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

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#231933 Jul 6, 2014
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't really follow most of what you wrote above, but would like to take issue with two.
First, I've been in bars where men and women could use the same bathroom - no issues. It was much more convenient for everyone.
Second, heterosexual marriages only contribute more to society if you're thinking "have kids, must pay." Homosexual marriages contribute as much and more in terms of taxes and spending - the wealthiest couples are 1) gay male couples, 2) heterosexual couples, 3) lesbian couples.
Naturally, the gay males have the greatest discretionary spending. The whole point of creating gay/straight households is to add to the economy - so you want to add households wherever you can. Get them working together, spending together.
What a load of crap.

Sexual assault in the military was up 50% last year. Between woman and gays, we have literally screwed our military denying the power of mating behavior.

If you consider money as the most valuable asset of a society, you are correct. However, rational people consider our children and their best interests as the most valuable asset.

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#231934 Jul 6, 2014
Chess Jurist wrote:
<quoted text>
A PhD in UWBW?
Who'd have thunk it?
More like prison bullsyhte artistry, He has a PHD in PBA

Since: Jul 08

Columbus, OH

#231935 Jul 6, 2014
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> More like prison bullsyhte artistry, He has a PHD in PBA
He has a PhD in PBA, too?

I was aware of his PhD in CST, Copper Scroll Theology, but this takes the cake.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#231936 Jul 6, 2014
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
It's not a controversial subject in social science or primatology. Once again, for the slow of mind and slight of education, same sex sexual behavior is a normal behavior in primates and humans.
So you're just making up bs again, demonstrating how little you know about science.
Third request:

Is rape a normal behavior in primates and humans?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#231937 Jul 6, 2014
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
1. Because you're switching the topic b/c you're afraid.
2. You're exaggerating my claims here.
Are you capable of honesty? Oh, wait, no nevermind. honesty won't support your argument.
Fourth request:

Is rape a normal behavior among primates and humans?

Since: Jul 08

Columbus, OH

#231938 Jul 6, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Third request:
Is rape a normal behavior in primates and humans?
Got something you wanna fess up to?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#231939 Jul 6, 2014
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
So...reading comprehension problems too, hey.
You're quite fortunate I'm here to educate you. Without me, you'd just blindly follow any religious ID movement.
Dawkins' comment above does not make the claim you are misreading it to make. He most certainly doesn't say "all behavior is evolved only for sexual reproduction. That's the only thing that matters" which is what you are saying.
He is telling you that genes exist to survive - they do. That's the extent. Genes that produce same sex sexual behavior in animals likewise exist to survive - but they aren't about reproduction. Survival isn't always about reproduction, stupid Buck.
For the simpletons: behaviors that increase your survivability are also selected. They don't have to increase your ability to reproduce, just your suvivability. Hence, behaviors that increase social bonding are selected for.
Duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu uuuuuuuuuuuuh!
Social behaviors you refer to are about survival of the organism, not the genes, beyond the extent to which organisms' survival allows them to reproduce.

If the "Selfish Gene Theory",(Why does Dawkins and others call it a theory when it's only a hypothesis?) does not propose reproduction is fundamental to evolutionary gene survival, then you need to educate me on the new method you have up your sleeve for primates and humans to pass on their genes.

I can't wait to hear it. On the edge of my seat.
__________

You said, "all behavior is evolved only for sexual reproduction" is what I said.

What I said was that it was a "fundamental focus".

You lack integrity.

“The Intrepid”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#231940 Jul 6, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Third request:
Is rape a normal behavior in primates and humans?
She's trying for the "it's natural" so that makes it ok.

Again.

“The Intrepid”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#231941 Jul 6, 2014
Oh my, there's only 8 viewers on the atheist forum.

That's just sad.

Especially since that means they have to infest the rest of the board to get attention.

What ever happened to, "Stay out of our forum."you nasty theists ?

Hypocrites.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#231942 Jul 6, 2014
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>

Dawkins' comment above does not make the claim you are misreading it to make...

He is telling you that genes exist to survive - they do. That's the extent. Genes that produce same sex sexual behavior in animals likewise exist to survive - but they aren't about reproduction. Survival isn't always about reproduction.
Let's see who is misreading him.

Richard Dawkins, "The Selfish Gene":

"... we can ask the question, what is a single selfish gene trying to do? It is trying to get more numerous in the gene pool. Basically it does this by helping to Program the bodies in which it finds itself to survive and to reproduce."

"I shall argue that the fundamental unit of selection, and therefore of self-interest, is not the species, nor the group, nor even, strictly, the individual. It is the gene, the unit of heredity."

" Individuals are not stable things, they are fleeting. Chromosomes too are shuffled to oblivion, like hands of cards soon after they are dealt. But the cards themselves survive the shuffling. The cards are the genes. The genes are not destroyed by crossing-over, they merely change partners and march on. Of course they march on. That is their business. They are the replicators and we are their survival machines. When we have served our purpose we are cast aside. But genes are denizens of geological time: genes are forever."

Here, as clearly as he can possibly say it, Dawkin's theory [hypothesis, though he calls it a theory] is that perpetuating genes to future generations is a fundamental focus of evolution.

He says the same thing I said he said; the same thing YOU SAID NO THEORIST SAID.

It's almost time now for me to begin ridiculing you.

“The Intrepid”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#231943 Jul 6, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Social behaviors you refer to are about survival of the organism, not the genes, beyond the extent to which organisms' survival allows them to reproduce.
If the "Selfish Gene Theory",(Why does Dawkins and others call it a theory when it's only a hypothesis?) does not propose reproduction is fundamental to evolutionary gene survival, then you need to educate me on the new method you have up your sleeve for primates and humans to pass on their genes.
I can't wait to hear it. On the edge of my seat.
__________
You said, "all behavior is evolved only for sexual reproduction" is what I said.
What I said was that it was a "fundamental focus".
You lack integrity.
The moron is trying to promote Dawkin's "gay gene" claim even though the human genome has already been completely mapped and shown not to contain said "gene".

Animals that do same-sex behavior are influenced by artificial contaminants, inside and outside of the womb. The effects confuse them but are not genetic in nature, they are artificial, which makes far from natural. Humans as higher functiong animals have no excuse of being cognitively "confused."

A healthy bull will mount "anything" near him after getting the scent of a cow. even tracors and cars. Nature, having no mind, is easily confused.

This subject is been put to bed long ago but that agenda oriented twit keeps insisting it hasn't. No surprise, considering where it's coming from.

“The Intrepid”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#231944 Jul 6, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's see who is misreading him.
Richard Dawkins, "The Selfish Gene":
"... we can ask the question, what is a single selfish gene trying to do? It is trying to get more numerous in the gene pool. Basically it does this by helping to Program the bodies in which it finds itself to survive and to reproduce."
"I shall argue that the fundamental unit of selection, and therefore of self-interest, is not the species, nor the group, nor even, strictly, the individual. It is the gene, the unit of heredity."
" Individuals are not stable things, they are fleeting. Chromosomes too are shuffled to oblivion, like hands of cards soon after they are dealt. But the cards themselves survive the shuffling. The cards are the genes. The genes are not destroyed by crossing-over, they merely change partners and march on. Of course they march on. That is their business. They are the replicators and we are their survival machines. When we have served our purpose we are cast aside. But genes are denizens of geological time: genes are forever."
Here, as clearly as he can possibly say it, Dawkin's theory [hypothesis, though he calls it a theory] is that perpetuating genes to future generations is a fundamental focus of evolution.
He says the same thing I said he said; the same thing YOU SAID NO THEORIST SAID.
It's almost time now for me to begin ridiculing you.
She's making a fool of herself quoting Dawkins if she's expecting to backup her claim with a nonexistent gay gene.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#231945 Jul 6, 2014
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
STDs travel along lines of inequality - those denied jobs, healthcare, freedom. STDs are most prevalent in poor nations, unprotected prostitutes, women without economic control (most 3rd world nations), and so on - and homosexuals. Why? Because of discrimination.
It's cute you call homosexuals the leading issue here - but the reality is that discrimination and social inequality is.
Worldwide, HIV is the leading killer of women aged 20-45.
Here, read. It's almost always women who bear the brunt here - b/c they usually cannot control their own economics, and so have to have sex under men's terms:
http://www.avert.org/std-statistics-worldwide...
You're so full of shit.

Discrimination against people results in STDs?

I guess that's why in FY 2015, American taxpayers will spend 30.4 billion dollars in AIDS treatment, education and research globally.

Graduate school has made a total dumbass of you.

“The Intrepid”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#231946 Jul 6, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Fourth request:
Is rape a normal behavior among primates and humans?
35% of male college students admitted (anonymously) that they would rape if they knew they could get away with it.

http://www.uic.edu/depts/owa/sa_rape_support....

A few years ago I read where 79% teen males who were anonymously polled admitted the same thing.

Apparently the college boys suspected a camera was aimed at their poll page. The paranoia of the guilty.

“The Intrepid”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#231948 Jul 6, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
You're so full of shit.
Discrimination against people results in STDs?
I guess that's why in FY 2015, American taxpayers will spend 30.4 billion dollars in AIDS treatment, education and research globally.
Graduate school has made a total dumbass of you.
I doubt the educational claims she makes, but, then again, I've come across some amazingly stupid graduates and professors.

Products of the system and their own agendas. ;)

Since: May 12

Las Vegas, NV

#231949 Jul 6, 2014
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I am clearly am telling you morality is a subjective collaboration of universal opinions and decisions decided by the human population of Earth. Not some imaginary being you believe they came from.
So why lambast the Bible ...If , you are now insinuating that when the human population accepted slavery ...It was okay .

because if that is indeed what you are claiming ...you must realize the fallacy of that position .

Since: May 12

Las Vegas, NV

#231950 Jul 6, 2014
Chess Jurist wrote:
<quoted text>
God is subjective?
Good to know.
..course...God loves everybody , He just loves Americans ..more..!

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#231951 Jul 6, 2014
number four wrote:
<quoted text>So why lambast the Bible ...If , you are now insinuating that when the human population accepted slavery ...It was okay .
because if that is indeed what you are claiming ...you must realize the fallacy of that position .
No they did not you asssuckingbigotedpigdogthatnee dsaswordstuck in it.
You are the type thing that was eliminated. Cept' your ilk still infects humanity.

But I'd be happy to cure that problem.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#231952 Jul 6, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Is rape a "normal" behavior in primates and humans?
__________
Yep, you sure did great arguing with me.
You might not be aware I saved the posts where you had to back down on points of contention with me...
Like when you claimed ID supporters publish no peer-reviewed research; or when you claimed ID scientists do no laboratory research, or when I posted the scientific theory of ID as you claim I did not, etc.....
Would you like me to re-post them and expose you as lying now?
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
You might not be aware I saved the posts where you had to back down on points of contention with me...
Uh oh.

Somebody is taking Teh Topix waaaaayyyyyyy too seriously.

Have you tried Yoga?

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#231953 Jul 6, 2014
number four wrote:
<quoted text>Ah , the crux of the matter ..
The Church isn't here to insure social equality ..it's here to save souls .
The Church can't produce a soul, not to mention a saved soul. Therefore it's claims are unfounded.
number four wrote:
<quoted text>
And , some discrimination is ' good '..Why aren't I allowed to use the girls restroom ..because , of a measly ' y ' chromosomes ...that's , pretty discriminatory .
I occasionally use the boy's restroom at certain events with a lot of people. Let's face it, the girl's line is always longer. Nobody has complained yet. Once my "business" is done, I deride the silly men for the condition of the facility. What a disgusting FuckinWasteland that is. Do you people ever clean up after yourselves?
number four wrote:
<quoted text>
Those of you in search of a neighborhood kid to babysit for you ; do you also consider the young men too ...or , only the young women ..Hmmm..?....
Why can't I be a Den Mother , I'm eminently qualified ...?
Do you consider that 'good' discrimination?
number four wrote:
<quoted text>
So yes I discriminate , of the two marriages ; the hetrosexual unions have proven to contribute more to society ..
How so?

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 woodtick57 1,174,624
What role do you think humans play in global wa... 17 min LonePalm 3,214
Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 30 min State the Obvious 308,059
UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 2 hr Bruin For Life 28,755
Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) Thu HitMan 201,321
Should child beauty pageants be banned? Jan 27 Pinoyboyguy 733
I got my loan from stephenloanhelp@hotmail.com (Jun '13) Jan 24 RICK SERVICE 32
More from around the web