Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 258512 comments on the Webbunny tumblelog story from Jul 18, 2009, titled Atheism requires as much faith as religion?. In it, Webbunny tumblelog reports that:

Atheism requires as much faith as religion? bearvspuma : The only problem with this rationalization is that ita s assuming all athiests are so because theya re intelligent in the ways of science and reasoning and all people that believe in a form of god are unintelligent.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Webbunny tumblelog.

“Resources For The Future”

Since: Feb 14

Los Angeles, CA

#213099 Feb 18, 2014
Divinity Surgeon wrote:
<quoted text>
"Sanctity of marriage" is a laughable term.
It's a business transaction, only now, fathers don't generally sell their daughters for cattle and property anymore.
Although, lots of married men refer to their wives as being "more expensive than prostitutes".
I think that if everyone doesn't have the Legal right to marry whom they choose, nobody should have it.
The only thing that actually means anything remotely close to "sanctity", is love.
Law, has naught to do with it.
Come now, that concept of yours could put an end to shows like Bridezilla. My gosh, what other educational programming would we watch then... LOL
blacklagoon

Boston, MA

#213100 Feb 18, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Uh-huh....
So you're anti-abortion are ya?
No, I am not anti-abortion.

“Resources For The Future”

Since: Feb 14

Los Angeles, CA

#213101 Feb 18, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Well if they listened and obeyed their Christin teachings, they'd only be having sex with one person or none at all.
THAT'S the beauty of sexual morality. I don't have AIDS and neither does my wife. I'll never get AIDS through sex. The only way would be through a medical goof-up. It's nice knowing that.
Is that sort of like, stay out of the Congo so you won't contract Malaria?
blacklagoon

Boston, MA

#213102 Feb 18, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh.
You say you cited God, not Jesus.
umm....
You are stupid aren't you? I cited your holy book and the words ASSOCIATED with your God. Different from "I cited God." Yes I know, the difference is difficult for you to grasp, but keep trying!!!!!

“MEET KIKI -She Seeks Home”

Since: Oct 10

With Established Harem

#213103 Feb 18, 2014
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
I did no such thing. My challenge has always been to equate the present violence of Islam to Christian behavior.
If the character of Christianity is as you claim, let alone identical to Islam, it should be no problem.
Smile.
.. the Restoration of the Ten Commands in Uganda is but one of the violent events involving Christianity at the turn of the 20th-Century. How about Christian mobs recently killing Muslims in Central African Republic or Syria? Need I mention 9-11 ??..

.. religion and violence are woven together in history’s tapestries. What makes you think that will ever change ??..

.. you consider Jesus divine, right? When posters declaim or desecrate your belief, you probably experience moral outrage. That's understandable, that's what infuses anger ..

.. groups like Focus On The Family use 'sacred' issues like SSM and abortion to rally the troops and infuse anger which ultimately leads to some form of violence (i.e.: murdering abortion physicians or gays). At some point, violence is intractable ..

.. if all you read is literature aimed at what you consider sacred, the spirit and mind can easily become confused and corrupted. This is the goal of groups like Focus On The Family ..

.. this thread tries to respond to such groups by presenting a balanced, well-researched perspective. Can you blame them? They're trying to find another way to circumvent violence. Isn't that good ??..
Anon

Lakewood, OH

#213104 Feb 18, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't see it that way. I don't see deception everywhere.
Probably because I'm honest and I naively assume others are honest, too.
How noble of you. Still, reality suggests otherwise...

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#213105 Feb 18, 2014
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> How can you be so dense. The Rabbi uses archeological evidence as indicated here.
----------
All this changed with the turn of a shovel. Recent archaeological finds have clearly demonstrated that the camel was domesticated by the 18th century BCE.
Prof. Kenneth Kitchen, an Egyptologist at the University of Liverpool (retired) has pointed out that the sale of Joseph to a caravan of Midianites should have been another example of anachronism in the Torah. Joseph was sold for 20 silver pieces. A thousand years later the price for a slave was much higher (ancient inflation). However, the price reported in the Torah matches precisely the going price of slaves in the region from Joseph's time period. This is just one example which demonstrates, according to Kitchen that "it's more reasonable to assume that the biblical data reflect reality
----------
Regarding your statement about using the Bible to prove the Bible is true ignores the fact critics use the Bible to falsify the Bible. Also ignored is the fact the Bible is a collection of writings and not a single book. So yes you can use the bible to either validate or discredit. You can use the Old to fact check from the New.
You are hopelessly stupid.
You're more than willing to take the word of a Rabbi when it comes to something you want to assert as factual in your religious myth.

But you'll completely discount - the same Rabbi http://judaism.about.com/library/3_askrabbi_o... - or another Rabbi http://www.aish.com/jl/li/m/48944241.html if what they say counters your personal mythic belief.

You don't have to answer, I know, I know, I know... I'm a blasphemer!

Christians are comical.

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#213106 Feb 18, 2014
Zachary Gima wrote:
Is that sort of like, stay out of the Congo so you won't contract Malaria?
LOL

Sure, that works...

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#213107 Feb 18, 2014
blacklagoon wrote:
No, I am not anti-abortion.
So you're ok with millions of potential babies being killed every time your lady swallows?

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#213108 Feb 18, 2014
blacklagoon wrote:
You are stupid aren't you? I cited your holy book and the words ASSOCIATED with your God. Different from "I cited God." Yes I know, the difference is difficult for you to grasp, but keep trying!!!!!
That's a helluva corner you've painted yourself into, my man.

First you quote Jesus saying we can get bitten by snakes and it's ok but when I quote Jesus showing that you're misunderstanding what you're reading, you get all pissy and argue "who cares what the bible says!"

Funny...
blacklagoon

Boston, MA

#213109 Feb 18, 2014
OG Kush wrote:
<quoted text>
You described yourself perfectly, you really don't understand it do you?
you can handcrank a model T and it'll run it but it doesn't mean it's a Mercedes.
Try to be a real composer instead of a second-tier trumpet player - try having access to literally hundreds of thousands of tones composing entire orchestration and when you're done it'll sound like hundreds of musicians playing . do that with your trumpet then I'll be impressed.
Even the B3 has become electronic haven't you noticed? Forget Wersi, think tyros think any number of companies that make synthesizers.
There's a product, he could be fossilized now, but is called 'band in a box'. I suggest you educate yourself on what you can do with electronic music.
By trying this simple piece of software. For amateurs in the world of music it's a godsend.
Synthesizers are the wave of the future
I'm sure you mean well but you're thinking is rather Antiquated.
Teachers should move their students forward into the future not backward into the past like religion.
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
I see, you're advocating being lazy and letting a machine do all the work for you. I am a composer, and realize that removing all of the elements that make a composer what he is, is not only wrong, but counterproductive. Unless you yourself are a composer it would be difficult for you to understand. Having all of the work done for you, as in the program you're talking about, rob you of internalizing the music. You never learn the ranges and characteristics of each instrument, you never learn the dynamic possibilities given a specific range. You never learn about mixed orchestration, how different instruments sound when mixed together. How those sounds become different when octave unisons are used. So in the end you NEVER fully understand the art of orchestration. Further problems arise when the person using this program listens to the playback. A real composer recognizes that the computer is lying to them, that is NOT what horns, woodwinds and strings actually sound like. You are receiving false information and basing your musical choices on this false information.

For a musical hack like you, or anyone that thinks they can become an instance composer of serious music, then this is the program for you. For those of us who are serious about composing, and cherish the art of composition, these programs are worthless. That is exactly why I forbid my students form using the computer or any other programs to compose their music, I know how much it robs them, I know the false information they would receive, and more important how it robs their ears, they would no longer have to rely on their ears to hear the music, it's already done for them, and it robs them of internalizing their music.

Using these music programs means:

1.) Loss of internalizing the music

2.) Contributes to the inability to "hear" in your head, the music.

3.) Contributes to the extreme lack of knowledge about orchestration.

4.) Delivers false information regarding the sounds of all instruments

5) Contributes to the inability to understand the dynamic ranges for which the instruments are capable of playing within a specific register

6.) Contributes to the lack of knowledge concerning mixed orchestration.

7.) Robs the composer of hearing melody harmony relationships, and being about to "pre-hear" these relationships.

8.) Contributes to the lack of understanding the effects of various articulations.

9.) Contributes to the lack of understanding breathing issues with wind players and bow directions with string players

10.) Limits the landscape that a composer can observe, programs limit it to 8 bars on the screen. A composer working with a hand written score can see 16 to 32 bar of score.

Seems like an awful lot of negative aspects for your program

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#213110 Feb 18, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Mrs RR & I did our taxes last week. There's no more "husband" and "wife", there's now "taxpayer1" and "taxpayer2". The IRS did that to avoid confusion due to all the states where SSM is now legal....
I'm not sure why that bothers you since you've claimed the basis of marriage is a sacred, or sanctified, union, according to religious beliefs and isn't a contractual arrangement.

Isn't it just enough that you're married in the eye(S) of your deity? Sanctified and holy?
blacklagoon

Boston, MA

#213111 Feb 18, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
So you're ok with millions of potential babies being killed every time your lady swallows?
I certainly am, and enjoy every moment, don't you?

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#213112 Feb 18, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>I just call it like it is.

A secretary is a secretary, not an administrative assistant.

A janitor is a janitor, not a sanitation technician.

A wife biting you in the chest out of anger is a bitch, not a wife.
A sanctified bi!ch?

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#213113 Feb 18, 2014
scaritual wrote:
I'm not sure why that bothers you since you've claimed the basis of marriage is a sacred, or sanctified, union, according to religious beliefs and isn't a contractual arrangement.
Isn't it just enough that you're married in the eye(S) of your deity? Sanctified and holy?
You make a pretty good point there, scarscar.

In the eyes of God it doesn't matter.

It just feels shitty to be reduced from "husband" to "taxpayer1" to suit the needs of people, like some here, that think marriage is just a legal contract.

Change isn't easy, I guess.

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#213114 Feb 18, 2014
blacklagoon wrote:
I certainly am, and enjoy every moment, don't you?
Naw...

I usually throw the babies on her face or watch them spill down her back....

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#213115 Feb 18, 2014
KiMare wrote:
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL, very clever until you look at the second link that comes up;
http://withalliamgod.wordpress.com/2011/01/21 ...
Bazinga!
<quoted text>
You respond to an exposed lie with a diversion?
You need to apologize.
What you supplied was a refutation based upon an unclaimed exact copy of your religious mythology. It was a straw man argument/refutation.

No one claims Christianity is an - exact copy - of a previously existing mythology.

Concepts and elements within the other mythologies are pointed out, and it's noted that the Christian mythology shares similarities or common themes with an older mythology - which is a trademark of mythologies, they borrow from older mythologies - that existed before Christianity.

That's a disingenuous Christian tactic in responding to those observations that Christianity shares similarities with preexisting mythic beliefs.

Christians alter the observations made by scholars that point out those common elements, trying to change those observations to a claim of Christianity being an exact copy of other mythologies.

That isn't the case.
OG Kush

Orange Park, FL

#213117 Feb 18, 2014
blacklagoon wrote:
<quoted text>I see, you're advocating being lazy and letting a machine do all the work for you. I am a composer, and realize that removing all of the elements that make a composer what he is, is not only wrong, but counterproductive. Unless you yourself are a composer it would be difficult for you to understand.

For a musical hack like you, or anyone that thinks they can become an instance composer of serious music, then this is the program for you.

Using these music programs means:
1.) Loss of internalizing the music
2.) Contributes to the inability to "hear" in your head, the music.
3.) Contributes to the extreme lack of knowledge about orchestration.
4.) Delivers false information regarding the sounds of all instruments
5) Contributes to the inability to understand the dynamic ranges for which the instruments are capable of playing within a specific register
6.) Contributes to the lack of knowledge concerning mixed orchestration.
7.) Robs the composer of hearing melody harmony relationships, and being about to "pre-hear" these relationships.
8.) Contributes to the lack of understanding the effects of various articulations.
9.) Contributes to the lack of understanding breathing issues with wind players and bow directions with string players
10.) Limits the landscape that a composer can observe, programs limit it to 8 bars on the screen. A composer working with a hand written score can see 16 to 32 bar of score.
Seems like an awful lot of negative aspects for your program
Yeah way too negative and antiquated to suit my needs.

Electronic Music producers get to work with audio engineers and musicians to get the best our of their sound an put it on a record, sound technicians have to make sure the music is on par, and audio engineers get to actually record artists.

This is an excellent job, though very in-depth and requires many skills. There have been so many success stories in this industry as well. Simon Cowell, Snoop Dogg, Dr. Dre, Missy Elliot, Brian Eno, Randy Jackson, Jay-Z, Timbaland, and many others have mastered this area of work and made a very good salary in doing so.

Music schools can give budding producers, sound technicians or audio engineers a leg up. Going to a four year college for this purpose is difficult for most people because of the time it takes and how expensive it is. Plus, in four year colleges, you may earn a degree, but never have any hands-on practice in your field.

Many attend one or two year programs that specialize in production and audio engineering. This is an excellent choice because these technical schools have so many advantages, such as being cost and time efficient and having many helpful job placement programs for students.

There are programs where students can work in real studios every day instead of a classroom setting. Most people teaching are professions in their field and will be imparting first-hand information to their students.

Technical schools are also supplied with the latest equipment because technical schools realize that students can not go out into the workforce not knowing the latest technology.

Certain programs have mentoring programs, where they will send you to work with a real music producer, audio or sound engineer, or sound technician and learn the industry first hand.
Electronic Music producers especially must know so many subjects in depth, such as music theory, the songwriting process, mixing and editing, working with musicians and engineers, and using sound effects and samples to better the song.

Learn to teach your students the future professor you'll be a better teacher for it.

Remember the richest child is poor without music

“The Bible is no science book”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#213118 Feb 18, 2014
OG Kush wrote:
<quoted text>
You're living in the world of the past musically.
Of course there's nothing wrong with this but electronic music is the future.
The technology is still in its infancy yet we have human voice coming out of electronic instruments.
You must not get out very much there's a whole world of electronics that have been bypassed.
So feel free to pick your banjo remember the good old days of Carlos Montoya and Andre Segovia on the acoustic guitar. For rock Yngwie Malmsteen.
Revel in the magic of Maynard Ferguson and Arturo Sandoval on your much beloved trumpet.
But in the end run... electronic music will dominate.
Electronic music will have its place, but a real artist and a real instrument will always have a place in peoples heart and soul. Music comes from the heart and every musician brings it out of his chosen instrument. His, nobody elses. Everybody on the planet can tell the difference between the guitar music of say Eric Clapton and B.B. King. Electronic just cant do that.
blacklagoon

Boston, MA

#213119 Feb 18, 2014
OG Kush wrote:
<quoted text>
You described yourself perfectly, you really don't understand it do you?
you can handcrank a model T and it'll run it but it doesn't mean it's a Mercedes.
Try to be a real composer instead of a second-tier trumpet player - try having access to literally hundreds of thousands of tones composing entire orchestration and when you're done it'll sound like hundreds of musicians playing . do that with your trumpet then I'll be impressed.
Even the B3 has become electronic haven't you noticed? Forget Wersi, think tyros think any number of companies that make synthesizers.
There's a product, he could be fossilized now, but is called 'band in a box'. I suggest you educate yourself on what you can do with electronic music.
By trying this simple piece of software. For amateurs in the world of music it's a godsend.
Synthesizers are the wave of the future
I'm sure you mean well but you're thinking is rather Antiquated.
Teachers should move their students forward into the future not backward into the past like religion.
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
FACT, before a student can move forward into the future, he MUST learn about the past, the tradition, the body of work by the giants, without which, the future becomes meaningless.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

NCAA Basketball Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 3 min Jenkins 1,780,515
News Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 5 min Susanm 345,861
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 2 hr Chosen Traveler 36,080
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) Jun 10 hojo 12,419
News Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) Jun 5 Public Accommodation 201,480
do you need a loan (Sep '13) May 30 zan 5
News Carlisle's Fitzgerald signs to play at Norfolk ... May '18 Go phartse 4