Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

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. Full Story

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#219850 Mar 17, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
The restaurant doesn't refuse their money, do they?
The worker isn't forced to do anything. He can keep his ass at home.
IPSEC wrote:
Ah, yes, the compassion and generosity of the religious.
Like you Topix Atheists! telling us to keep our religion private, in our church and in our homes?

Hypocrite much?

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#219851 Mar 17, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Just let someone walk in and not take their hat off. They'll practically tase them.
Ask any honest observer of the court. The judges and lawyers are more criminal than the defendants who stand in front of them.
No exaggeration. The judges and lawyers are crooks, from top to bottom.
YUUUUP!

And what's up with "you can't wear shorts"??

In jury duty, a guy got kicked out and forced to reschedule because he had shorts on, like the courtroom is a place of honesty and integrity or something...

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#219852 Mar 17, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Just let someone walk in and not take their hat off. They'll practically tase them.
Ask any honest observer of the court. The judges and lawyers are more criminal than the defendants who stand in front of them.
No exaggeration. The judges and lawyers are crooks, from top to bottom.
And if you don't stand before the "honorable blah blah blah", you could get arrested.

Is that even legal?!?

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#219853 Mar 17, 2014
Today's chuckle...

David Barton on Matthew Hagee's radio show stated...

“If your fellow citizens tell you they want you in office, you don’t have a right to say no,” Barton said.“That’s pure selfishness.”

Considering that a few monts ago Christians had asked Barton to run of the Senate and Barton refused...Barton must be a purely selfish person.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#219854 Mar 17, 2014
wilderide wrote:
<quoted text>
You did not seem to care about the possibility of being judged by other gods, and so I can't help but wonder why being judged by your god should be any more concerning.
Moreover, it seems to me that anyone who really believed that an unfavorable judgement would result in eternal torture and had even a shred of compassion would not just "dust off their sandals" and walk away if someone disbelieved you. That makes no sense to me. Either such a Christian doesn't really believe in Hell, or they have no compassion.
I think you like conversations that go in circles

Whatever reason you took me saying I'd be shut outta luck but that's the risk we take when choosing to follow one faith and there would be nothing I could do about it is me not caring, you were mistaken

And I don't believe he'll us eternal. I believe the soul dies in hell. But it really doesn't change what I already told you. It'd be selfish of you to want someone to waste an inordinate amount of time trying to force you into believing when you show no interest and I can't give you faith anyway when other people may benefit from hearing the gospel.

It is a childlike mentality to take the attitude that you aren't the least but interested but want people to stay to keep trying to convince you anyway. You have the information. What you choose to do with it is now on you. It is simply how things work with adults. You can't force them to be someone you want them to be. But please remember your complaint whenever you might feel tempted to say religious people are trying to oppress you and force their beliefs in you. Apparently you think they should. Kinda ironic

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#219855 Mar 17, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
"Don't insult my intelligence." was addressed to the attorney, not Minnich.
You/re a bald-faced liar. Or else, you will show Behe admitting "ID is not science".
This is why I should not allow you to engage me. You have no integrity. Besides having no integrity, you are not intelligent.
I believe I did state that the comment was to the lawyer, not to Minnich.

I said...

I did find it amusing when the defense lawyer made the claim that a scientific paper was part of the public record...after having argued the previous day that scientific papers were NOT part of the public record. I liked Jones response..."Don't insult my intelligence."

Your reading skills still need some work, don't they.

And, yes, Behe admitted that ID is not science. He admitted on the stand that the definition of science would have to be re-written to define ID as science. He also admitted that such a redefinition of science would also define astrology as science.

We have been over this before. All you had then was bluster and diversion. You were wrong then. You are wrong now.
Buck Crick wrote:
Kitzmiller, Day 20:
THE COURT: We've seen that.
Minnich: I know.
Attorney: You're going to see a little bit more of it, Your Honor.
Minnich: I kind of feel like Zsa Zsa's fifth husband, you know? As the old adage goes, you know, I know what to do but I just can't make it exciting. I'll try.
Then later,...
THE COURT: Did you get that, Wes?
Minnich: Am I boring you, judge?
Oh. Wow. What a take down. <yawn>

Yes, Buck, you are boring me.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#219856 Mar 17, 2014
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>Its not that I didn't care, there simply is nothing that could be done. Like I said, I'd be shit outta luck but that is the chance one takes when deciding who to follow.
<quoted text>It has nothing to do with compassion. You are trying to hard to find a bad guy in this scenario
For starters, I think you are being disingenuous if you are suggesting you could be talked into it
Secondly even if someone could be talked into it, that isn't real faith. A man can't give another man faith. A person either believes or not on their own. All man can do is witness. Then it is up to you
It seems weird that you would seek to fault someone even if the situation was how you suggest, which it isn't. There are millions of people int he world. But someone should spend a disproportionate time on you despite your clear resistance when there are other people out there that might actually benefit from the message? That's pretty selfish of you.
But its a moot point as I couldn't make you believe
Oops

Guess I had answered this already

I retract the circles comment

Well...at least until I see the reply! But I may have jumped the gun

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#219857 Mar 17, 2014
Interesting video on Humanism...

(about 3 min)

&fe ature=player_embedded

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#219858 Mar 17, 2014
Chris Clearwater wrote:
<quoted text>
True. It brings me back to something the poster WIP posted years ago. Paraphrasing, she said she was witness to Christian missionaries in poor nations offering food but withholding it if people didn't convert to Christ. At the time I think I said this was a lie. Still think it is because no Christian would do that. Would like to stay longer but having some computer issues. Take care.
Yeah that'd be a really garbage thing to do and I'd certainly hope nobody would try to hold attending to physical needs over someone's head to get them to convert. I can't see it being a genuine conversion under those circumstances and obviously whoever would do something like that isn't teaching the gospel properly. In the Good Samaritan, there was no strings attached to the help

(T) Peace

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#219859 Mar 17, 2014
Cool. New evidence of the Big Bang...

Quote

Physicists have found a long-predicted twist in light from the Big Bang that represents the first image of ripples in the universe called gravitational waves, researchers announced today. The finding is direct proof of the theory of inflation, the idea that the universe expanded extremely quickly in the first fraction of a second after it was born. What’s more, the signal is coming through much more strongly than expected, ruling out a large class of inflation models and potentially pointing the way toward new theories of physics, experts say.

End quote

--Scientific America

On the announcement today of the discovery.

“BAS in Electrical Engineering”

Since: Jan 14

Location hidden

#219860 Mar 17, 2014
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
Cool. New evidence of the Big Bang...
Quote
Physicists have found a long-predicted twist in light from the Big Bang that represents the first image of ripples in the universe called gravitational waves, researchers announced today. The finding is direct proof of the theory of inflation, the idea that the universe expanded extremely quickly in the first fraction of a second after it was born. What’s more, the signal is coming through much more strongly than expected, ruling out a large class of inflation models and potentially pointing the way toward new theories of physics, experts say.
End quote
--Scientific America
On the announcement today of the discovery.
I love this discovery in that it adds some answers and validity of the big bang and yet and gives us even more questions.

It does take us that much closer to the start though and that I find fascinating.

Since: Sep 10

San Francisco, CA

#219861 Mar 17, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Just let someone walk in and not take their hat off. They'll practically tase them.
Ask any honest observer of the court. The judges and lawyers are more criminal than the defendants who stand in front of them.
No exaggeration. The judges and lawyers are crooks, from top to bottom.
You must be a Communist.

Or a traitor of some sort.

No patriotic American would besmirch our judicial officers that way.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#219862 Mar 17, 2014
BenAdam wrote:
<quoted text>
I tend to agree only because of my personal experiences. Spiritual belief is a revelation that defies explanation. Right, wrong or delusion; it is something beyond the rational world and (also IMHO) need to remain that way.
"Many are called but few are chosen."
I think that means that we should not look down on those we feel "don;t get it" but rather to have compassion for them. Al the shile realizing that we may indeed be one of "The many" rather than one of "the few".
I think belief has a similar process to falling in love

You can't plan it. You can't force someone to. Someone does have to open their heart to the idea or its very unlikely. And the information and circumstances and the type of person someone is play a big role in whether that emotion is triggered. But it can't be made to happen by another person

And I think looking down on someone for believing something different is silly because people can't help what they believe. Sure there are some belief systems I find less plausible than others, some maybe to the degree that the belief system itself may seem silly to me. I find Scientology silly. But that's just how I think personally. I don't think I'm better or smarter than anyone else for believing Christianity instead

. I may find certain people undesirable even for personality reasons but I wouldn't think it made me a better person because I was in love with someone else than someone who loves the person I personally wouldn't be interested in. People can't help who they love

And I agree with the compassion. If its a belief someone has or a person they love that you think is wrong for someone and it is hurting them and you would rather see them with the 'right' person or belief then the natural reaction should be sympathy not mockery. And besides, maybe we are the ones that got it wrong.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#219863 Mar 17, 2014
IPSEC wrote:
<quoted text>So, I'm a Topix atheist and I protested that your blanket recitation of the beliefs of Topix atheists were not mine, so that makes you a liar. You countered, dishonestly, actually, that the post was in response to IANS. It wasn't. It was a silly call to arms to Dipshit Crick. So, IANS answers and illustrates that they are not his statements either. You further lie and then claim you weren't responding to IANS but issuing a blanket statement of belief of Topix atheists. So, which is it, Dipshit Redneck?
You really are not very bright.
If I may...

"Atheist's Statement:

1. There is no evidence to support the existence of any deity.

2. Therefore, there is no reason to believe in any of them.

3. Therefore, I don't.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#219864 Mar 17, 2014
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
Cool. New evidence of the Big Bang...
Quote
Physicists have found a long-predicted twist in light from the Big Bang that represents the first image of ripples in the universe called gravitational waves, researchers announced today. The finding is direct proof of the theory of inflation, the idea that the universe expanded extremely quickly in the first fraction of a second after it was born. What’s more, the signal is coming through much more strongly than expected, ruling out a large class of inflation models and potentially pointing the way toward new theories of physics, experts say.
End quote
--Scientific America
On the announcement today of the discovery.
And you have a blind faith in whatever a science magazine spits out, don't ya?

What researchers? What are their credentials? Do they have an agenda? Was their funding dependent of "finding" this new evidence? Where's the proof that the universe expanded extremely quickly in the first fraction of a second? Who conducted those tests?

You ask none of that. You think it's in a scientific journal, it MUST be true.

Since: Sep 10

San Francisco, CA

#219865 Mar 17, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
YUUUUP!
And what's up with "you can't wear shorts"??
In jury duty, a guy got kicked out and forced to reschedule because he had shorts on, like the courtroom is a place of honesty and integrity or something...
That's nothing.

In one of my cases, the court was selecting a jury from the pool of prospective jurors.

One juror got dismissed.

He was wearing a t-shirt that said, GUILTY, in large letters.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#219866 Mar 17, 2014
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
You must be a Communist.
Or a traitor of some sort.
No patriotic American would besmirch our judicial officers that way.
Even the PenisPump judge?

allnurses-breakroom.com/world-news.../okla-ju... ;

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#219867 Mar 17, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Would you agree that irrational biases - prejudgements not based in evidence - are counterproductive and/or unjust, but that wisdom is a series of accurate judgments borne of experience rightly understood?
Is it a bias to dislike a restaurant that frequently serves bad meals served at the wrong temperature on dirty dishes? If you use the word bias that way, then rationals bias is the best way to judge things. If you reserve the meaning of the word bias only to irrational judgments, what do you call the other kind?
I agree a bias doesn't necessarily mean irrational. I simply think one should go into something objectively. And then if someone is biased for whatever reason after, that should be taken into consideration when using them as a reference. Particularly if all the reasons that went into their bias are unknown.

Lets say I provide a quote that says "illegal immigration might provide a short term boost to a local economy but in the long run its a leading cause for the crumbling of a society"

Now someone might be somewhat intrigued and inclined to take it somewhat at face value. Now what if after I told you I quoted it from a book called "dirty Mexicans - the termites of society". Would you then be more likely to think maybe that bias should have been expected and that perhaps it is a bias and not objective?

Now does it mean definitely all their conclusions are wrong? Of course not. But I would tend to take it with a grain of salt

P.S.

I'm only using Mexicans because I don't know off hand who would be a bigger demo as far as immigrants in the U.S. It literally has no other implication for why I picked that group

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#219868 Mar 17, 2014
River Tam wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
That's why I only pray to Regis Philbin.
If my prayers are answered, Cool !!
If not, it's OK. He's still so cute.
Hey!!

I was gonna wait till I posted to ask Ians if you had been around!

Great to see ya!

And yeah, might as well go with good looking if all things are equal! I try to get girls to pray to me all the time! Most of them are too stuck up or think I have done sort of ego problem. They are clearly insane:)

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#219869 Mar 17, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
No.
I condone killing, in particular instances, for ACTIONS, not beliefs.
I support killing anyone who takes 30 items or more into the 15 or less express lane and then pays by check that they only decided to use because they didn't have exact change!

Ok maybe not kill. But at least it should be legal to pop one of their tires!

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
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 3 min TSM 1,156,336
Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 5 min Feces for pagans 307,122
UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 52 min Trojan 28,501
What role do you think humans play in global wa... 2 hr litesong 2,743
How to Recover Deleted or lost Contacts from Sa... 16 hr yinefsfgd 3
Should child beauty pageants be banned? Fri zubedaanur 693
UConn vs. Duke Monday night 9pm ESPN2 Dec 25 ivyawe 1
More from around the web