Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 247314 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: May 10

Location hidden

#192177 Dec 14, 2013
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
You're a walking cautionary tale.
Though you may stagger at times.
You are more likable with your wisecracks than with your philosophy.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#192178 Dec 14, 2013
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>

If you say that Tom IS a married bachelor, then Tom does not exist.
Manifestly false.

Tom does exist. You just got an erroneous description.

I saw Tom just the other day. He is not a married bachelor. He is married.

If you say Tom is single, he still exists. But he is not single.

Your argument is illogical, and proven so.

“The Edge”

Since: Dec 10

Of Tomorow

#192179 Dec 14, 2013
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
The dust starts to accrete by static charges, I think.
It was demonstrated using a baggy full of salt crystals in microgravity.
At 34.55.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#192180 Dec 14, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
It is a war on Christmas, and a war aimed at Christians.
The use of "Happy Holidays" as a substitute greeting for "Merry Christmas" has nothing to do with other holidays. Hannukah is over, and New Year's day is signified by the greeting "Happy New Year". So it's about one holiday, and the controversy is that it contains the word "Christ".
You are not arguing; you are hunkering down.
Tide's opinions, which he asserts as facts, are not thoughtful. They are indicative of the shallow, liberal revisionist thinking being instilled in today's education system, and popular culture.
I see Christmas as a Christian war on atheism.

And all non-Christian religions, for that matter.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#192181 Dec 14, 2013
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, you didn't know? Life is unfair.
What do you think it means to "have" rights?
Is it like "having" money?
Rights and money are both just commonly agreed upon concepts. They are provisions of government.
Wrong.

In America, rights are not "provisions of government".

This illustrates your problem understanding America's concept of rights. It is typical of the deficit in education that is pervasive today.

I'd help you, but I suspect you have a compelling desire not to see the truth of it.

Since: Sep 10

Long Beach, CA

#192182 Dec 14, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
The school allowed students to see class rank at the end of the first year. It is based on grades recieved in classes.
He only applied to one school. His interviews went very well, by his assessment, and his grades and MCAT scores were higher than the median for the entering class. But he is a white male. The new admissions board at the school publicly stated they were stressing diversity.
I'm not talking through my hat. Liberalism cost him a year. More importantly, it's costing the public in the form of less than achievable quality of graduates.
To apply to just one school is moronic, don't you think?

Since: Sep 10

Long Beach, CA

#192183 Dec 14, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
The same thing is happening in the Andes.
I'll be in Patagonia in a couple of days, and will report from the field.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#192184 Dec 14, 2013
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, you didn't know? Life is unfair.
What do you think it means to "have" rights?
Is it like "having" money?
Rights and money are both just commonly agreed upon concepts. They are provisions of government.
Thomas Jefferson's view on the source of rights:

"And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure if we have lost the only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God?"

-Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia (Philadelphia: Matthew Carey, 1794), Query XVIII, p. 237.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#192185 Dec 14, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
To apply to just one school is moronic, don't you think?
Don't know. You could ask him when he gets his M.D.

If he had known he was going to be the victim of liberal racist discrimination, he might have done differently.
Bongo

Coram, NY

#192186 Dec 14, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Thomas Jefferson's view on the source of rights:
"And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure if we have lost the only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God?"
-Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia (Philadelphia: Matthew Carey, 1794), Query XVIII, p. 237.
Pursuant to Catchers assertion, this is all mumbo jumbo. He also claims to know what you don't possibly think.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#192187 Dec 14, 2013
Bongo wrote:
<quoted text> Pursuant to Catchers assertion, this is all mumbo jumbo. He also claims to know what you don't possibly think.
It's the same old no-god need.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#192188 Dec 14, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
That's why I didn't.
I do believe the Constitution is real.
Unlike at least 4 Supreme Court justices.
I think Scalia, Thomas, Roberts and Alito believe the Constitution is real. They just don't like what it says.

Since: Sep 10

Long Beach, CA

#192189 Dec 14, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Thomas Jefferson's view on the source of rights:
"And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure if we have lost the only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God?"
-Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia (Philadelphia: Matthew Carey, 1794), Query XVIII, p. 237.
Good God, Buck.

What does that make me, a Jeffersonian?

A deist?

Stop with the mine quoting. Don't disparage my guy Jefferson.

“What's left to defend?”

Since: Jan 11

Freedom

#192190 Dec 14, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
Manifestly false.
Tom does exist. You just got an erroneous description.
I saw Tom just the other day. He is not a married bachelor. He is married.
If you say Tom is single, he still exists. But he is not single.
Your argument is illogical, and proven so.
Married bachelors cannot exist.

If Tom is a married bachelor, then Tom does not exist.

This is a basic conditional proof.

Since: Sep 10

Long Beach, CA

#192191 Dec 14, 2013
And no quote mining either. Oops.
Bongo

Coram, NY

#192192 Dec 14, 2013
River Tam wrote:
<quoted text>
I think Scalia, Thomas, Roberts and Alito believe the Constitution is real. They just don't like what it says.
BLASPHEMY LAWS

The IHEU, which has member bodies in some 50 countries and supporters in many more where such organizations are banned, said there was systematic or severe discrimination against atheists across the 27-nation European Union.

The situation was severe in Austria, Denmark, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Malta and Poland where blasphemy laws allow for jail sentences up to three years on charges of offending a religion or believers. GENEVA — In 13 countries around the world, all of them Muslim, people who openly espouse atheism or reject the official state religion of Islam face execution under the law, according to a detailed study issued on Tuesday.

And beyond the Islamic nations, even some of the West's apparently most democratic governments at best discriminate against citizens who have no belief in a god and at worst can jail them for offences dubbed blasphemy, it said.

“The eye has it...”

Since: May 09

Russell's Teapot

#192193 Dec 14, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
If rights come from men, they are at the discretion of men, to be assigned arbitrarily, or taken away.
You may assert that <"rights"> - of morality, freedom etc.- are granted by deity(creator), and yet those "rights", have always been always been meted out by man in application to humans, no?
Buck Crick wrote:
The ways that would be worse are obvious and unlimited.
Certainly. The "deity", has obviously decided that those rights it asserts to men are non existent when a Grizzly Bear is present.

The "rights" of the Grizzly are of paramount importance, then. He gets his way, his morality prevails, and his decision overrules man.

Unless man decides to fight for his rights, which is what has always been the case with man it seems.
Buck Crick wrote:
For one example, certain men could justify the right of enslaving other men by their position as a priveliged class of men.
Or the Grizzly, or any superior predator. That deity you speak of has obviously decided the most capable predator in any given situation has the most important, assertable or prevalent rights.

A natural disaster even enters into the equation for this purpose. The deity appears ambiguous or capricious in application of what the deity incorporates...errrrr...doesn' t incorporate as far as any guarantee is concerned.

Whatever that is.
Buck Crick wrote:
It is the inherent nature of the rights of all men that preclude this.
"Security under our constitution is given to the rights of conscience and private judgment. They are by nature subject to no control but that of Deity, and in that free situation they are now left."
-Chief Justice John Jay
The deity must want competition. The deity must prefer conflict resolution as the means for rights and codes of morality to prevail.
Buck Crick wrote:
Lost in this discussion is the initial point - creation by a Creator is, factually, the basis asserted by the founders for our rights - including those protected in the Constitution.
The term, "creator", is vague and up for subjective interpretation.

What is it? Deism? Another concept? How can you believe in something for which, by the very nature of what is purported to be, is based upon no evidence?

I don't think belief or assertion qualifies as evidence.
Buck Crick wrote:
What that means is a different argument than whether it is, indeed, the basis.
Yeah.

Subjectively applied by whomever it may be, at that moment.

“What's left to defend?”

Since: Jan 11

Freedom

#192194 Dec 14, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
Wrong.
In America, rights are not "provisions of government".
This illustrates your problem understanding America's concept of rights. It is typical of the deficit in education that is pervasive today.
I'd help you, but I suspect you have a compelling desire not to see the truth of it.
This post was brought to you by Magic Beans.

“The eye has it...”

Since: May 09

Russell's Teapot

#192195 Dec 14, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
Slavery represented in the Bible is a profoundly different animal, and centers around Hebrew tradition of debt repayment. I am not the authority on such customs, nor the Hebrew language used to describe it, but I have studied a bit with those who are.
The Midrash and its function within Judaism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midrash , also http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Catholic_Encycl... (1913)/Midrashim
More about slavery in the OT from Judaic Midrash halakha, "VE-eileh ha-mishpatim" (AND these are the statutes). It was a deeper explanation kept by the Rabbi's concerning OT text. An exegesis of the Torah.

Quoting: "Your slaves and maidservants that you shall possess from the nations that surround you, from them you may purchase slaves and maidservants. Also, from the children of the sojourners who reside with you from them you may purchase [slaves], and from their families that live among you that were born in your land.[All these] shall be your permanent possession. You shall will them as inheritance to your children after you as hereditary property; you shall keep them in servitude permanently. However regarding your bretheren, Bnei Yisroel, man over his brother, you must not rule over him to crush him." - Vayikra 25:39-46
Commentary: "A non-Jewish servant, however, can be passed on to descendants through inheritance!

The possession of a non-Jewish slave is eternal.

But note another difference: A Jewish slave may not be subjected to “hard labor”(b’farech); a non-Jewish slave has no such condition. Seemingly, a non-Jewish slave may be worked to the bone with the most menial of work.
As mentioned above, a Jewish servant must be released after six years of work.
Not so, however, is the case for a non-Jewish slave. How are we supposed to understand that they are kept forever? How are we to allow hard labor for someone who was purchased like property? How can we understand the purchase of another human being at all?
The institution of slavery represents a blurring of the line dividing human personhood from property. This blurring is reflected clearly in some of the laws recorded in the parasha (Note that I am treating the institution of slavery in toto, without reference to the important distinction between Hebrew slaves and Canaanite slaves, as in Vayikra 25:39-46):
(a) When a master strikes his slave and the slave subsequently dies (after 24-48 hours), the master is exempt from punishment "because he is his property" (21:21-22. Rashbam: "and the law allows him to strike him in order to chastise him.")
(b) An ox that gores and kills a slave subjects its owner only to a 30-shekel fine and not to "ransom money" designed to redeem the master from a death penalty (21:29-32).
(c) The master may (sometimes) compel his slave to cohabit with a slave-girl and the children will belong to the master (21:4). http://www.yu.edu/ http://www.slideshare.net/steiny100/jewish-sl...

"The master may (sometimes) compel his slave to cohabit with a slave-girl and the children will belong to the master"

I'm disgusted, are you?

Biblical verse that relate directly to the Midrash exegesis.
Genesis 17:13, Genesis 17:27, Exodus 20:10, Exodus 21:1-4, Exodus 21:7, Exodus 21:8, Exodus 21:16, Exodus 21:20-21, Exodus 21:26-27, Leviticus 19:20-22, Leviticus 25:39, Leviticus 25:44-46, Leviticus 25:48-53, Numbers 31:28-47, Deuteronomy 15:12-18, Deuteronomy 21:10-14, Deuteronomy 20:14, Deuteronomy 23:15-16, 2 Samuel 9:10

The NT didn't abolish slavery or change anything stated in the OT, it only stated that all people, slave, Gentile etc., were open to following the NT/OT - religion. Mark 14:66, 1 Corinthians 12:13, Colossians 3:11,1 Timothy 6:1-2
The OT/NT that speaks of slavery in the sense that it was natural, and condoned by the deity in both the NT and OT.

Something that was a part of daily life.

“The Edge”

Since: Dec 10

Of Tomorow

#192196 Dec 14, 2013
Bongo wrote:
<quoted text> BLASPHEMY LAWS
The IHEU, which has member bodies in some 50 countries and supporters in many more where such organizations are banned, said there was systematic or severe discrimination against atheists across the 27-nation European Union.
The situation was severe in Austria, Denmark, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Malta and Poland where blasphemy laws allow for jail sentences up to three years on charges of offending a religion or believers. GENEVA — In 13 countries around the world, all of them Muslim, people who openly espouse atheism or reject the official state religion of Islam face execution under the law, according to a detailed study issued on Tuesday.
And beyond the Islamic nations, even some of the West's apparently most democratic governments at best discriminate against citizens who have no belief in a god and at worst can jail them for offences dubbed blasphemy, it said.
We atheist know just how many brainwashed idiot's there are in the world , without you having to point it out. But even you knowing how stupid belief is, you are still a believer.

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
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) 1 hr JChristy 6,857
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 3 hr shinningelectr0n 1,275,358
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 4 hr Trojan 29,921
News Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) Fri _Bad Axe 310,476
Conn's Appliances (Nov '07) Aug 20 Jcrombie67 282
Hoophall Invitational - Miami Aug 17 Hoophall 1
News Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) Aug 16 Doctor Justice_ 201,862
More from around the web