I'm Geko45 and I am establishing Gekoism. I am an atheist and I also believe that religion generally oppresses people, but I don't think the solution to that problem is more oppression. Under Gekoism, everyone is free to do and believe whatever they want as long as they do not infringe upon the rights of another to do likewise. You don't even have to like each other under Gekoism, but you damn well will leave each other alone. That's pretty much the only crime under Gekoism, violating the rights of another.

Gunhaver
08-31-2012, 14:12
But I'm Geko45 and I am establishing Gekoism. I am an atheist and I also believe that religion generally oppresses people, but I don't think the solution to that problem is more oppression. Under Gekoism, everyone is free to do and believe whatever they want as long as they do not infringe upon the rights of another to do likewise. You don't even have to like each other under Gekoism, but you damn well will leave each other alone. That's pretty much the only crime under Gekoism, violating the rights of another.

Well that'll never fly. It violates the rights of too many Christians.

Bryan Fischer: If Gays Aren't Discriminated Against, Christians Will Be - YouTube

Geko45
08-31-2012, 14:40
Well that'll never fly. It violates the rights of too many Christians.

Yeah, that's pretty messed up. As I'm sure you are aware, the fallacy of that argument is that rights only extend up to the boundary where they would encounter the rights of another. In other words, if your religion requires you to discriminate against an unwilling third party then you don't have the right to practice that aspect of your religion under the Constitution (or Gekoism). Or to use an example that everyone here can agree on, one person's right to not be exposed to firearms does not mean that they can insist on disarming all those around them (unless its their private property).

Woofie
08-31-2012, 14:48
All I see on FB are christian inspired truisms and bible quotes. Can't ever remember seeing a status update that endorsed atheism. Plus, here on this forum it seems about 50/50.

:dunno:

This is my experience, too. I know several atheists and not a one of them posts anti Jesusy stuff on FB, or just don't even use FB.

Also someone from a local church was dropping off novels door to door about Christianity a few days ago. Didn't even bother to knock; just leaned them against the door and left.

Syclone538
08-31-2012, 15:25
But I'm Geko45 and I am establishing Gekoism. I am an atheist and I also believe that religion generally oppresses people, but I don't think the solution to that problem is more oppression. Under Gekoism, everyone is free to do and believe whatever they want as long as they do not infringe upon the rights of another to do likewise. You don't even have to like each other under Gekoism, but you damn well will leave each other alone. That's pretty much the only crime under Gekoism, violating the rights of another.

:wavey:


http://ts1.mm.bing.net/images/thumbnail.aspx?q=4736915824443972&id=68c07ef9f66b296a7fb8c45fe65209fc
http://ts2.mm.bing.net/images/thumbnail.aspx?q=5050109111895753&id=4246928bcb1ba13abf36fa5228a8b79a

Bren
08-31-2012, 15:30
I could argue the same thing about Marist Atheism that led to Communism that has led to millions of deaths. There is no Communist regime that has not slaughtered its own people wholesale, usually with the same philosophy you are expousing here.

Communism is an economic system. The lack of religion is simply incidental to the need of an economic system authoritarian enough to force people to work, but take their property and the fruits of their labor. If your control has to be that close and forceful, you cannot afford to allow the people an alternative system of government and, as all of history shows, the church has been an alternative and competing government all over the world, where it isn't the sole government.

Bren
08-31-2012, 15:32
But I'm Geko45 and I am establishing Gekoism. I am an atheist and I also believe that religion generally oppresses people, but I don't think the solution to that problem is more oppression. Under Gekoism, everyone is free to do and believe whatever they want as long as they do not infringe upon the rights of another to do likewise. You don't even have to like each other under Gekoism, but you damn well will leave each other alone. That's pretty much the only crime under Gekoism, violating the rights of another.

Thomas Jefferson and the founders we really remember by name would agree - most modern christians do not.

Kingarthurhk
08-31-2012, 16:02
I would be very surprised if this is actually happening in the U.S.

Anyway, this post makes it look like you don't understand the difference between science and atheism.

This is atheism, in it's entirety...

Theist "God exists."
Atheist "I don't believe you."

That is it, that is all there is to it.

You forgot, "I don't believe you, and in a system that all tax payers pay into to educate your children, I will insist on my world view alone."

Kingarthurhk
08-31-2012, 16:04
Communism is an economic system. The lack of religion is simply incidental to the need of an economic system authoritarian enough to force people to work, but take their property and the fruits of their labor. If your control has to be that close and forceful, you cannot afford to allow the people an alternative system of government and, as all of history shows, the church has been an alternative and competing government all over the world, where it isn't the sole government.

I am talking about all religion. The Tibetan Budhists learned this the hard way as well. Communism is a Marxist system based upon Atheism.

Syclone538
08-31-2012, 16:11
You forgot, "I don't believe you, and in a system that all tax payers pay into to educate your children, I will insist on my world view alone."

First, I oppose any fed gov involvement in education.

No, just evidence based instead of faith based.

edit

And just so you don't get the cause and effect backwards, I'm atheist because of being evidence based, not evidence based because of being atheist.

Kingarthurhk
08-31-2012, 16:15
First, I oppose any fed gov involvement in education.

No, just evidence based instead of faith based.

The two aren't mutually exclusive, it is just that Atheism insists on being the dominant force in a pluralistic society where all people (except illegal aliens and those who rent) pay taxes to support the public school system.

IhRedrider
08-31-2012, 21:30
To all those from the church of "i don't believe in God",

Thanks for coming out. This thread is about how you talk to much about God. And.... you can't stay away. This is a very strange thing. Keep telling yourselves what you wish desperately to be true, but we will ALL know soon.

NMG26
08-31-2012, 22:14
To all those from the church of "i don't believe in God",

Thanks for coming out. This thread is about how you talk to much about God. And.... you can't stay away. This is a very strange thing. Keep telling yourselves what you wish desperately to be true, but we will ALL know soon.

What will we all know soon?

Is God somehow going to make it all clear soon?




.

Gunhaver
08-31-2012, 23:27
To all those from the church of "i don't believe in God",

Thanks for coming out. This thread is about how you talk to much about God. And.... you can't stay away. This is a very strange thing. Keep telling yourselves what you wish desperately to be true, but we will ALL know soon.

And why do you think that is? Why can't we stay away?

Animal Mother
09-01-2012, 04:32
To all those from the church of "i don't believe in God",

Thanks for coming out. This thread is about how you talk to much about God. And.... you can't stay away. This is a very strange thing. Keep telling yourselves what you wish desperately to be true, but we will ALL know soon.Could you perhaps define "soon" a little more concretely?

High-Gear
09-01-2012, 14:22
You forgot, "I don't believe you, and in a system that all tax payers pay into to educate your children, I will insist on my world view alone."

So you support equal time for Flying Spaghetti Monsterism along with ID, and Evolution?

You also support the teaching of Intelligent falling alongside the teaching of gravity?

Kingarthurhk
09-01-2012, 14:42
So you support equal time for Flying Spaghetti Monsterism along with ID, and Evolution?

You also support the teaching of Intelligent falling alongside the teaching of gravity?

The Flying Spaghettis Monster is an Atheist invention. I guess all men makes gods of something.

High-Gear
09-01-2012, 14:53
The Flying Spaghettis Monster is an Atheist invention. I guess all men makes gods of something.
Wrong, it was the revealed word to a prophet.
You can't disprove FSM'ism!

It is just as credible as your man made releigion. All yours has over FSM'ism is antiquity.

Kingarthurhk
09-01-2012, 14:55
Wrong, it was the revealed word to a prophet.
You can't disprove FSM'ism!

It is just as credible as your man made releigion. All yours has over FSM'ism is antiquity.

You have overlooked hope and eternal life.

High-Gear
09-01-2012, 15:25
You have overlooked hope and eternal life.

No, FSM heaven has a Stripper Factory and a beer volcano! What does your heaven have?

Gunhaver
09-01-2012, 15:34
No, FSM heaven has a Stripper Factory and a beer volcano! What does your heaven have?

A stripper factory? Is that like Build a Bear but with strippers? 'Cause I could get on board with that. I wouldn't even need 72 of them.

Kingarthurhk
09-01-2012, 16:01
No, FSM heaven has a Stripper Factory and a beer volcano! What does your heaven have?

Harmony, each person loving and giving to the other with joy, an incorruptable body without pain, decay, or death. A keen mind to explore the mysteries of the Universe, and liberty to explore it and commune with all living beings in peace and harmony. Living in the perpetual presence of a loving God who graciously gives all things, and loves with a completeness that cannot be adequately stated in any current known language.

Living in peace and harmony with all nature, nothing that will harm or destroy.

A eternity of learning, love, and exploration of all that is, and never running out of time, energy, or things to discover.

I think that pales to strippers and beer volcano. After the strippers catch and give vinereal diseases and the beer volucano gives you cerosis of the liver and all die in agony, what have you gained?:dunno:

GreenDrake
09-01-2012, 17:51
I'll take the beer volcano and strippers. Who wants to live with a bunch of hippies anyway.

Kingarthurhk
09-01-2012, 17:53
I'll take the beer volcano and strippers. Who wants to live with a bunch of hippies anyway.

Then I suspect you will not have to worry about either scenario.

GreenDrake
09-01-2012, 18:40
Then I suspect you will not have to worry about either scenario.

Wait, will the FSM be there? Because if he is not, I am going to need some hookers and blow, cancel the strippers.

Kingarthurhk
09-01-2012, 18:42
Wait, will the FSM be there? Because if he is not, I am going to need some hookers and blow, cancel the strippers.

Do you do that now? Do you think that brings happiness? Or, do you think it would destroy everything you have built to this point in your life?

Geko45
09-01-2012, 21:09
Wait, will the FSM be there? Because if he is not, I am going to need some hookers and blow, cancel the strippers.

Pastafarianism promises hookers, blow and all the spaghetti you can eat.

He boiled for our sins, rAmen.

GreenDrake
09-01-2012, 21:16
Excellent, Geko. Art, my heaven is a place I visit weekly. A gin clear blue ribbon trout stream where I play tug of war with native west slope cutthroat trout. I don't believe in any sort of afterlife, so I am not afraid of eternal damnation or other imaginary places. I don't judge you for your beliefs though. If you dig it, right on.

Kingarthurhk
09-01-2012, 21:25
Excellent, Geko. Art, my heaven is a place I visit weekly. A gin clear blue ribbon trout stream where I play tug of war with native west slope cutthroat trout. I don't believe in any sort of afterlife, so I am not afraid of eternal damnation or other imaginary places. I don't judge you for your beliefs though. If you dig it, right on.

You enjoy the outdoors. So, do I. Now, imagine the outdoors without disease, death, and decay. Where you can be outdoors all year without worrying about the wearther drastically changing or predators. Where you have your own land and and plant your own food and vineyard without bizarre government regulation, or or worrying about your crop going badly.

The new earth is going to be spectacular. It would be a shame to miss out on running water so pure that it looks like glass.

GreenDrake
09-01-2012, 21:34
I am living my heaven, to me there is no "new earth" One shot, that's it. Cool if that's your belief, like I said, my heaven is something I experience whenever I want, in this life.

Animal Mother
09-01-2012, 22:00
You enjoy the outdoors. So, do I. Now, imagine the outdoors without disease, death, and decay. Where you can be outdoors all year without worrying about the wearther drastically changing or predators. Where you have your own land and and plant your own food and vineyard without bizarre government regulation, or or worrying about your crop going badly.

The new earth is going to be spectacular. It would be a shame to miss out on running water so pure that it looks like glass.That wouldn't be bad, but it's no stripper factory and beer volcano. It doesn't even measure up to Gimle, the hall which will be the destination of the virtuous who die in Ragnarok.

Geko45
09-01-2012, 22:11
The new earth is going to be spectacular. It would be a shame to miss out on running water so pure that it looks like glass.

Sounds wonderful, but there is absolutely no reason to believe that exists. Still, I would do what it takes to guarantee admittance if it didn't mean forgoing living this life in a moral and full manner (yes, christianity is immoral on certain points).

Altaris
09-01-2012, 22:12
You enjoy the outdoors. So, do I. Now, imagine the outdoors without disease, death, and decay. Where you can be outdoors all year without worrying about the wearther drastically changing or predators. Where you have your own land and and plant your own food and vineyard without bizarre government regulation, or or worrying about your crop going badly.

The new earth is going to be spectacular. It would be a shame to miss out on running water so pure that it looks like glass.

So where is this place supposed to be, and do have you verified its location?

Altaris
09-01-2012, 22:14
That wouldn't be bad, but it's no stripper factory and beer volcano. It doesn't even measure up to Gimle, the hall which will be the destination of the virtuous who die in Ragnarok.

Stripper factory and beer volcano?!?!? Who do I need to kill to make it to this place?

Kingarthurhk
09-01-2012, 23:33
So where is this place supposed to be, and do have you verified its location?

It existed once, and will again.

Kingarthurhk
09-01-2012, 23:34
Stripper factory and beer volcano?!?!? Who do I need to kill to make it to this place?

Two guesses.

Kingarthurhk
09-01-2012, 23:35
Sounds wonderful, but there is absolutely no reason to believe that exists. Still, I would do what it takes to guarantee admittance if it didn't mean forgoing living this life in a moral and full manner (yes, christianity is immoral on certain points).

Christianity as intended or otherwise?

Syclone538
09-02-2012, 00:14
The Flying Spaghettis Monster is an Atheist invention.
...

And you can prove this?

...
I guess all men makes gods of something.

Well no, but most likely all gods are made by men.

Geko45
09-02-2012, 00:52
Christianity as intended or otherwise?

As intended, but I will concede that this is only a matter of personal opinion. The bible seems clear on oppressing certain freedoms that it deems immoral and that isn't really supported any more than as being objectionable to god.

I'm a smart guy. If I can't understand how a behavior is victimizing anyone then I have to assume it's none of my business. christianity requires its followers to interfere in the lives of others. Less so than islam, in contrast, but still more so than any person is entitled to.

Kingarthurhk
09-02-2012, 03:08
As intended, but I will concede that this is only a matter of personal opinion. The bible seems clear on oppressing certain freedoms that it deems immoral and that isn't really supported any more than being objectionable to god.

I'm a smart guy. If I can't understand how a behavior is victimizing anyone then I have to assume its none of my business. christianity requires its followers to interfere in the lives of others. Less so than islam, in contrast, but still more so than any person is entitled to.

Interfere as in sharing?

Kingarthurhk
09-02-2012, 03:14
And you can prove this?



Well no, but most likely all gods are made by men.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster

Geko45
09-02-2012, 05:25
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster

Heresy is not proof.

steveksux
09-02-2012, 07:03
Heresy is not proof.

Is that heresy, or blasphemy? Anyway, wikipedia is obviously infested with non-believers, I may think about believing it when Snopes gets onboard. Until then, its just haters hatin.

Randy

Kingarthurhk
09-02-2012, 08:04
Heresy is not proof.

As I said before it was started by Atheists who really really didn't want any other view except their own being put forth in a pluralistically funded public school system. Probably, in the ignorant belief that their religious viewpoint was the panacea to do away with all other religious viewpoints. Ignorant, in the sense that the French Revolution, nor Marxisim was not remembered.

Geko45
09-02-2012, 08:17
As I said before it was started by Atheists who really really didn't want any other view except their own being put forth in a pluralistically funded public school system.

No, you're citing those that have aligned themselves with the Antipasti and seek to usurp the FSM's rightful claim to all our sauce. Pastafarianism is the one true faith. You have no proof to the contrary.

He boiled for our sins, rAmen.

Geko45
09-02-2012, 08:26
Interfere as in sharing?

Interfere as in insisting on enacting a moral code as law that has no other support than what is contained in the bible.

GreenDrake
09-02-2012, 08:38
No, you're citing those that have aligned themselves with the Antipasti and seek to usurp the FSM's rightful claim to all our sauce. Pastafarianism is the one true faith. You have no proof to the contrary.

He boiled for our sins, rAmen.

I love when he embodies himself in a nice lobster ravioli or a carbonara cream sauce. FSM is the true lord of lords.

Kingarthurhk
09-02-2012, 08:44
Interfere as in insisting on enacting a moral code as law that has no other support than what is contained in the bible.

I assume you are referring to the 10 commandments?

Let's examine your thoughts on that:

Do you think it is good thing to be respectful and carring toward parents that raised you, and cared for you?

Do you think it is a good thing not to murder?

Do you think there would be less problems and vinereal diseases, and unwanted children if no one was sexually unfaithful to their spouse?

Do you think it would be a better world if people didn't steal other people's things?

Do you think it would be a better world if people didn't go around lying about other people, causing the other person to be harmed by that lie?

Do you think anything good can come from obsessing over someone else's possessions?

These seem like practical, intelligent, and wise positions to keep a peaceful society, don't you think?

Syclone538
09-02-2012, 08:50
I didn't see any proof on wiki, maybe you can quote it.

As I said before it was started by Atheists who really really didn't want any other view except their own being put forth in a pluralistically funded public school system. Probably, in the ignorant belief that their religious viewpoint was the panacea to do away with all other religious viewpoints. Ignorant, in the sense that the French Revolution, nor Marxisim was not remembered.

And you can prove FSM didn't reveal itself to us that way as a test of faith?

Cavalry Doc
09-02-2012, 09:12
i swear i log onto facebook and every atheist there just has a ton of posts making fun of jesus or yelling out to everyone there atheists. What are they seeking attention, trying to get people to comment on them? The religious types i know just go about there day and dont try to rub it in anyones face. just an observation......

That is a common observation. Many atheists proselytize more than some jehovahs witnesses I've met.

http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p158/CavalryDoc/atheism1-1.jpg

Cavalry Doc
09-02-2012, 09:15
I didn't see any proof on wiki, maybe you can quote it.



And you can prove FSM didn't reveal itself to us that way as a test of faith?

The origins are quite obvious, but really, if you want to believe in the FSM, and his divinity, that's cool with me. But since you are being honest and all, would that mean that you now classify yourself as a theist?


Reading this page, it looks like the theist/atheist ratio is increasing, well, unless you guys are not being honest........ using a parody to make a point as kingarthurhk was pointing out to you.

Syclone538
09-02-2012, 09:19
The origins are quite obvious, but really, if you want to believe in the FSM, and his divinity, that's cool with me. But since you are being honest and all, would that mean that you now classify yourself as a theist?

The origins of the following of FSM are known, but if FSM actually exists, then the origins of FSM are not known.

I don't believe in FSM, I'm just saying it's just as valid as any other religion.

I am being honest, and no.

Cavalry Doc
09-02-2012, 09:55
The origins of the following of FSM are known, but if FSM actually exists, then the origins of FSM are not known.

I don't believe in FSM, I'm just saying it's just as valid as any other religion.

I am being honest, and no.

Actually, you are being deceitful.

If you actually believed in the divinity of the FSM, then you'd potentially be right. But since you acknowledge it is a ruse, it isn't valid, precisely because you admit you are making it all up. That's not too hard to understand I hope.

Kingarthurhk
09-02-2012, 09:56
I didn't see any proof on wiki, maybe you can quote it.



And you can prove FSM didn't reveal itself to us that way as a test of faith?

So, being disenguous is also an Atheist hallmark?

Syclone538
09-02-2012, 10:25
Well, it is if your intention is to be deceitful.
...

It's not.

...
If you actually believed in the divinity of the FSM, then you'd potentially be right.
...

So whether I believe in a religion is what makes it true or not?

...
But since you acknowledge it is a ruse,
...

I do not. There might be someone that believes it, and even if nobody believes it, you still can not prove it's not true, just like all religions.

...
it isn't valid, precisely because you admit you are making it all up.
...

You think I made it up, and think I claim to?

...
That's not too hard to understand I hope.

I think I understand, you are just wrong.

Geko45
09-02-2012, 10:26
Satire is neither disingenuous nor deceitful.

Syclone538
09-02-2012, 10:28
So, being disenguous is also an Atheist hallmark?

How so?

Can I take this non answer as saying, no you can not prove FSM doesn't exist?

Altaris
09-02-2012, 10:45
I assume you are referring to the 10 commandments?

Let's examine your thoughts on that:

Do you think it is good thing to be respectful and carring toward parents that raised you, and cared for you?

Do you think it is a good thing not to murder?

Do you think there would be less problems and vinereal diseases, and unwanted children if no one was sexually unfaithful to their spouse?

Do you think it would be a better world if people didn't steal other people's things?

Do you think it would be a better world if people didn't go around lying about other people, causing the other person to be harmed by that lie?

Do you think anything good can come from obsessing over someone else's possessions?

These seem like practical, intelligent, and wise positions to keep a peaceful society, don't you think?

Yes, these are practical common sense things that just about any tribe/society would come with. They certainly aren't divinely inspired or created. You don't need a god to act good.


To quote Steven Weinberg:
"With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion."

Cavalry Doc
09-02-2012, 10:48
Satire is neither disingenuous nor deceitful.

That's an incomplete thought. Satire can be deceitful depending on how it is presented.

Altaris
09-02-2012, 10:52
That's an incomplete thought. Satire can be deceitful depending on how it is presented.

I have to agree with that. Just look at The Daily Show with Jon Stewart for example. Claimed to be a satirical news program, and is a lot of the times. That however allows him to sneak a lot of very biased liberal view points in there, which he may or may not even realize he is doing.

Cavalry Doc
09-02-2012, 10:59
It's not.



So whether I believe in a religion is what makes it true or not?



I do not. There might be someone that believes it, and even if nobody believes it, you still can not prove it's not true, just like all religions.



You think I made it up, and think I claim to?



I think I understand, you are just wrong.


Whether a religion is true to you or not, depends on your belief in it. Challenging a person with a particular different religious belief, and somehow saying that their inability to disprove that belief, proves what exactly?

Other than they don't believe in the FSM, how does that disprove or counter christianity? They can believe in their god, and you can believe in yours.

And with me being an agnostic, you are correct, I cannot prove to you whether there is or ever has been a deity or deities (including FSM), but then I've never tried to prove it one way or the other. What would someone being a devout pastafarian bother me for?


I don't feel a need to disprove other people's religious beliefs.

Cavalry Doc
09-02-2012, 11:00
I have to agree with that. Just look at The Daily Show with Jon Stewart for example. Claimed to be a satirical news program, and is a lot of the times. That however allows him to sneak a lot of very biased liberal view points in there, which he may or may not even realize he is doing.

And you'd be surprised how many people consider his show a source of news.

Geko45
09-02-2012, 11:03
That's an incomplete thought. Satire can be deceitful depending on how it is presented.

Not by its very nature though. Yes, it can be used in that manner, but that is true of language in general. However, since satire is meant to be obviously absurd it is a bit disingenuous to start throwing around claims of dishonesty when it is fully apparent to everyone involved what the real point is.

Geko45
09-02-2012, 11:06
That however allows him to sneak a lot of very biased liberal view points in there, which he may or may not even realize he is doing.

That's not really an example of dishonest satire though. Jon Stewart really believes that junk, so he is not being dishonest, just horribly misguided. Satire is never unbiased and that is kinda the whole point of it.

Altaris
09-02-2012, 11:07
And you'd be surprised how many people consider his show a source of news.

No I wouldn't. I've seen the evidence :tongueout:

Cavalry Doc
09-02-2012, 11:11
Not by its very nature though. Yes, it can be used in that manner, but that is true of language in general. However, since satire is meant to be obviously absurd it is a bit disingenuous to start throwing around claims of dishonesty when it is fully apparent to everyone involved what the real point is.

I can point to several statements made in this thread that are untrue based on the follow up statements made by the same poster.

Why don't you tell me what the real point is? It looks to me like two opposing religious views ( christian vs atheist ). You cannot prove that the christian god doesn't exist, and he cannot prove that the FSM isn't real, even though he knows the origin of it as a fictitious parody.

What pearls of wisdom can be gleaned from that debate?

That he has faith in a different deity other than the FSM? I thought that was obvious way before this thread was began.

Cavalry Doc
09-02-2012, 11:13
No I wouldn't. I've seen the evidence :tongueout:

Whole foods in Austin???? Great place to go nature watching. I love watching the pasty skinned hemp rope sandal wearin' hippies down there. I keep looking for the letter at the meat counter from the management, apologizing for the murder of all the innocent animals on display.

:rofl:

Geko45
09-02-2012, 11:15
Challenging a person with a particular different religious belief, and somehow saying that their inability to disprove that belief, proves what exactly?

And this right here is the whole point of the Pastafarian satirical story.

Other than they don't believe in the FSM, how does that disprove or counter christianity?

It shows that when christians make this same claim about their faith (that it can't be definitively disproven) it is equally irrelevant.

Kingarthurhk
09-02-2012, 17:34
Yes, these are practical common sense things that just about any tribe/society would come with. They certainly aren't divinely inspired or created. You don't need a god to act good.


To quote Steven Weinberg:
"With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion."

The point is, they didn't come up with them. They codified in Exodus 20. So, you are good with the last six commandments, it's the first four that bother you?

Cavalry Doc
09-02-2012, 17:55
And this right here is the whole point of the Pastafarian satirical story.



It shows that when christians make this same claim about their faith (that it can't be definitively disproven) it is equally irrelevant.

What is irrelevant about the truth? You can't prove to them that their god does not exist, and they can't prove to you that their god exists. Not surprising, but hardly irrelevant.

Geko45
09-02-2012, 20:16
What is irrelevant about the truth? You can't prove to them that their god does not exist, and they can't prove to you that their god exists. Not surprising, but hardly irrelevant.

Umm, when did I say the truth is irrelevant? :dunno:

Seriously CD, you are making less and less sense lately.

Cavalry Doc
09-02-2012, 20:39
Umm, when did I say the truth is irrelevant? :dunno:

Seriously CD, you are making less and less sense lately.

One group believes in "x", and says you can't prove "x" false.

Another group says "oh yeah, you can't prove our admittedly made up hypothysis is false either.

The truth is, the second group still can't prove "x" is wrong.

A lot of people are just fixed in what they believe.

Geko45
09-02-2012, 20:57
Another group says "oh yeah, you can't prove our admittedly made up hypothysis is false either.

The truth is, the second group still can't prove "x" is wrong.

And the original group can't prove "X" is true which is the only point that the satire is meant to highlight. Seriously, if this is to abstract for you then you might want to consider some remedial class work. I suppose you think Jonathan Swift really wanted to eat the poor too.

Altaris
09-02-2012, 21:37
Whole foods in Austin???? Great place to go nature watching. I love watching the pasty skinned hemp rope sandal wearin' hippies down there. I keep looking for the letter at the meat counter from the management, apologizing for the murder of all the innocent animals on display.

:rofl:

:rofl::rofl::rofl:

That is actually exactly what I was thinking. My best friend lives right next to Barton Springs and some of the people around there are just nuts. If you think people on here are bad you should try to talk to one of them. The talk of feeling, and lack of facts and evidence is just mind numbing. Of course, you probably know all of that already since you are here as well.

Syclone538
09-02-2012, 21:39
Actually, you are being deceitful.
...

Please explain.

Altaris
09-02-2012, 21:47
The point is, they didn't come up with them. They codified in Exodus 20. So, you are good with the last six commandments, it's the first four that bother you?

I wouldn't say bother me, but are irrelevant/meaningless to me.

Why would I worry about blasphemy or graven images when I have no evidence of the entity I am supposedly offending in the first place.
While it would sound like a silly statement to make if I said "Dragon dammit", I am not worried about offending dragons, or the followers of dragons. They don't exist, so my statement is meaningless to anything involving them.

The other commandments that I do agree with are really just the Golden Rule. Do on to others as you would have done to you. Or Treat people as you would hope they treat you.....or however you want to word it. That is a basic rule that many cultures across many time periods and many continents have come up with. No god is required to come up with something like that. We are smart enough to figure that out on our own.

Kingarthurhk
09-03-2012, 06:10
I wouldn't say bother me, but are irrelevant/meaningless to me.

Why would I worry about blasphemy or graven images when I have no evidence of the entity I am supposedly offending in the first place.
While it would sound like a silly statement to make if I said "Dragon dammit", I am not worried about offending dragons, or the followers of dragons. They don't exist, so my statement is meaningless to anything involving them.

The other commandments that I do agree with are really just the Golden Rule. Do on to others as you would have done to you. Or Treat people as you would hope they treat you.....or however you want to word it. That is a basic rule that many cultures across many time periods and many continents have come up with. No god is required to come up with something like that. We are smart enough to figure that out on our own.

Unless, of course, there is a God, there is a revelation, and it means what it says:

Jeremiah 31:31-33, “The days are coming,” declares the Lord,
“when I will make a new covenant<sup class="crossreference" value='(CN (http://glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-19723CN))'></sup>
with the people of Israel
and with the people of Judah.
<sup class="versenum">32 </sup>It will not be like the covenant<sup class="crossreference" value='(CO (http://glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-19724CO))'></sup>
I made with their ancestors<sup class="crossreference" value='(CP (http://glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-19724CP))'></sup>
when I took them by the hand
to lead them out of Egypt,<sup class="crossreference" value='(CQ (http://glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-19724CQ))'></sup>
because they broke my covenant,
though I was a husband<sup class="crossreference" value='(CR (http://glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-19724CR))'></sup> to<sup class="footnote" value='[d (http://glocktalk.com/forums/#fen-NIV-19724d)]'>[d (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jeremiah+31&version=NIV#fen-NIV-19724d)]</sup> them,<sup class="footnote" value='[e (http://glocktalk.com/forums/#fen-NIV-19724e)]'>[e (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jeremiah+31&version=NIV#fen-NIV-19724e)]</sup>”
declares the Lord.
<sup class="versenum">33 </sup>“This is the covenant I will make with the people of Israel
after that time,” declares the Lord.
“I will put my law in their minds<sup class="crossreference" value='(CS (http://glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-19725CS))'></sup>
and write it on their hearts.<sup class="crossreference" value='(CT (http://glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-19725CT))'></sup>
I will be their God,
and they will be my people.<sup class="crossreference" value='(CU (http://glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-19725CU))'></sup>
<sup class="versenum">34 </sup>No longer will they teach<sup class="crossreference" value='(CV (http://glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-19726CV))'></sup> their neighbor,
or say to one another, ‘Know the Lord,’
because they will all know<sup class="crossreference" value='(CW (http://glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-19726CW))'></sup> me,
from the least of them to the greatest,”
declares the Lord.
“For I will forgive<sup class="crossreference" value='(CX (http://glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-19726CX))'></sup> their wickedness
and will remember their sins<sup class="crossreference" value='(CY (http://glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-19726CY))'></sup> no more.”

Hebrews 10:15-17, "
<sup class="versenum">15 </sup>The Holy Spirit also testifies<sup class="crossreference" value='(Z (http://glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-30149Z))'></sup> to us about this. First he says:

<sup class="versenum">16 </sup>“This is the covenant I will make with them
after that time, says the Lord.
I will put my laws in their hearts,
and I will write them on their minds.”<sup class="footnote" value='[b (http://glocktalk.com/forums/#fen-NIV-30150b)]'>[b (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews+10&version=NIV#fen-NIV-30150b)]</sup><sup class="crossreference" value='(AA (http://glocktalk.com/forums/#cen-NIV-30150AA))'></sup>


<sup class="versenum">17 </sup>Then he adds:
“Their sins and lawless acts
I will remember no more.”
<sup></sup>
<sup></sup>
<sup>Romans 2:12-15, "</sup>All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. <sup>13 </sup>For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God’s sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. <sup>14 </sup>(Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law. <sup>15 </sup>They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.)<sup>16 </sup>This will take place on the day when God judges people’s secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares."

So, you see, there is a God, there is an independant morality, that is why you use terms like right and wrong, "good" and "evil". Otherwise, you say, whatever you want to do, it really doesn't matter.

High-Gear
09-03-2012, 07:46
You can be an Atheist and identify as Pastafarian! Just like many people identify as Christian, and have varying levels of belief. In fact I guarentee there are people who identify as a religion, attend service, follow custom and ritual, and who don't believe a word of it! In fact I guarentee there are pastors, priests, and rabbis who are atheists.

So don't say a person who identifies as a pastafarian has to be a theist.

Cavalry Doc
09-03-2012, 07:55
And the original group can't prove "X" is true which is the only point that the satire is meant to highlight. Seriously, if this is to abstract for you then you might want to consider some remedial class work. I suppose you think Jonathan Swift really wanted to eat the poor too.


Neither side of the argument has proof, except for you of course. But that inductive reasoning is based on a relatively miniscule amount of data when you consider time, space and the limitations of your senses.

But some are so sure they are right in the argument. I find that really interesting. One side in the argument admits it is a matter of faith at least.

But the point that you claim the satire is true, and demand a rebuttal to your satire, it gets a little weird.

Either the FSM is a known fictitious creation with specifically known origins or not, if it is not a truly believed in deity/religion, then Kingarthurhk's pointing out the wiki that illustrates it's origin is a sufficient rebuttal. Done deal.

But then some around here stated that they really do consider it a deity, demanding a rebuttal. That's where the lines of integrity start getting a little blurry.

It is most likely satire as you claim, and it can simply be dismissed as such. But since you all claimed to really believe, isn't it fair to ask if you are now a theist? You have claimed as much in this thread. Potentially a good source of sigline material too.

:wavey:

RC-RAMIE
09-03-2012, 10:43
Neither side of the argument has proof, except for you of course. But that inductive reasoning is based on a relatively miniscule amount of data when you consider time, space and the limitations of your senses.

But some are so sure they are right in the argument. I find that really interesting. One side in the argument admits it is a matter of faith at least.

But the point that you claim the satire is true, and demand a rebuttal to your satire, it gets a little weird.

Either the FSM is a known fictitious creation with specifically known origins or not, if it is not a truly believed in deity/religion, then Kingarthurhk's pointing out the wiki that illustrates it's origin is a sufficient rebuttal. Done deal.

But then some around here stated that they really do consider it a deity, demanding a rebuttal. That's where the lines of integrity start getting a little blurry.

It is most likely satire as you claim, and it can simply be dismissed as such. But since you all claimed to really believe, isn't it fair to ask if you are now a theist? You have claimed as much in this thread. Potentially a good source of sigline material too.

:wavey:

You keep going way out of the way to defend your "opinion" that atheism is a religion.




....

steveksux
09-03-2012, 11:03
Either the FSM is a known fictitious creation with specifically known origins or not, if it is not a truly believed in deity/religion, then Kingarthurhk's pointing out the wiki that illustrates it's origin is a sufficient rebuttal. Done deal.

But then some around here stated that they really do consider it a deity, demanding a rebuttal. That's where the lines of integrity start getting a little blurry.

Jews still consider Jesus claims of divinity and to be the Messiah to be a fictitious creation of his disciples.

That doesn't call into question the integrity of Christians who believe otherwise.

Randy

Cavalry Doc
09-03-2012, 11:04
You keep going way out of the way to defend your "opinion" that atheism is a religion.




....

I don't have to go out of my way at all.

I just see people with different systems of belief arguing that theirs is the right one, or that a particular other belief system is obviously the wrong one.

Neither can know for sure, but both sides are convinced.

steveksux
09-03-2012, 11:04
You keep going way out of the way to defend your "opinion" that atheism is a religion...With such ardor and faith, too!!!

Same with his crusade to discredit the FSM.

Have we discovered an offshoot religion of Pastafarianism? Anti-Pastafarianism? Belief with ardor and faith. ANd just because Anti-pastafarianism is the antonym of Pastafarianism doesn't mean they aren't the same. Or so I've heard.

Randy

Kingarthurhk
09-03-2012, 11:10
Jews still consider Jesus claims of divinity and to be the Messiah to be a fictitious creation of his disciples.

That doesn't call into question the integrity of Christians who believe otherwise.

Randy

So does Islam. So does Budhism. So does Hinduism. What's your point?

steveksux
09-03-2012, 11:26
So does Islam. So does Budhism. So does Hinduism. What's your point?
That the argument CD is using against Pastafarianism makes it no different than any of the other major religions. Other than seniority.

The fact that others consider Christianity a false religion doesn't bring into question the integrity of Christians who believe it in spite of those other people's opinions as CD seems to be implying of Pastafarians.

Randy

Geko45
09-03-2012, 17:09
It is most likely satire as you claim, and it can simply be dismissed as such. But since you all claimed to really believe, isn't it fair to ask if you are now a theist? You have claimed as much in this thread. Potentially a good source of sigline material too.

:wavey:

I'm just gonna assume that you are feigning this sort of stupidity in a crude and ineffective attempt to counter satire with satire.

Hint, was Jonathan Swift really a cannibal? Was he being deceitful?

High-Gear
09-03-2012, 17:22
And you'd be surprised how many people consider his show a source of news.

Unlike Fox news how? At least Jon Stewart tells you up front their intent is comedic satire. Fox is extremely biased, and went to court to protect their right to lie, while representing themselves as a "fair and balanced" legitamate news agency.:rofl:

Kingarthurhk
09-03-2012, 18:19
I'm just gonna assume that you are feigning this sort of stupidity in a crude and ineffective attempt to counter satire with satire.

Hint, was Jonathan Swift really a cannibal? Was he being deceitful?

Which undersores my point that that FSB is an Atheist invention. An anger reaction that their supremacy should ever be challeged in shaping young minds.

High-Gear
09-03-2012, 19:04
Which undersores my point that that FSB is an Atheist invention. An anger reaction that their supremacy should ever be challeged in shaping young minds.

And your god is a human invention. A fear reaction to attempt to explain the natural world, and lessen fears about death.

Kingarthurhk
09-03-2012, 19:20
And your god is a human invention. A fear reaction to attempt to explain the natural world, and lessen fears about death.

Or, could it be it is your attempt to put aside your guilt over the choices you have made, and misery loves company, so if everyone is molded to be just like you, then you can pretend that it is all okay and normal-when you can't put aside that it is not?

Also, I don't fear death. I am cool with the idea.

Geko45
09-03-2012, 19:51
Or, could it be it is your attempt to put aside your guilt over the choices you have made, and misery loves company, so if everyone is molded to be just like you, then you can pretend that it is all okay and normal-when you can't put aside that it is not?

This is just another example of the typical theist attempt to resolve their own internal cognitive dissonance. The theist encounters intelligent people that don't acknowledge their "truth" and they ask themselves "how can this possibly be?" Rather than confront the possibility that they may be mistaken, the equivocation of "they must have concealed sin they don't want to repent" is substituted for reality.

This allows you to maintain your worldview and categorically dismiss any argument presented no matter how compelling. It's nothing more than a watered down version of the same strategy scientologists employ and it says more about you than it does your opponent.

Geko45
09-03-2012, 19:55
Which underscores my point that that FSM is an Atheist invention. An anger reaction that their supremacy should ever be challenged in shaping young minds.

Satire usually spawns from frustration so you are at least partly correct, but the second part is total hypocrisy. Theists claim that their version of "god" has all the answers for all people. Most atheists I have known have always taken the live and let live position (just don't force us to be involved) approach.

Cavalry Doc
09-03-2012, 20:07
I'm just gonna assume that you are feigning this sort of stupidity in a crude and ineffective attempt to counter satire with satire.

Hint, was Jonathan Swift really a cannibal? Was he being deceitful?

There's that lack of manners you are well known for again.

You and others brought up an apparently fictitious parody of religion and asked a christian to rebut it, when he did so quite well by pointing out that it is a fictitious parody, you and others claimed that you were true followers of the FSM, and demanded that he rebut it's existence.

I guess the real question is were you lying then, or are you lying now?

You are showing your emotions on your sleeve again, simply because you were making a ridiculous and dishonest argument, and it was pointed out to you.

Cavalry Doc
09-03-2012, 20:14
Satire usually spawns from frustration so you are at least partly correct, but the second part is total hypocrisy. Theists claim that their version of "god" has all the answers for all people. Most atheists I have known have always taken the live and let live position (just don't force us to be involved) approach.

Satire is not necessarily a high art form.

Pastafarianism promises hookers, blow and all the spaghetti you can eat.

He boiled for our sins, rAmen.

I can see your frustration. How dare all these other religions try to get you to convert. When was the last time that happened in real life where you were not able to stop it with a polite "thanks, but no thanks"?

But you've stated that all religions (except yours) is a scourge on humanity and should be banned. Where is the live and let live in that position?

You must be very conflicted internally to be so inconsistent. To use a phrase in a satirical way, you've got some demons to exercise.

:cool:

Syclone538
09-03-2012, 20:37
Actually, you are being deceitful.
...

Please explain.

Geko45
09-03-2012, 20:57
There's that lack of manners you are well known for again.

Haven't you noticed a difference in how I relate to you versus how I relate to King? Why do you think that is?

I guess the real question is were you lying then, or are you lying now?

No, the real question is why are you being deliberately obtuse?

Geko45
09-03-2012, 21:11
But you've stated that all religions (except yours) is a scourge on humanity and should be banned.

Liar. Show me where I have ever said it should be banned. I have called it a scourge that we are better off without, but I have never called for the banning of religious freedom. In fact, I have repeatedly stated that I don't care what someone believes as long as they don't force it on others (hint, search for Gekoism).

High-Gear
09-04-2012, 00:34
Or, could it be it is your attempt to put aside your guilt over the choices you have made, and misery loves company, so if everyone is molded to be just like you, then you can pretend that it is all okay and normal-when you can't put aside that it is not?

Also, I don't fear death. I am cool with the idea.

King,
It has nothing to do with guilt, or wanting people to be like me. I didn't say you fear death, I said in my opinion gods are invented in part because once people became aware of their own mortality it helped them cope with the fear of death.

Why do you believe if I don't see the plausibilty of your god, I must be either mad at your god or too guilty to face him? This concept baffles me.




Btw, I don't fear death either. I'm too busy living life to the fullest Each day to give it much thought. When it happens I won't know it, as I don't know what it was like before I was born.

Cavalry Doc
09-04-2012, 04:30
Haven't you noticed a difference in how I relate to you versus how I relate to King? Why do you think that is?


I'm sure you are just about to tell me. Don't be surprised if we have different opinions on that too though.


No, the real question is why are you being deliberately obtuse?

What would you call pretending to really believe in the FSM and demanding kingarthurhk prove he doesn't exist?

Cavalry Doc
09-04-2012, 04:37
Please explain.

I read through the thread again. You personally did not claim to be a born again pastafarian, so you were not deceitful. The direction the thread was going was. Heck, one atheist has claimed three different religious beliefs in a single thread..

Bren
09-04-2012, 04:42
One group believes in "x", and says you can't prove "x" false.

Another group says "oh yeah, you can't prove our admittedly made up hypothysis is false either.

The truth is, the second group still can't prove "x" is wrong.

A lot of people are just fixed in what they believe.

The point is to very simply illustrate the burden of proof and the reason for it to people who don't understand it, such as those who claim to be right because you can't "disprove" what they believe.

The flying spaghetti monster illustrates that you can't prove the negative with evidence, even where both sides know the story is made up. Therefore, saying "you still can't prove 'x'" is wrong is proves nothing, it is just a standard logical fallacy called "argument from ignorance".

In short - it isn't intended to prove anything about God or flying spaghetti monsters, it is intended to educate people quickly and easily, so they don't keep repeating a ridiculous argument and thinking they "win the debate" because they can't put 2 and 2 together.

The argument is also known as "Russell's Teapot" from Bretrand Russell:
Many orthodox people speak as though it were the business of sceptics to disprove received dogmas rather than of dogmatists to prove them. This is, of course, a mistake. If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time.

Cavalry Doc
09-04-2012, 05:06
Liar. Show me where I have ever said it should be banned. I have called it a scourge that we are better off without, but I have never called for the banning of religious freedom. In fact, I have repeatedly stated that I don't care what someone believes as long as they don't force it on others (hint, search for Gekoism).

Never? You've never said that religion should be eliminated?

Tell you what, I'll concede that my entire line of reasoning was illegitimate if you concede that religion is a scourge on the human race that must be eliminated if we are ever to be truly free.

And then we'll call it... totally lopsided in my favor.

:thumbsup:



I think you owe me an apology now. I'll wait.


I think that post was a window into how you truly think about other belief systems. You have a very strong need to think you know an awful lot, and that you are the one that is correct about any differing opinions. I mean really, wanting to eliminate all other religions so that only your opinion of how something happened billions of years ago survives? That's a little arrogant considering just how insignificant you really are when you take into account the billions of other people on the planet, our infinitesimally short life spans when compared to age of the universe and the short distances you have traveled within the vastness of space.

Cavalry Doc
09-04-2012, 05:14
The point is to very simply illustrate the burden of proof and the reason for it to people who don't understand it, such as those who claim to be right because you can't "disprove" what they believe.

The flying spaghetti monster illustrates that you can't prove the negative with evidence, even where both sides know the story is made up. Therefore, saying "you still can't prove 'x'" is wrong is exactly the kind of illogical thinking the story is designed to educate people about.

In short - it isn't intended to prove anything about God or flying spaghetti monsters, it is intended to educate people quickly and easily, so they don't keep repeating a ridiculous argument and thinking they "win the debate" because they can't put 2 and 2 together.

The argument is also known as "Russell's Teapot" from Bretrand Russell:

I think in many theistic belief systems, there is a claim that faith is required. They believe because they believe. Whether someone else believes in something else that cannot also be proven wrong, meh, who really cares? Also, how do you "win" an argument about religion? We all have different opinions, none of which we can prove, but each of us is comfortable with our own opinion for our own reasons.

The FSM was not contrived to be an educational tool without barbs, as proven by this thread.

We end up right back where we were before it was brought up. kingarthurhk believes in jesus, geko believes all other belief systems need to be eliminated, and I believe that we should all be tolerant of other belief systems.

Altaris
09-04-2012, 08:57
We end up right back where we were before it was brought up. kingarthurhk believes in jesus, geko believes all other belief systems need to be eliminated, and I believe that we should all be tolerant of other belief systems.


I disagree. I do not think we should be tolerant of all belief systems. Not to put words in other people's mouths, but from what I have seen, some on here feel the same way.

Sam Harris: Can science answer questions about morality? - YouTube

Sam has another 1hr 47min lecture where he expands on this as well. One of the things he talks about there touches on exactly what you just said on just tolerating it. When you have a culture(Islam for example), that says if you talk bad about this book we will behead you, or that if you are a woman and you want to go to school we will throw battery acid in your face, how can we as a moral population tolerate that in any way shape or form. Tolerance is what allows ignorance to thrive. Tolerance is what allowed bad things to happen to people. If we want to improve the moral landscape and reduce suffering of humans, then we have no choice but to be intolerant of their made up beliefs and evil actions.


Maybe this belongs in the Good/Bad thread as well, but since I saw you post that I had to throw it here.

Cavalry Doc
09-04-2012, 09:15
I disagree. I do not think we should be tolerant of all belief systems. Not to put words in other people's mouths, but from what I have seen, some on here feel the same way.

Sam Harris: Can science answer questions about morality? - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6zY_NA6Zig)

Sam has another 1hr 47min lecture where he expands on this as well. One of the things he talks about there touches on exactly what you just said on just tolerating it. When you have a culture(Islam for example), that says if you talk bad about this book we will behead you, or that if you are a woman and you want to go to school we will throw battery acid in your face, how can we as a moral population tolerate that in any way shape or form. Tolerance is what allows ignorance to thrive. Tolerance is what allowed bad things to happen to people. If we want to improve the moral landscape and reduce suffering of humans, then we have no choice but to be intolerant of their made up beliefs and evil actions.


Maybe this belongs in the Good/Bad thread as well, but since I saw you post that I had to throw it here.

I guess I should have qualified that a bit. If you tolerate us, we will tolerate you back. I've been to war twice to restore homelands to muslims. The Kosovars were very appreciative about it, the Kuwaiti's? For a couple of months or so, but that was about it. I've also been to combat where the mission wasn't to help them at all.

So, when the good muslims are good, I'm willing to be tolerant, when they aren't, I'm willing to confront that head on, preferably with overwhelming fire superiority.

Good muslims should stay away from the bad ones. I'd recommend a distance about twice the blast radius of the most common ordnance used in theater.

http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p158/CavalryDoc/GWOT.gif

Bren
09-04-2012, 09:30
I think in many theistic belief systems, there is a claim that faith is required. They believe because they believe. Whether someone else believes in something else that cannot also be proven wrong, meh, who really cares? Also, how do you "win" an argument about religion? We all have different opinions, none of which we can prove, but each of us is comfortable with our own opinion for our own reasons.


You win an argument about religion by having it. As you said, the religious side can't be proven by evidence, so when a religious person engages in an evidentiary argument about their religion, they have already lost.

Who really cares? Apparently the religious people who respond in these threads and the atheists who'd like to decrease the stranglehold the religious have on our society.

Syclone538
09-04-2012, 09:51
It wasn't in the clip, but I think it should be mentioned how Sam Harris explains right and wrong.

The worst possible suffering for the longest possible time for the most possible life is bad, and everything else is better. Now you have a starting point on one end. Basically, if you disagree with that you don't know what you are talking about.

Syclone538
09-04-2012, 09:55
I read through the thread again. You personally did not claim to be a born again pastafarian, so you were not deceitful. The direction the thread was going was. Heck, one atheist has claimed three different religious beliefs in a single thread..

Well thanks for admitting that I wasn't lying. If I knew you were going to have to read the thread again, I'd have also asked you to name the post #s where anyone did. Now I think I'll read the thread again.

Geko45
09-04-2012, 13:02
But you've stated that all religions (except yours) is a scourge on humanity and should be banned.

Liar. Show me where I have ever said it should be banned.

Never? You've never said that religion should be eliminated?

Tell you what, I'll concede that my entire line of reasoning was illegitimate if you concede that religion is a scourge on the human race that must be eliminated if we are ever to be truly free.

I think you owe me an apology now. I'll wait.

You'll be waiting a long time because you are still a damn liar. You try to switch what you are accusing me of and think no one will notice? "Eliminated" (as in through education) is a far different thing than forcibly "banning" something.

You really have no integrity at all, do you?

Cavalry Doc
09-04-2012, 14:12
You win an argument about religion by having it. As you said, the religious side can't be proven by evidence, so when a religious person engages in an evidentiary argument about their religion, they have already lost.

Who really cares? Apparently the religious people who respond in these threads and the atheists who'd like to decrease the stranglehold the religious have on our society.



It seems to me, that if evidence is required, the theists and atheists would both lose. The agnostics would seem to be the favorites in that arena.

What stranglehold?? I am very rarely inconvenienced IRL by other peoples religion (with the exception of jihadists).

Cavalry Doc
09-04-2012, 14:14
You'll be waiting a long time because you are still a damn liar. You try to switch what you are accusing me of and think no one will notice? "Eliminated" (as in through education) is a far different thing than forcibly "banning" something.

You really have no integrity at all, do you?

So wait, now you're going around damning people. And you thought you weren't religious. :rofl:

Sure. Twist it around.

Do you truly believe religion can be eliminated through your educational efforts. Is it possible in the next 10 years, if churches are allowed to continue their recruiting? Are they allowed to teach creation in school, or should that be banned, Uhhhh.... err.... Eliminated?

We both know what you meant, otherwise you'd be able to calmly correct me instead of the overly emotional hissy fit you are having at the moment.

RC-RAMIE
09-04-2012, 14:26
So wait, now you're going around damning people. And you thought you weren't religious. :rofl:

Sure. Twist it around.

Do you truly believe religion can be eliminated through your educational efforts. Is it possible in the next 10 years, if churches are allowed to continue their recruiting? Are they allowed to teach creation in school, or should that be banned, Uhhhh.... err.... Eliminated?

We both know what you meant, otherwise you'd be able to calmly correct me instead of the overly emotional hissy fit you are having at the moment.

Doc probably just another one of your "opinions" about what he meant.

Geko45
09-04-2012, 14:31
So wait, now you're going around damning people. And you thought you weren't religious. :rofl:

Sure. Twist it around.

And you dodge again... You're still a damn liar and everyone that reads this will know it.

Oh, and I'm not praying to some deity to damn you, I'm wishing you damned by my own concerted thoughts. I don't think it will work, but it sure does make me feel good. You might even say I wish it with ardor and faith. Yes, that's it, my new religion is wishing you eternal burning torment with the white hot intensity of a thousand blazing suns.

:wavey:

Cavalry Doc
09-04-2012, 14:35
Doc probably just another one of your "opinions" about what he meant.

He seemed pretty clear at the time, but he has walked back a lot of the things he has said before. The emotional volume of the response is usually highest when he has to do that.

Geko45
09-04-2012, 14:36
The emotional volume of the response is usually highest when he has to do that.

Oh, then you'll love the one above...

:wavey:

Cavalry Doc
09-04-2012, 14:38
And you dodge again... You're still a damn liar and everyone that reads this will know it.

Oh, and I'm not praying to some deity to damn you, I'm wishing you damned by my own concerted thoughts. I don't think it will work, but it sure does make me feel good. You might even say I wish it with ardor and faith. Yes, that's it, my new religion is wishing you eternal burning torment with the white hot intensity of a thousand blazing suns.

:wavey:

Any chance you went to starbucks for lunch? You really have to lay off the caffeine. Try half-caf for a week or so to ween yourself off, it'll help you avoid caffeine withdraw headaches.

Then you might want to make an appointment to take care of that little anger management thingy we've talked about before. K?

Geko45
09-04-2012, 15:12
Then you might want to make an appointment to take care of that little anger management thingy we've talked about before. K?

It keeps me warm...

:wavey:

Cavalry Doc
09-04-2012, 15:31
It keeps me warm...

:wavey:

I'm sure it does. Just a tip though, don't talk about religion when you are playing poker. You'll lose your shirt.

Kingarthurhk
09-04-2012, 16:13
This is just another example of the typical theist attempt to resolve their own internal cognitive dissonance. The theist encounters intelligent people that don't acknowledge their "truth" and they ask themselves "how can this possibly be?" Rather than confront the possibility that they may be mistaken, the equivocation of "they must have concealed sin they don't want to repent" is substituted for reality.

This allows you to maintain your worldview and categorically dismiss any argument presented no matter how compelling. It's nothing more than a watered down version of the same strategy scientologists employ and it says more about you than it does your opponent.

This seems like what I get from Atheists.

Kingarthurhk
09-04-2012, 16:20
And you dodge again... You're still a damn liar and everyone that reads this will know it.

Oh, and I'm not praying to some deity to damn you, I'm wishing you damned by my own concerted thoughts. I don't think it will work, but it sure does make me feel good. You might even say I wish it with ardor and faith. Yes, that's it, my new religion is wishing you eternal burning torment with the white hot intensity of a thousand blazing suns.

:wavey:

That seems like a waste of ador and faith that could be used in a postive direction.

Geko45
09-04-2012, 16:29
That seems like a waste of ardor and faith that could be used in a positive direction.

Yeah, you're probably right, but I don't see opposing intellectual dishonesty as a completely negative effort.

Animal Mother
09-04-2012, 16:58
This allows you to maintain your worldview and categorically dismiss any argument presented no matter how compelling. It's nothing more than a watered down version of the same strategy scientologists employ and it says more about you than it does your opponent.
This seems like what I get from Atheists.

No, it really isn't, at least in the case of "proof" of God or the perfectness of the Bible. In those instances, you present an argument, a response is offered. You ignore the response and declare your argument proven. That isn't what atheists do.

Cavalry Doc
09-04-2012, 17:40
Yeah, you're probably right, but I don't see opposing intellectual dishonesty as a completely negative effort.

You're the one so objective that you stated that you feel certain things with the intensity of a thousand blazing suns, when it probably didn't even break 100 degrees Fahrenheit. With statements like that, when you claim that all other religions are a scourge and should be eliminated to ensure freedom (ironic considering which amandment the founding fathers felt important enough to do first) its perfectly reasonable to believe that you would not rely on education alone.

But if you wish to walk that statement back to just wanting to try to convince all other religions to follow yours, I guess we could all just chalk it up to prosthelytising.

Kingarthurhk
09-04-2012, 17:42
Yeah, you're probably right, but I don't see opposing intellectual dishonesty as a completely negative effort.

I don't see CavDoc as dishonest, rather the other way round. He looks at Atheism and Theism from a trully Agnostic view point. He looks at both offerings, and says, "I really don't know which one is right." How is that dishonest? It seems like a man who is searching, and to honest search is no dishonesty. It is an independat perspective looking to find meaning, and not sure where to turn.

It is like being angry at a man with no feet because your shoes are too tight and gave you a blister.

Kingarthurhk
09-04-2012, 17:45
No, it really isn't, at least in the case of "proof" of God or the perfectness of the Bible. In those instances, you present an argument, a response is offered. You ignore the response and declare your argument proven. That isn't what atheists do.

Sure it is. It is the dance you and I often have. I present to you an agrument. It seems the more effective the argument your response is:

No, that is inacurrate and your argument is without merit.

However, you can't tell me why. You simply deny the argument, by denying it, and for no other reason.

Animal Mother
09-04-2012, 17:56
Sure it is. It is the dance you and I often have. I present to you an agrument. It seems the more effective the argument your response is:

No, that is inacurrate and your argument is without merit.

However, you can't tell me why. You simply deny the argument, by denying it, and for no other reason.I do tell you why, I've told you why in every instance. I challenge you to find a single post I've made responding to one of your arguments where I haven't explained the problem with the argument you are making. You claim I simply deny the argument, and apparently do this on a regular basis, finding such a post should be an easy task.

Cavalry Doc
09-04-2012, 18:01
I don't see CavDoc as dishonest, rather the other way round. He looks at Atheism and Theism from a trully Agnostic view point. He looks at both offerings, and says, "I really don't know which one is right." How is that dishonest? It seems like a man who is searching, and to honest search is no dishonesty. It is an independat perspective looking to find meaning, and not sure where to turn.

It is like being angry at a man with no feet because your shoes are too tight and gave you a blister.

Thanks for the vote of confidence. Also, a great analogy, a rare occurance around here. I am only passively searching though. When something happens that convinces me one way or the other, I'll be sure to let everyone here know. Geko, and a few others let's their emotions get the better of them, and when they aren't as convincing as they think they should be, attack the messenger. There are going to be differences of opinion, it's inevitable. Some can accept that, some can't.

Bren
09-05-2012, 05:23
It seems to me, that if evidence is required, the theists and atheists would both lose. The agnostics would seem to be the favorites in that arena.

What stranglehold?? I am very rarely inconvenienced IRL by other peoples religion (with the exception of jihadists).

Than you have missed many, many posts discussing fundamental things like "postive claims" and "burden of proof." Those who believe their is no evidence of the existece of a god or gods are the default winners until somebody produces evidence - only at that point is their anything to refute.

The idea that there is a requirement to "disprove" things, equal to the requirement to prove them, even where they are not supported by any objective evidence, is what that whole "Flyingt Spaghetti Monster" debate was about.

When someone says, "the flying spaghetti monster exists" that doesn't put them on equal footing with those who don't believe it, because they have presented no objective evidence and, therefore, with no reason to believe, disbelief is the default position for any rational mind. To merit any belief or require disproof of evidence, the person making the positive claim must first support that claim with enough evidence tpo make it more than imagination.

Cavalry Doc
09-05-2012, 06:02
But let's be honest. The claims of many proclaimed atheists go beyond simple lack of belief in a single deity or religion. The strengths of their feelings on the subject certainly seem to be in line with the definition of atheist.


Main Entry: athe·ist
Pronunciation: \ˈā-thē-ist\
Function: noun
Date: 1551
: one who believes that there is no deity

RC-RAMIE
09-05-2012, 08:08
But let's be honest. The claims of many proclaimed atheists go beyond simple lack of belief in a single deity or religion. The strengths of their feelings on the subject certainly seem to be in line with the definition of atheist.


Main Entry: athe·ist
Pronunciation: \ˈā-thē-ist\
Function: noun
Date: 1551
: one who believes that there is no deity

No, just your "opinion" again.

Cavalry Doc
09-05-2012, 09:39
No, just your "opinion" again.

A well supported and logical opinion though. It certainly makes sense.

nmk
09-05-2012, 09:58
I don't see CavDoc as dishonest, rather the other way round. He looks at Atheism and Theism from a trully Agnostic view point. He looks at both offerings, and says, "I really don't know which one is right." How is that dishonest? It seems like a man who is searching, and to honest search is no dishonesty. It is an independat perspective looking to find meaning, and not sure where to turn.

It is like being angry at a man with no feet because your shoes are too tight and gave you a blister.

Sure it is. It is the dance you and I often have. I present to you an agrument. It seems the more effective the argument your response is:

No, that is inacurrate and your argument is without merit.

However, you can't tell me why. You simply deny the argument, by denying it, and for no other reason.

Is this real life?

Geko45
09-05-2012, 11:32
He looks at both offerings, and says, "I really don't know which one is right." How is that dishonest?

If that were all he was saying then I'd have no problem with him, but it is not. Not only does he not claim to know, he insists no one else can either. Then he spends most of his time on here telling atheists that he is certain atheism is a religion, but never challenges theists on their much more definitive claims. He likes to play the part of honest pilgrim searching for answers, but that position is not consistent with his actions here in this forum. For someone who self identifies as an agnostic, he seems to claim to know what others believe better than they do (i.e. intellectually dishonest).

Cavalry Doc
09-05-2012, 12:14
If that all he were saying then I'd have no problem with him, but it is not. Not only does he not claim to know, he insists no one else can either. Then he spends most of his time on here telling atheists that he is certain atheism is a religion, but never challenges theists on their much more definitive claims. He likes to play the part of honest pilgrim searching for answers, but that position is not consistent with his actions here in this forum. For someone he self identifies as an agnostic, he seems to claim to know what others believe better than they do (i.e. intellectually dishonest).

Theists admit it is a matter of faith for them. At least they are honest about that. I don't have any problems with them believing what they want. I have no problems with atheista believing there has never been a deity either. Both are within the realm of possibility. The thing some proclaimed atheists have a problem admitting is that believing there has never been a deity is also not a proven fact. It's an opinion, and seeing the emotional reaction to pointing that out, I find it hard to believe that at least a few here have only a passive lack of belief. Heck, one guy even proclaimed that he had proven there was no god. That's a pretty lofty claim considering the limits of human knowledge.

There is no reason to be so upset. And my quest for the answer as to whether there ever was a deity is markedly passive. I have too much stuff to occupy my time, and I'm not sure what grid coordinates the search would even begin at.

Geko45
09-05-2012, 12:20
Theists admit it is a matter of faith for them. At least they are honest about that.

Then you need to go read Vic's thread on Evidence for the existence of God (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1440948).

RC-RAMIE
09-05-2012, 12:21
The thing some proclaimed atheists have a problem admitting is that believing there has never been a deity is also not a proven fact.

Not a proven fact just no evidence to believe otherwise.

Cavalry Doc
09-05-2012, 12:27
Then you need to go read Vic's thread on Evidence for the existence of God (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1440948).

I have. Not much different than your use of your own limited experience to inductively prove a god has never existed. He's looked around and with what he has seen, he has chosen to believe there is a god. Two sides of the same coin.

Cavalry Doc
09-05-2012, 12:31
Not a proven fact just no evidence to believe otherwise.

None that you are willing to accept anyway. Some believe they have found proof that a god does exist. I haven't found any "proof" that is convincing one way or the other. There are some pretty good arguments both ways.

RC-RAMIE
09-05-2012, 13:35
None that you are willing to accept anyway. Some believe they have found proof that a god does exist. I haven't found any "proof" that is convincing one way or the other. There are some pretty good arguments both ways.

No just none. What evidence do you think I keep rejecting to stay a atheist?

scccdoc
09-05-2012, 13:55
Theists admit it is a matter of faith for them. At least they are honest about that. I don't have any problems with them believing what they want. I have no problems with atheista believing there has never been a deity either. Both are within the realm of possibility. The thing some proclaimed atheists have a problem admitting is that believing there has never been a deity is also not a proven fact. It's an opinion, and seeing the emotional reaction to pointing that out, I find it hard to believe that at least a few here have only a passive lack of belief. Heck, one guy even proclaimed that he had proven there was no god. That's a pretty lofty claim considering the limits of human knowledge.



There is no reason to be so upset. And my quest for the answer as to whether there ever was a deity is markedly passive. I have too much stuff to occupy my time, and I'm not sure what grid coordinates the search would even begin at.

A man rejects God neither because of intellectual demands nor because of scarcity of evidence. A man rejects God because of a moral resistance that refuses to admit his need for God..
Ravi Zacharias

Gunhaver
09-05-2012, 14:00
A man rejects God neither because of intellectual demands nor because of scarcity of evidence. A man rejects God because of a moral resistance that refuses to admit his need for God..
Ravi Zacharias



Actually it's all three of those things.

scccdoc
09-05-2012, 14:04
Actually it's all three of those things.

I assume the latter................

Gunhaver
09-05-2012, 14:05
None that you are willing to accept anyway. Some believe they have found proof that a god does exist. I haven't found any "proof" that is convincing one way or the other. There are some pretty good arguments both ways.

And yet you only feel compelled to argue against the atheists certainty that he doesn't exist and never the theists certainty that he does. Not very agnostic of you.

Cavalry Doc
09-05-2012, 14:08
No just none. What evidence do you think I keep rejecting to stay a atheist?

The same evidence that others use to conclude there is a god. Don't feel bad, it hasn't convinced me either, but at least I understand where they are coming from.

scccdoc
09-05-2012, 14:10
And yet you only feel compelled to argue against the atheists certainty that he doesn't exist and never the theists certainty that he does. Not very agnostic of you.

The Bible says "either you are for God or you are against Him". If Cal Doc is not for him, he therefore in God's eyes would be against Him. (sorry, no time to find the reference)

Cavalry Doc
09-05-2012, 14:11
And yet you only feel compelled to argue against the atheists certainty that he doesn't exist and never the theists certainty that he does. Not very agnostic of you.

I don't think it's a compulsion, I just get more pushback from the atheists, or at least it seems that way. You point out to a theist that there is no absolute proof of a deity and that they have arrived at their conclusion using faith, and they don't seem to upset about it. Point out the same thing to an atheist and you are treated as a blasphemer.

Cavalry Doc
09-05-2012, 14:16
The Bible says "either you are for God or you are against Him". If Cal Doc is not for him, he therefore in God's eyes would be against Him. (sorry, no time to find the reference)

I haven't heard that directly from god yet. I'll let you know if I get a call. I respect people's choice to practice thier religion, until it flies a plane into a building or protests a soldiers funeral. Then I have issues.

RC-RAMIE
09-05-2012, 14:41
I don't think it's a compulsion, I just get more pushback from the atheists, or at least it seems that way. You point out to a theist that there is no absolute proof of a deity and that they have arrived at their conclusion using faith, and they don't seem to upset about it. Point out the same thing to an atheist and you are treated as a blasphemer.

Because atheist didn't get there by faith.

scccdoc
09-05-2012, 14:46
I haven't heard that directly from god yet. I'll let you know if I get a call. I respect people's choice to practice thier religion, until it flies a plane into a building or protests a soldiers funeral. Then I have issues.

That was not meant to be derogatory toward you, just a statement of Biblical fact. I admire your open-minded approach, too bad others do not! :whistling:

dave421
09-05-2012, 15:06
That was not meant to be derogatory toward you, just a statement of Biblical fact. I admire your open-minded approach, too bad others do not! :whistling:

Is there such a thing? The testimonies in the Bible are of man who is flawed. What testimonies to include in (and leave out of) the book were chosen by flawed man. The book has been translated many times by... Flawed man. If no such thing as a perfect man exists, how can the bible and the testimonies within be perfect?

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

whmaxwell
09-05-2012, 15:13
But I'm Geko45 and I am establishing Gekoism. I am an atheist and I also believe that religion generally oppresses people, but I don't think the solution to that problem is more oppression. Under Gekoism, everyone is free to do and believe whatever they want as long as they do not infringe upon the rights of another to do likewise. You don't even have to like each other under Gekoism, but you damn well will leave each other alone. That's pretty much the only crime under Gekoism, violating the rights of another.

There you go... that's my take on it. I don't care what you believe as long as you don't try to kill me for not believing what you do.

Oh, and I have never had an argument with my friends that are atheist or pagan or Christian (for that matter). I have had some discussions about liberal vs. conservative :)

Cavalry Doc
09-05-2012, 17:04
That was not meant to be derogatory toward you, just a statement of Biblical fact. I admire your open-minded approach, too bad others do not! :whistling:

No problem, I get that a lot.

http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p158/CavalryDoc/CavDoc-3.gif

Cavalry Doc
09-05-2012, 17:52
Because atheist didn't get there by faith.

Sure they did. If you strongly believe there is no deity, it is simply a matter of faith. You may have used inductive logic to arrive at that conclusion, but you have to admit, so did the theists.

People look at the universe as we know it, and come to certain conclusions. It's not a bad thing, lots of people look at things and make decisions based on what they have experienced, and others with different experience come to different conclusions. If you think religion is complex, you ought to try politics. Each separate issue has pro and con arguments along an almost infinite gradient between polar extremes.

There is a god, there ain't a god, there might be a god is pretty simplistic by comparison.

Cavalry Doc
09-05-2012, 17:55
But I'm Geko45 and I am establishing Gekoism. I am an atheist and I also believe that religion generally oppresses people, but I don't think the solution to that problem is more oppression. Under Gekoism, everyone is free to do and believe whatever they want as long as they do not infringe upon the rights of another to do likewise. You don't even have to like each other under Gekoism, but you damn well will leave each other alone. That's pretty much the only crime under Gekoism, violating the rights of another.

You and Barry would get along great. You both have such a high opinion of yourselves.

http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p158/CavalryDoc/rofllarge.gifhttp://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p158/CavalryDoc/rofllarge.gifhttp://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p158/CavalryDoc/rofllarge.gifhttp://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p158/CavalryDoc/rofllarge.gif

Neither is completely transparent about their pasts either........

Tell you what, I'll concede that my entire line of reasoning was illegitimate if you concede that religion is a scourge on the human race that must be eliminated if we are ever to be truly free.

And then we'll call it... totally lopsided in my favor.

:thumbsup:



Narcissists are so easy.

Cavalry Doc
09-05-2012, 18:04
Is there such a thing? The testimonies in the Bible are of man who is flawed. What testimonies to include in (and leave out of) the book were chosen by flawed man. The book has been translated many times by... Flawed man. If no such thing as a perfect man exists, how can the bible and the testimonies within be perfect?

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

That's an interesting point. If any deity to man communication is to be perfect, it has to be direct. If a few men had direct contact with a deity, and wrote it all down, then we have to take into consideration that a perfect (possibly) being was speaking to an imperfect student. The concepts may have been correct, but not the literal text.

Then again, they could have been aided by the perfectness of the deity to accurately transcribe what he wished.

Either way, It is possible that a deity's message was garbled a bit my man. That does not rule out the possibility of a deity though. I'm sure that we can all agree that man is not perfect, (with the possible exception of Geko).

:cool:

ksg0245
09-05-2012, 18:47
I don't think it's a compulsion, I just get more pushback from the atheists, or at least it seems that way. You point out to a theist that there is no absolute proof of a deity and that they have arrived at their conclusion using faith, and they don't seem to upset about it. Point out the same thing to an atheist and you are treated as a blasphemer.

You get pushback from atheists because you misstate their position, and then accuse them of not actually being atheists when they object to your misstatement.

ksg0245
09-05-2012, 18:50
Sure they did. If you strongly believe there is no deity, it is simply a matter of faith. You may have used inductive logic to arrive at that conclusion, but you have to admit, so did the theists.

People look at the universe as we know it, and come to certain conclusions. It's not a bad thing, lots of people look at things and make decisions based on what they have experienced, and others with different experience come to different conclusions. If you think religion is complex, you ought to try politics. Each separate issue has pro and con arguments along an almost infinite gradient between polar extremes.

There is a god, there ain't a god, there might be a god is pretty simplistic by comparison.

Faith isn't required to not believe something because of a lack of verifiable, objective evidence.

ksg0245
09-05-2012, 18:53
The same evidence that others use to conclude there is a god. Don't feel bad, it hasn't convinced me either, but at least I understand where they are coming from.

Could you please be more specific about what evidence you think RC-Ramie is rejecting?

ksg0245
09-05-2012, 18:57
A well supported and logical opinion though. It certainly makes sense.

To you, who is obsessed atheism be a religion; not to actual atheists, who presumably know better than you what their position is.

Cavalry Doc
09-05-2012, 19:24
Faith isn't required to not believe something because of a lack of verifiable, objective evidence.


An oft repeated and yet hollow point.

A lack of belief leads toward agnosticism, not atheism. A belief leads toward atheism, as evidenced by the veracity of their anthitheistic and anti-agnostic arguments.

Altaris
09-05-2012, 19:24
A man rejects God neither because of intellectual demands nor because of scarcity of evidence. A man rejects God because of a moral resistance that refuses to admit his need for God..
Ravi Zacharias

That is incorrect. Scarcity of evidence(none in this case), is exactly why a man rejects god. No evidence is exactly why a man rejects anything.

I reject dragons because of no evidence. I reject smurfs because of no evidence. I reject my house really being a living monster because of no evidence. I have no moral resistance to any of these things. It has nothing to do with it. It is all about the evidence. A god is an equally ridiculous idea as any of the 3 other made up things I mentioned in this paragraph.

Cavalry Doc
09-05-2012, 19:26
Could you please be more specific about what evidence you think RC-Ramie is rejecting?

No. I think it's quite evident within the thread. There are things people have experienced. They use those experiences to arrive at different conclusions. True or Not?

Cavalry Doc
09-05-2012, 19:29
You get pushback from atheists because you misstate their position, and then accuse them of not actually being atheists when they object to your misstatement.

You are certainly welcome to your mistaken opinion. Atheists are what they are.

Definition of ATHEIST
: one who believes that there is no deity

There are some that have labeled themselves as such, that just simply aren't.

Habla ingles por favor.