Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

Full story: Webbunny tumblelog

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.

Comments (Page 9,257)

Showing posts 185,121 - 185,140 of216,621
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Thinking

Chard, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#192884
Dec 16, 2013
 
Not merely opinion.

Teaching intelligent design is unconstitutional: this is the legally binding opinion of a Republican christian judge appointed by GWB.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_E._Jones_II...
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks for sharing your opinion.

“Today we pray”

Since: Jul 12

"tomorrow we win"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#192885
Dec 16, 2013
 
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>He wore an AIDS ribbon on the Graham Norton show recently.(There was a bit of a flap over that, but that's because Norton did, too, in violation of something or other).
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/dec/10/...
"The gay comic, a passionate supporters of Aids charities – including the Elton John Aids foundation...."

There's a foundation for Elton John's aids?!

o.O
Thinking

Chard, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#192886
Dec 16, 2013
 
No, I'm happy with ny use of the word.

intelligent design was indeed fabricated by christard liars. They got found out in court.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmiller_v._Do...
Eagle 12 wrote:
<quoted text>
I don’t think you see the irony in your statement. I know what you meant but the word “fabrication,” also means to construct, construction, manufacture and to build.
Intelligent design is all about God building and constructing. From the very beginning by programming the first cell with DNA to what we have today.

“Today we pray”

Since: Jul 12

"tomorrow we win"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#192887
Dec 16, 2013
 
macumazahn wrote:
Go ahead, now tell me I'm going to Hell.
You've already admitted that the Bibles been translated numerous times, by Men, and is therefore full of human errors.
So tell me, what's your pipeline to the True Word of God?
I've never told anyone they're going to Hell.

I'm not gonna start with you.

Just keep amusing me with your Topix Atheist! awesomeness.

“Today we pray”

Since: Jul 12

"tomorrow we win"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#192888
Dec 16, 2013
 
Thinking wrote:
In optics you use the word focii. But for the car I've only heard Focuses (no possessive). I think Ford has got a badge issue it probably doesn't deserve any more. But so many modern cars are bland as hell and Ford don't have anything that does it for me.
We've added a FIAT 500 that we use just for town/London parking. I could have bought probably 20 other cars that would do the same job, but only the 500 looked cute to us.
<quoted text>
Leave it to a Brit to buy a car because it's "cute"...

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#192889
Dec 16, 2013
 
Eagle 12 wrote:
<quoted text>.
How the memory lapses on Atheist.
Never mentioning that the Children of Abraham were also slaves for 400 years. Also not mentioning that Joseph was also sold as a slave.
The words of Moses,“Let my people go,” became a rallying cry during the civil rights movement of the 50’s -60’s.
Which 400 years?
And enslaved by whom?
And where are the records of this?

“Today we pray”

Since: Jul 12

"tomorrow we win"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#192890
Dec 16, 2013
 
Thinking wrote:
Not merely opinion.
Teaching intelligent design is unconstitutional: this is the legally binding opinion of a Republican christian judge appointed by GWB.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_E._Jones_II...
<quoted text>
You moved the goalposts and introduced a failed red herring.

Your original quote was not about legality.

"Thinking wrote:
No, because intelligent design is a fabrication."

It was your opinion that ID is a lie.

Stick to that, maybe we can discuss it.

Move the goalposts again and I'll put you back in the spittoon.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#192891
Dec 16, 2013
 
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
I've never told anyone they're going to Hell.
I'm not gonna start with you.
Just keep amusing me with your Topix Atheist! awesomeness.
Never claimed awesomeness.

But again, what's your pipeline?
Thinking

Chard, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#192892
Dec 16, 2013
 
My take is that so long as Clarkson is not prevented from making crass gay jokes about his colleagues, he would be sincerely supportive of gay rights. Same goes for gender, race, nationality, etc. Possibly not religion, though.

Yes, apparently only the poppy is allowed to be worn in this TV format. I didn't know that until this "story" broke.
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>He wore an AIDS ribbon on the Graham Norton show recently.(There was a bit of a flap over that, but that's because Norton did, too, in violation of something or other).
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/dec/10/...
Thinking

Chard, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#192893
Dec 16, 2013
 
Should I therefore take it you are conditioned to buy cars that are fugly?
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Leave it to a Brit to buy a car because it's "cute"...
Thinking

Chard, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#192894
Dec 16, 2013
 
That you have an issue with the logic of GWB's christian judge is your problem, not mine.

intelligent design is a fabrication.
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
You moved the goalposts and introduced a failed red herring.
Your original quote was not about legality.
"Thinking wrote:
No, because intelligent design is a fabrication."
It was your opinion that ID is a lie.
Stick to that, maybe we can discuss it.
Move the goalposts again and I'll put you back in the spittoon.

“It's all about the struggle”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#192895
Dec 16, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
It is interesting how his pathology convinces himself that his shouting from his manual of neo-atheism that he is handing you your ass on a platter. This is common among that group.
These forums are really an interesting development. Once upon a time you had to wait for the mentally ill to commit an act to reveal themselves. Now mental health professionals can monitor forums and target those that need some intervention.
lol

That reminds me of the topix twit Dogen, who claims to be a buddhist psycho therapist who said his patients whose ideologies are different than his make him sick, that he silently screams at them while listening to their "delusions" during their "sessions", wants to call them names and drug their minds into oblivion. Yep, he sounds so ethical and his "professional" opinion so honest and trustworthy. If he's telling the truth about being a mental health professional his patients are in real trouble considering the massive hatred he carries for those who "believe" differently from him. So much for "free thinking", huh? I have found that most here who claim to be a free thinker actually have zero tolerance for those who "think freely" in a way that isn't their WAY.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#192896
Dec 16, 2013
 
Thinking wrote:
Not merely opinion.
Teaching intelligent design is unconstitutional: this is the legally binding opinion of a Republican christian judge appointed by GWB.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_E._Jones_II...
<quoted text>
Show me the provision of the Constitution violated by teaching Intelligent Design.

And the judge's decision is not legally binding anywhere but the middle district of Pennsylvania.

So cite the passage in the Constitution that is violated.

I'm dying to see it.

“It's all about the struggle”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#192897
Dec 16, 2013
 
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Leave it to a Brit to buy a car because it's "cute"...
Hey! Those new fiats are cute.:[

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#192898
Dec 16, 2013
 
Buck Crick wrote:
Not to speak for lightbeam, but I think, instead of objective moral truth, he should have used transcendent moral truth, or independent moral truth.
Those are all functionally equivalent in the sense that they each take the source of ethics from the minds of men and project them elsewhere, generally into the mind of deity to be revealed and obeyed, although the specific terms don't necessarily require a god to be the source or repository of these morals. They just exist floating in space to be discovered to be transcendent or independent of man,

But it's the god belief that motivates these discussions - the desire to give the god an authoritative role in affairs of men, and willingness to make unsupported assumptions about the ontological nature of ethical values that forces the need for a god..That's why we get these convoluted arguments about mankind being unable to have a conscience or have moral knowledge without a god to give it to him. From Wiki:

"The argument from morality is an argument for the existence of God. Arguments from morality ... observe some aspect of morality and argue that God is the best or only explanation for this, concluding that God must exist."

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#192899
Dec 16, 2013
 
Buck Crick wrote:
The value of the god-endowed rights principle is that it supercedes the mortal tendency for selfishness, power, and depravity of the individual and resists trends in culture or government toward relativism, legal positivism, and situational ethics.Those tendencies operated with slavery. Then the god-endowed principle was vindicated.
What you and lightbeamrider keep ignoring is that we have seen both manners of thought put into practice, and we have seen their fruits. I'm pretty certain that you will disagree, but I have no doubt that the rational ethics developed by consensus are the best ethics we have or could have, and that authoritative systems that hand that job to a king, god (as interpreted by priests) or dictator are the worst except for the rare times in history when men have lived under wise and benevolent dictators.

So, you can arrange as many words as you like in any order you like, but you cannot convince an evidence based mind that faith based ethical systems will produce a better result when they have consistently failed when put to the test.

Consider a nation of faith based thinkers like typical Christians on this thread and a nation of evidence based thinkers like the typical unbelievers on this thread, and subject each to a demagogue that wants to commit genocide on a people, enslave the male survivors, and force sex on the females. Which group is more likely to say no, and which is more likely to submit to authority and try to find a way to justify it? That's a no brainer.

Given the failure of Christian ethics to prevent the Spanish Inquisition, the Salem witch trials, the Nazi Holocaust and the Ku Klux Klan, why do you still want to argue that religious (or objective or transcendent or independent) ethical systems are superior? Your best hope is always humanists that know that moral law is created by human beings and their consciences through consensus, just like the Founders did when they wrote the Constitution and its Bill of Rights in committee with no apparent appeal to a bible or the stars.

“Today we pray”

Since: Jul 12

"tomorrow we win"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#192900
Dec 16, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>Never claimed awesomeness.
But again, what's your pipeline?
Awesomeness never had to be claimed

It's well known that every Topix Atheist! is a doctor or a professor or a high-priced attorney or a self-proclaimed genius intellectual.

Awesomeness is implied, though never claimed.

“It's all about the struggle”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#192902
Dec 16, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
HA HA!!
I haven't heard that in a few days.
Thanks for the chuckle.
Yeah,:]
blacklagoon

Brookline, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#192903
Dec 16, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
There was also black, African slavers.
There was also Spanish slavers.
Nearly every culture in our history has had slavery.
Don't limit your knowledge to hatred and bias of white Christians.
yeah, and ALL of these slave owners thought they had ever right to own another human being as God fully sanction slavery in their holy book. What better justification that having your very own God fully support slavery.

Should we now do some research and see exactly what the percentage of slave owners were white Christians? I'm sure it would be extremely embarrassing for you.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#192904
Dec 16, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Thinking wrote:
No, I'm happy with ny use of the word.
intelligent design was indeed fabricated by christard liars. They got found out in court.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmiller_v._Do...
<quoted text>
Your link does not support that ID was fabricated.

Know what that makes you?

A liar.

Since you're not a christard liar, I'll just call you a "Regular Liar".

You are a regular liar.

Here's a tip: I know more about the Kitzmiller trial than anyone on this thread, and it's not close.

Say something specific about it. See what happens.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 185,121 - 185,140 of216,621
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

•••
•••
•••
•••
•••
•••