Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 240054 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.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#216260 Mar 3, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Things change? It was a lie when he said it. Something changing had nothing to do with it.
They had already written the regs that would cause the cancellations, and they knew it, and discussed it, before Obama repeated the promise over and over.
Not to mention a republican senator introduced a bill in response that would allow people to keep their plan, as they all knew about the impending cancellations, and the democrats voted it down.
It was a flat out lie. It was not even a broken promise. It was a lie from the start.
It's the government, Buck.

Take your ankle bracelet off and call 911.

Let's see how good they are.
tricki

Birdsboro, PA

#216261 Mar 3, 2014
River Tam wrote:
<quoted text>
Nobody has ever killed for atheism.
Hope that helps.
PROVE IT

no atheist has killed for immoral purposes. Dorothy has an incredible capacity for self-pity and living under a dark cloud

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#216262 Mar 3, 2014
NightSerf wrote:
<quoted text>No. I don't defend Obama in any way--I leave that to people who are much more interested in politics than I am. But I am a bit of a stickler for accuracy. Obama did not promise to lower the ocean's level. He did not even promise to slow the rate by himself. Rather, he expressed confidence the the ability and will of Americans as a whole to do so and belief that this decade would be seen in the future as the time when that change began to take place. That's not the same thing as promising to lower sea levels during his administration. I think that you are allowing your animosity to blind you and keep you from seeing your own error in this matter.
So Obama was predicting that, by electing him, somebody else would cause the sea level to be lower?

No, you are not much of a stickler for accuracy. You are a stickler for deflection, in this case.

Obama absolutely promised to lower the sea level. He stated, in the context of the momentous incident of his becoming president, "the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal".

If the rise of the ocean slows, then the sea level is LOWER than it is without him. And we will look back, according to Obama, on "this moment" as when it began to happen. What was happening in that "moment"? He was becoming president.

That is an absolute, flat-out promise to lower the sea level, no matter the means or the assistance he might require to accomplish it. He promised to lower it. We will know it began at that moment. Because of him.

Tapdance to it any way you like.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#216263 Mar 3, 2014
River Tam wrote:
<quoted text>
It's the government, Buck.
Take your ankle bracelet off and call 911.
Let's see how good they are.
Oh. It's the government.

Then march your liberal ass out to California, stop at Nixon's grave, and apologize.

Tell him now you know it was just the government.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#216264 Mar 3, 2014
tricki wrote:
<quoted text>
PROVE IT
no atheist has killed for immoral purposes. Dorothy has an incredible capacity for self-pity and living under a dark cloud
Hush, tard.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#216265 Mar 3, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh. It's the government.
Then march your liberal ass out to California, stop at Nixon's grave, and apologize.
Tell him now you know it was just the government.
Who is Nixon?

What year is this?

Things change, Buck.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#216266 Mar 3, 2014
River Tam wrote:
<quoted text>
Nobody has ever killed for a non belief in deities just like nobody has ever killed for a non belief in tree pixies.
Hope that helps.
Atheism is not a non-belief.

"The Communist Party is to oppose religion and to fight for the full victory of atheism.”

--The Great Soviet Encyclopedia (Moscow, USSR)

If the USSR was "fighting for the full victory of atheism", and people were killed, how were they fighting for atheism but not killing for atheism?

Can you explain that?

I can explain it for you. You are a liar and a moron. That's the explanation.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#216267 Mar 3, 2014
River Tam wrote:
<quoted text>
Nobody has ever killed for atheism.
Hope that helps.
"A Marxist must be a materialist, i. e., an enemy of religion, but a dialectical materialist, i. e., one who treats the struggle against religion not in an abstract way, not on the basis of remote, purely theoretical, never varying preaching, but in a concrete way, on the basis of the class struggle which is going on in practice and is educating the masses more and better than anything else could."

- Vladimir Lenin

What was the "concrete way" of advancing atheism?

In the first five years after the October Revolution, 28 bishops and 1,200 priests were murdered, many on the orders of Leon Trotsky. When Joseph Stalin came to power in 1927, he ordered his secret police, under Genrikh Yagoda to intensify persecution of Christians. In the next few years, 50,000 clergy were murdered, many were tortured, including some by crucifixion.

Nobody has ever killed for atheism? Good luck with that one, Rivet Tampon.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#216268 Mar 3, 2014
River Tam wrote:
<quoted text>
Who is Nixon?
What year is this?
Things change, Buck.
When a liberal is in office, your principles change.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#216269 Mar 3, 2014
blacklagoon wrote:
<quoted text>
You do know that religious beliefs are a danger to society right? That unsupported beliefs are what caused 9/11 and a host of other horrific acts?
It was the western christians who warned of the danger of Islam.

You secularists denied the danger. You wanted to be multicultural purists.

Same thing on Communism. Western Christians, including Richard Nixon, were avowed anti-communist. You liberals and secularists opposed them.

You secularists have been wrong on the two major global threats of our generation, and the Christians have been right.

So who is the danger to society?

You.

You wish you had a better argument, right?

“It's just a box of rain...”

Since: May 07

Knoxville, TN

#216270 Mar 3, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
So Obama was predicting that, by electing him, somebody else would cause the sea level to be lower?
No, you are not much of a stickler for accuracy. You are a stickler for deflection, in this case.
Obama absolutely promised to lower the sea level. He stated, in the context of the momentous incident of his becoming president, "the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal".
If the rise of the ocean slows, then the sea level is LOWER than it is without him. And we will look back, according to Obama, on "this moment" as when it began to happen. What was happening in that "moment"? He was becoming president.
That is an absolute, flat-out promise to lower the sea level, no matter the means or the assistance he might require to accomplish it. He promised to lower it. We will know it began at that moment. Because of him.
Tapdance to it any way you like.
That's a bit of s twist of logic. You're saying that if the sea levels continue to rise, but at a decreasing rate, it is the same thing as if the level falls? And you accuse me of tap dancing? I should have known--your obsessive inability to see past your preconceptions has not changed over the last year.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#216272 Mar 3, 2014
BenAdam wrote:
They would still be murdering and torturing people at will if they could get away with it.
Agreed. That's my point. There is no evidence that they wouldn't, and plenty that they would both from history and in the words of the Dominionists and many Topix posters. This is what I was referring to when I invited Christians to show us examples where the Christian church has ever refused to torture and/or kill in times and places when it had the power to do those things legally, but tool a moral stand and said, "No! That is not right. It would be cruel and a violation of the Golden Rule." To my knowledge, never. They have always done the most horrible things to people when they thought they could, and there is zero evidence that that has changed.

KiMare thought he made his church look better than the Muslims by comparing the Christian taliban to the Muslim taliban. The main difference is that Christians are found principally where humanism has had the most influence. Secular democracies are a humanist innovation that limit Christianity in a way that the governments of several Muslim states either cannot or will not. KiMare wants credit for his church for that.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#216275 Mar 3, 2014
NightSerf wrote:
<quoted text>
What Obama actually said was, "I face this challenge with profound humility and knowledge of my own limitations. But I also face it with limitless faith in the capacity of the American people, because if we are willing to work for it and fight for it and believe in it, then I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs for the jobless. This was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal..."
He wasn't promising to lower ocean levels, but to provide the leadership that would make it possible to slow the rate of their rise and begin the process of allowing the planet to heal itself of man-made blights, and there is tenuous evidence that indicates that he has done exactly that. But it's really too soon to tell one way or the other.. Only those subsequent generations can make that assessment with any degree of confidence.
OK. Thanks for that.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#216276 Mar 3, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
Craig debated Harris and the consensus was Craig beat him.
Maybe in churches.
Buck Crick wrote:
Atheist Luke Muehlhauser of "Common Sense Atheism" declared Craig the winner.
Well that settles it then.

======

Here are some excerpts from the debate at Notre Dame

"Please notice the double standard that people like Dr. Craig use to exonerate God from all this evil. We’re told that God is loving, and kind, and just, and intrinsically good; but when someone like myself points out the rather obvious and compelling evidence that God is cruel and unjust, because he visits suffering on innocent people, of a scope and scale that would embarrass the most ambitious psychopath, we’re told that God is mysterious.“Who can understand God’s will?”

"I want to suggest to you, that it is not only tiresome when otherwise-intelligent people speak this way, it is morally reprehensible. This kind of faith is really the perfection of narcissism.“God loves me, dontcha know. He, he cured me of my eczema. He makes me feel so good while singing in church, and, and just when we had given up hope, he found a banker who was willing to reduce my mother’s mortgage.”

"Given all the good, all that this God of yours does not accomplish in the lives of others, given - given the misery that’s being imposed on some helpless child at this instant - this kind of faith is obscene. To think in this way is to fail to reason honestly, or to care sufficiently about the suffering of other human beings.

"And if God is good and loving and just and kind, and he wanted to guide us morally with a book, why give us a book that supports slavery? Why give us a book that admonishes us to kill people for imaginary crimes, like witchcraft.

"Now, of course, there is a way of not taking these questions to heart. According to Dr. Craig’s Divine Command theory, God is not bound by moral duties. God doesn’t have to be good. Whatever he commands is good. So when he commands that the Israelites to slaughter the Amalekites, that behavior becomes intrinsically good because he commanded it.

"Just think about the Muslims at this moment who are blowing themselves up, convinced that they are agents of God’s will. There is absolutely nothing that Dr. Craig can say against their behavior, in moral terms, apart from his own faith-based claim that they’re praying to the wrong God. If they had the right God, what they were doing would be good, on Divine Command theory.

"Now, I’m obviously not saying that all that Dr. Craig, or all religious people, are psychopaths and psychotics, but this to me is the true horror of religion. It allows perfectly decent and sane people to believe by the billions, what only lunatics could believe on their own.

"If you wake up tomorrow morning thinking that saying a few Latin words over your pancakes is going to turn them into the body of Elvis Presley, OK - you have lost your mind. But if you think more or less the same thing about a cracker and the body of Jesus, you’re just a Catholic.

"I’m not the first person to notice that it’s a very strange sort of loving God who would make salvation depend on believing in him on bad evidence.

"I hate to break it to you, here at Notre Dame, but Christianity is a cult of human sacrifice. Christianity is not a religion that repudiates human sacrifice. It is a religion that celebrates a single human sacrifice as though it were effective ... If there is a less moral moral framework than the one Dr. Craig is proposing, I haven’t heard of it."

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#216277 Mar 3, 2014
Tide with Beach wrote:

Atheism isn't an ideology, so there is no basis for such a conclusion. You have to look at something prescriptive to make a prediction about how a group will behave.
All you gotta do is look at atheist leaders from the last century and you have your answer. Atheist leaders have killed more in the last century than religion has in the history of man.
It's easy to agree with "may be".
No. This isn't Minority Report. People should not be killed for a belief. Sam Harris wouldn't want to be executed for his beliefs, would he?
Potentially, Jihad.
The United States government is hunting down members of Al Qaeda, and killing them, because their beliefs are that dangerous.
Wrong. The US is not hunting down jihadists for their beliefs, we're hunting them down for their actions.
I need you to remember that I am not nearly as dichotomous as you are. If there were a way of providing protection without killing, I would prefer that.
Except for the unneeded slander, I agree with you. Killing should be the last resort.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#216278 Mar 3, 2014
Tide with Beach wrote:
Harris didn't say that "people should be executed for a belief". I didn't have the opportunity to agree with that, because it wasn't said.
<quoted text>
Read it slower.
It's an argument for killing in self/other defense.


Self defense of a belief? No. You're trying to sugar coat Harris' vile opinion.

“Some beliefs are so dangerous that it may be ethical to kill people for believing them” Sam Harris

That is a very dangerous notion.
Are you a pacifist?


Hardly.
When it is clear that a person is willing to kill thousands for a belief that they hold, AND the circumstance provides that they have the means to do so, it may be ethical to kill them as soon as all the information is available and you have the opportunity, rather than risk the thousands of lives on trying to disarm them before they can act on their beliefs.
Then you should be willing to "disarm" Sam Harris, he wants to kill a lot of people. Let's kill him before he has the chance.

O_o

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#216279 Mar 3, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Pelosi deserves a slap in the face.
River Tam wrote:
All women do, right?
No. Some deserve a slap on the ass.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#216280 Mar 3, 2014
River Tam wrote:
Sup, bro?
Us gays need to stick together.
Nothin, girlfriend.

Mmm-hmm

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#216281 Mar 3, 2014
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>
And despite your ignorance, there are people that go from well-off to poor through no actions of their own.
Or do you think people lose their jobs (and become poor) in a bad economy because of personal actions they took.
Yes, I will agree that some people can escape poverty. But it takes incredibly hard work AND incredibly good luck. Few are able to accomplish it no matter how hard they try.
That may be but the answer to poverty is not government handouts. All you're doing with that is telling folks that they don't need to strive, other people have and they'll cover your burden.
tricki

Birdsboro, PA

#216282 Mar 3, 2014
To my knowledge, never. They have always done the most horrible things to people when they thought they could, and there is zero evidence that that has changed.

christians are holding back the evil that the unsaved harbor in their hearts

HITLER WAS A DEVOUT CHRISTIAN ACCORDING TO FOG. THEY DO NOT CONDEMN HIM. PAT ROBERTSON? ENDLESSLY. HITLER? NEVER

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) 11 min Bluestater 1,236,514
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) 36 min Flightdeck 5,767
News Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 7 hr momma chamberlin 310,006
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 21 hr stewart scott 29,781
News Former UConn Player Pleads Guilty -- Courant.com (Oct '07) May 29 tom wingo 22
News Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) May 29 Pietro Armando 201,809
How to Recover Deleted or lost Contacts from Sa... May 25 Timotion 7
More from around the web