Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 258451 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.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#184607 Nov 15, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Democrats?
As opposed to ReThugs, who are against any and all programs that do not support their own intense *greed*

The modern ReThugs: the party of the most intensely felt **greed** in centuries.

I'd rather have the DemoWimps, even without their backbone.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#184608 Nov 15, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Babies would be sufficent proof to show your monster-god actually care.
But since we both know your god DOES NOT care?
Well... there you go.
You deleted 90% of my post.

I made a point to you that you obviously didn't like.

You're nothing but a troll.

Go to a titty bar, dude.

You need "something".

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#184609 Nov 15, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
HFY & HL would disagree with you.
So?

They appear to be optimists.

I'm a realist-- I fully understand the depths of your depravity.

I used to be a godbot like you, you see-- that's why I keep getting to you so well.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#184610 Nov 15, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
LMMFAO!!
The atheists get to redefine shit, why can't we?
Democrat: Those who vote based on irrelevant factors (gender, race, charisma, et cetera).
"As a Democrat, I voted for Barrack, because we need a black man in the White House."
As opposed to ReThuglicans, who **only** vote to give themselves **more** ill-gotten money.

The party of **greed**-- that describes your typical ReThug.

I find it amusing that the bible's Jesus would so not be a ReThuglican.

He'd likely not much care for DemoWimps either-- but you **know** he'd be against the ReThug attempt to take rights from people.

Jesus commanded his followers to **feed** the hungry, to **help** the homeless, to **doctor** the sick.

But the ReThugs? They are **against** all of that....

... at least the DemoWimps are **for** helping the needy.
LCNLin

United States

#184611 Nov 15, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Babies would be sufficent proof to show your monster-god actually care.
But since we both know your god DOES NOT care?
Well... there you go.
Babies would be sufficent proof?

Are you pregnant?

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#184612 Nov 15, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
Dreams have no more reality than the characters in a comic book do.
Negative.

Dreams are very real, so much to the point of influencing your next day...

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#184614 Nov 15, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
You seem to be a bit psychotic, but I don't discriminate. I'll try this with you one time.
God is not omnipotent, He is not all-powerful.
Then?

Your god isn't a god at all!

He's just some super-powerful **bully** who constantly demands you stroke his bloated ego.

Wow.

You are even more of a moron that I thought previously.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#184615 Nov 15, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Woah there, lil lady.
ALL churches are tax exempt.
Understand?
So?

None should be-- they cannot prove their silly and sometimes ugly claims.

So, in order to keep from being sued for fraud?

They have to claim it's just for entertainment reasons-- like movie theaters.

And we know that all entertainment **should** be taxed.

Until and if they can **prove** their gods are real?

That is only Just.

Since: Sep 08

Rocky Ford, CO

#184616 Nov 15, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't have a dog, I have a cat.
And your question depends on several things-- are dogs capable of love as we humans experience the emotion? Or is it something similar?
Without actually scanning the brain of the dog with a Science Fictional machine, to see what the dog is experiencing?
We cannot say one way or another.
But.
There are certainly many similarities to the behaviors of dogs, and the behaviors of humans who say they are in love.
Many, many similarities-- too many to just dismiss the dog's behavior as simply that of an animal.
It could be helpful to remember that both dogs and humans are **mammals**, and both ultimately share an ancestor back in the past.
As such, it's hardly surprising that mammals share similar instinctive drives (such as "love") that would manifest in a strongly similar way.
WTF?

That's the most intelligent post you have ever made.

Someone hijacked your account. Has to be.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#184617 Nov 15, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Prove it.
Google "plato".

There-- in one fell swoop, I did your homework FOR you.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#184618 Nov 15, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
~sniggers
I thought it was Pelosi.
"We have to pass this healthcare bill so we can find out what's in it"
http://youtu.be/KoE1R-xH5To
You are not a genuine christian.

A **real** follower of the words of Jesus?

Would **welcome** Obama care as answering the **command** to **help** the sick.

You are just another hypocrite, as we all suspected.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#184619 Nov 15, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes.
I am defeated.
Your Topix trophy is in the mail.
Directly to your asylum.
Your continued failure to counter my points is duly noted.

So you stoop to name-calling, and attempts at character assination.

Because, that's how your Jesus did it, right?

Jesus would call his detractors ugly names, right?

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#184620 Nov 15, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
RiversideRedneck wrote:
How can I be a high-grade moron like you?
<quoted text>
Thanks for admitting you're a moron.
Moron.
Or as Reba says; "Mow-ron".
I see you are still following Jesus' example.

Because he called the many people who defeated him, names.

Right?

Since: Sep 08

Rocky Ford, CO

#184621 Nov 15, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes-- your OCD is quite amusing.
Thanks!
Your negative jugits **prove** that I am **getting** to you!
LOL!
The experiment bears fruit-- you cannot help yourself!
LOL!
(I pull your strings like the puppet you are)
The truth is an even bigger LOL.

It wasn't me that did any of those judgits. I may have done five since they enabled those, and they were agrees.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#184622 Nov 15, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
You deleted 90% of my post.
I made a point to you that you obviously didn't like.
You're nothing but a troll.
Go to a titty bar, dude.
You need "something".
I stopped reading at the first sentence-- so that is what I replied to.

Since you started with a blatant lie?

I felt no need to read further.

As for the titty bar?

What **is** it with you god-robots, and your obsession with **sex**?

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#184623 Nov 15, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Negative.
Dreams are very real, so much to the point of influencing your next day...
So can reading a comic book.

It still does not make Spiderman real.

No more than it makes your equally fictional Jesus real.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#184624 Nov 15, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
WTF?
That's the most intelligent post you have ever made.
Someone hijacked your account. Has to be.
It's just that **You** never say anything intelligent enough to be worth responding to.

By the way?

THANKS FOR ALL THE NEGATIVE JUDGITS!

Clearly I am **getting** to you!

LOL!

“MEET KIKI -She Seeks Home”

Since: Oct 10

With Established Harem

#184625 Nov 15, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't have a dog, I have a cat.
And your question depends on several things-- are dogs capable of love as we humans experience the emotion? Or is it something similar?
Without actually scanning the brain of the dog with a Science Fictional machine, to see what the dog is experiencing?
We cannot say one way or another.
But.
There are certainly many similarities to the behaviors of dogs, and the behaviors of humans who say they are in love.
Many, many similarities-- too many to just dismiss the dog's behavior as simply that of an animal.
It could be helpful to remember that both dogs and humans are **mammals**, and both ultimately share an ancestor back in the past.
As such, it's hardly surprising that mammals share similar instinctive drives (such as "love") that would manifest in a strongly similar way.
.. a cat lover! Most excellent ..

.. do you believe your cat loves you or do you have faith that your cat loves you because (s)he's a mammal ??..

.. we really don't know if our pets love us, we just enjoy thinking they do ..

.. you may say the same concept applies to someone who believes in God ..

.. so, is it faith or belief ??..

Since: Sep 10

Redondo Beach, CA

#184626 Nov 15, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
I can give you his reply before he does.
It will be a dodge based on word-meanings.
He will say that "atheism" means only rejecting specific god-claims, and is therefore, consistent with skepticism.
His argument will rely on the mischaracterization of the two main terms in the discussion.
Getting off the hook, to him, is simply a matter of controlling the vocabulary.
It's a common rhetorical trick. Propagandists use it all the time.
We attorneys have to do that too, for competent representation of our clients.

Vocabulary control matters.

Since: Sep 08

Rocky Ford, CO

#184627 Nov 15, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
It's just that **You** never say anything intelligent enough to be worth responding to.
By the way?
THANKS FOR ALL THE NEGATIVE JUDGITS!
Clearly I am **getting** to you!
LOL!
Hmmmm...

Need to get that wild eyed look on that doll, too.

Goodnight, Bobby. You done wore me out.

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) 14 min RoxLo 1,523,980
News Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 19 min Snowman 313,998
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 3 hr MidPhartz 32,924
I got my loan from [email protected] (Jun '13) Apr 20 GLOBAL FUNDING SO... 43
How to Recover Deleted or lost Contacts from Sa... (Dec '14) Apr 20 DelucaKoehn 11
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) Apr 18 RNC 11,137
Conn's Appliances (Nov '07) Apr 8 Allycat1999 290
More from around the web