Don't dictate beliefs

Don't dictate beliefs

There are 11176 comments on the The Star Press story from Sep 5, 2012, titled Don't dictate beliefs. In it, The Star Press reports that:

No one else can say otherwise? That is basically saying those who do "believe in God" are better? Hardly.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Star Press.

Since: Aug 12

Location hidden

#7902 Dec 7, 2012
After losing the debate on religion, my Christian friend said to me, "I'll pray for you"

Understanding the humour of the situation, I quickly replied back, "I'll read more about science for you"
derek4 wrote:
Scientific fraud growing.....UK, China, Romania, Nigeria, on and on and on.
Why aren't the peer review groups catching all this misconduct?
I would think atheists would be upset since they say they're so concerned about honesty.
Hmmmm.....
Naaahhh....the atheists back our scientists!!!!
LMAO

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#7903 Dec 7, 2012
Mr Smartypants wrote:
<quoted text>
Great reply, KittenKoder! What cracks me up are the young-Earth cretinists who are only alive because modern medicine gave them a pacemaker and insulin and who use a computer with a satellite connection so they can go to a cretinist website and bitch about how scientists are idiots who don't know what they're doing.
Irony, Bill Gates is an open atheist, and most of MS employees are.

Asimov, the author that inspired us to try to build the perfect computer, very open and outspoken atheist before he died, rest in peace my hero.

One of the first developers of Linux was an atheist, the two that "invented" Linux when they decided to make a free version of Unix so everyone could get it.

Steve Jobs was an atheist, well, technically Buddhist, but most of them are atheists. lol

Everyone I know that works at Google is an atheist.

Oh yeah, computers, the godless machines.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#7904 Dec 7, 2012
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
You are attempting to dispute a portion of web content previously posted.
Just a reminder to everyone in the forum: If you wish to dispute the contents of a web page, you should refer to the publisher at the link provided, since I have no interest in your unsubstantiated objections to web content.
Also, please refrain from going into lengthy unprofessional scientific dialogue which you've copied somewhere but failed to link to the unknown author. When you do that, it's not credit worthy - therefore is a waste of my time and your time.
Thanks for your usual fine cooperation. LMAO
Just because you are a spam bot without an original thought to call his own does not mean everyone is else. Some people are able to speak relatively well on a variety of subjects, just because you can't doesn't mean no one else can either.

And do you know how stupid it is to spam post a link/copy paste from somewhere, and then deflect any criticism by saying that you didn't write it? You are throwing your support behind it when you post it, idiot.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#7905 Dec 7, 2012
*your own*

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#7906 Dec 7, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
You ... actually buy that part? That's a bedtime story they tell newbs to lure them in, nothing more. Sheesh. How long as you been in the church? A month? Maybe two? I know a Catholic who actually knows more about your religion than you do.
I have attended more than a thousand meetings with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I know what I'm talking about. How many sacrament meetings have you attended at the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day saints?

I find it a bit amusing that you are dictating to me what I believe on an Atheist Forum entitled "Don't dictate beliefs."

Mormon's don't believe God is going to give them their own planet when they go to Heaven and they don't believe Joseph Smith is God.

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#7907 Dec 7, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
You might if you saw things through the eyes of a skeptic. Your various doctrinal differences don't really matter to us. It's the church's political presence as a collective. It tends to vote Christian, and embodies certain Christian values whatever the denomination. Thus, Catholics, Mormons, Episcopalians, Jehovah's Witnesses and Baptists might not agree about anything else, but they form a united front opposing progressive politics and humanist values. They're all pretty happy to throw gays and atheists under the bus, for example, and to oppose abortion rights, sex education, and stem cell research.
That's what Christianity is to me. I don't care which eat wafers or go to church on Saturday.
So, yeah. I pretty much think of you as a collective.
I can see how that can be frustrating. I used to see atheists as a collective as well.

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#7908 Dec 7, 2012
swerty wrote:
Religion is just for people who don't understand science. <quoted text>
Have you heard of Philo Farnsworth? He helped develop the TV, he kinda understood science. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philo_Farnsworth

How about Henry Eyring? "He pioneered the application of quantum mechanics to chemistry. He also was awarded the National medal of Science for devolving the Absolute Rate Theory of chemical reactions. He was elected president of the American Chemical Society in 1963 and of the Association for the Advancement of Science in 1965."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Eyring

Or Richard Scott, a nuclear engineer? All involved with science, all religious.

BYU Biology Professor Steven Peck
http://blog.beliefnet.com/flunkingsainthood/2...

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#7909 Dec 7, 2012
Sambrotherofnephi wrote:
<quoted text>
I have attended more than a thousand meetings with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I know what I'm talking about. How many sacrament meetings have you attended at the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day saints?
I find it a bit amusing that you are dictating to me what I believe on an Atheist Forum entitled "Don't dictate beliefs."
Mormon's don't believe God is going to give them their own planet when they go to Heaven and they don't believe Joseph Smith is God.
It amazes me that you missed that I grew up. So then, you're a liar, well that was obvious before, you probably are a Mormon, they are taught to lie for their cult, just like Scientologists. I recall the "white lie" lessons from the leaders every Sunday and every Seminary class before going to real school.

You see, you messed up in your lying, for one, you're talking to a real ex-Mormon, one who still has Mormon friends, one of them helped me do a video debunking morons like you, actually. There are a few who are honest, in spite of themselves, mostly when they need the help of one of us atheists to set idiotic people like you straight. Another point you messed up was the "believe Joseph is a god." Well, he will be, according to their beliefs. You see, the belief is that those who follow the religion perfectly become gods themselves, gods of their own worlds. It's a "system" of sorts used to populate the universe with intelligent life. Their god's wives, and himself, went through a life just like the rest of us, they earned their position and now offer the same to their billions of children, I think they're going to have to change that to a much higher number now, no? This is very basic Sunday school lessons too, very basic, like you start hearing this from birth, and you have to prove you know it to get what is best described as "promotions" to new levels. Though the men get more power and control in the church, one of their many flaws. The 12 bishops at the top wait their turn to be the next prophet, it's in order of when you become one of the 12, and when one dies the next living one is the new prophet.

It's not that complicated really.

Since: Mar 11

Portage, MI

#7910 Dec 8, 2012
That's why we love you :)
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
It amazes me that you missed that I grew up. So then, you're a liar, well that was obvious before, you probably are a Mormon, they are taught to lie for their cult, just like Scientologists. I recall the "white lie" lessons from the leaders every Sunday and every Seminary class before going to real school.
You see, you messed up in your lying, for one, you're talking to a real ex-Mormon, one who still has Mormon friends, one of them helped me do a video debunking morons like you, actually. There are a few who are honest, in spite of themselves, mostly when they need the help of one of us atheists to set idiotic people like you straight. Another point you messed up was the "believe Joseph is a god." Well, he will be, according to their beliefs. You see, the belief is that those who follow the religion perfectly become gods themselves, gods of their own worlds. It's a "system" of sorts used to populate the universe with intelligent life. Their god's wives, and himself, went through a life just like the rest of us, they earned their position and now offer the same to their billions of children, I think they're going to have to change that to a much higher number now, no? This is very basic Sunday school lessons too, very basic, like you start hearing this from birth, and you have to prove you know it to get what is best described as "promotions" to new levels. Though the men get more power and control in the church, one of their many flaws. The 12 bishops at the top wait their turn to be the next prophet, it's in order of when you become one of the 12, and when one dies the next living one is the new prophet.
It's not that complicated really.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#7911 Dec 8, 2012
Sambrotherofnephi wrote:
<quoted text>
Have you heard of Philo Farnsworth? He helped develop the TV, he kinda understood science. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philo_Farnsworth
How about Henry Eyring? "He pioneered the application of quantum mechanics to chemistry. He also was awarded the National medal of Science for devolving the Absolute Rate Theory of chemical reactions. He was elected president of the American Chemical Society in 1963 and of the Association for the Advancement of Science in 1965."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Eyring
Or Richard Scott, a nuclear engineer? All involved with science, all religious.
BYU Biology Professor Steven Peck
http://blog.beliefnet.com/flunkingsainthood/2...
You can be an intelligent scientist, but still stupid & fearful when it comes to gods that aren't really there.

The fact is you lying theists have no proof of god and you try to misrepresent scientists, without actually trying to apply any science to your claims.

The reason you don't apply science to your claims is because you know that you're actually lying about the god you claim is real.

“Citizen_Patriot_ Voter_Atheist!”

Since: May 09

Earth,TX

#7912 Dec 8, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
You should change your name to give me a brain.
Wikipedia
"Virtually all modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed"
You're far from a scholar and it shows.
Yeah, that is called faith, and like he said, there is more proof of Hercules than Jesus. Somebody believing something doesn't mean that proof exists. Believing in Jesus also means that you believe that Jehovah would make you eat your children, it's all part of the same "all or nothing" fractured-fairy tale book.

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#7913 Dec 8, 2012
Reason Personified wrote:
<quoted text>Yeah, that is called faith, and like he said, there is more proof of Hercules than Jesus. Somebody believing something doesn't mean that proof exists. Believing in Jesus also means that you believe that Jehovah would make you eat your children, it's all part of the same "all or nothing" fractured-fairy tale book.
Nicely put.

"I will make them eat the flesh of their children"
Jeremiah 19:1-9

Here we see the horrendous morality and limited intelligence of the god of the Bible. These people were sacrificing some of their own children to another god. What does the Bible god do?

He gets angry at the adults and arranges it so that they will now eat their children!!! Stupid or what?

The god of the Bible has made his judgement and rather than stopping the killing of a few innocent children, he ensures that these kids will be eaten. Instead of saving the kids from being sacrificed, the Bible god is making the parents eat them?

All this does is to demonstrate that the god of the bible comes from the brain addled ramblings of primitive, superstitious savages.

Yet somehow I just know that Dim/KJV/longears will see this as an example of their deity's transcendent love.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#7914 Dec 8, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
So, when the few sane people remind you of your delusion, you consider it a compliment. This is actually a very common symptom of delusion you are expressing.
You and the other atheists in here are about as sane as asylum escapees, lol.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#7915 Dec 8, 2012
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>Just because you are a spam bot without an original thought to call his own does not mean everyone is else. Some people are able to speak relatively well on a variety of subjects...
This part was funny: "does not mean everyone is else" LMAO

"Everyone is else" (?)

This part was just as funny: "Some people are able to speak relatively well on a variety of subjects"

LOL - True - and I post many of what they speak and write about.

So yes, many people are, but alas, you're not one of those people.

You really offer us zero.

LOL

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#7916 Dec 8, 2012
Mr Smartypants wrote:
The great thing about science is that it's self-correcting, unlike religion. Scientists are human and give in to human urges to be dishonest and delusional just like everybody else. Guess who proved that Piltdown Man was a hoax? Other scientists.
As for religion, basically 100% of it is unprovable bullshit...
You're wrong, "smartypants". You fail.

And - wow, who could believe anything coming from a nut case name like "smartypants"?

The great thing about God is that no one can correct him since he is perfection.

“Deception and Fraud in the Publication of Scientific Research: Are There Solutions?

A number of events in the U.S. and abroad have refocused the scientific community on historical issues of whether, and how, integrity of our technical literature can be assured. Solutions to this problem are neither simple nor certain. Professional societies have addressed scientific misconduct, and effective responses by the research community will require cooperation of scientific publications. While the incidence of scientific fraud is difficult to estimate with precision and certainly varies with discipline, identified and publicized recent cases beg attention from editorial boards. Several egregious cases are described. The peer review system serves the function of examination and critique by scientists in relevant disciplines to assess submitted papers prior to publication. There is even a developing literature and several specific journals dedicated to the subject of fraud, professional integrity and ways to monitor or correct existing conditions. Underlying the field of professional and scientific publication is a fundamental assumption that data are real and that research actually occurred. Typically, the process is “blind” in both directions, although some journals permit “author-directed” reviews. A reviewer’s responsibilities include ensuring that text properly reflects data, that tables and figures are necessary/appropriate, and that conclusions fairly and reasonably reflect results and the body of information. Thus, existing peer review systems probably cannot detect anything but the most obvious fraud. In addition to imposing or perpetuating stringent review protocols, journals also can amend author guidelines to speak explicitly about publishing requirements. Cases of properly documented fraud warrant immediate public announcement, followed by official withdrawal or retraction. Reflection on these issues led editors of one journal to institute changes in editorial policies and develop a code of ethics for authors, reviewers, and editors. Prevention of dishonest research is already difficult, and we should ensure that this remains the case. Editors should formally commit reviewers/authors to ethical conduct in technical publications prior to publication and review.”
http://scholarworks.umass.edu/intljssw/vol1/i...

[This was the most interesting statement in the text:“... existing peer review systems probably cannot detect anything but the most obvious fraud.”]

[“Prevention of dishonest research is already difficult...“]

[Science cannot be trusted; it has failed us.]

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#7917 Dec 8, 2012
Atheism is a lonely religion

“According to Audacious Epigone. atheists are most likely to live alone.

This is not surprising. Atheists are less desirable sexual partners. I observed this once when I was living in Washington, DC, and I wandered by an atheist convention happening on the mall. The atheist were predominately male, and significantly uglier than average.

This is because ugly people become social outcasts, and social outcasts are more likely to be attracted to outcast movements like atheism, libertarianism, communism, etc.”

continued – more comments:

“The people likely to attend atheist conventions are not the same as most atheists, I'd expect them to be uglier and less socially inclined (after all, they have nothing better to do than go to an atheism convention).”[LMAO]

“How prickly and annoying do you have to be to care if "under God" is in the pledge or to be anti-Christmas carols? Check out atheist websites and the causes that they take up. These people aren't just outcasts; they're outcasts who relish in their weirdness.”

“Humans are social animals, but atheists have no social infrastructure even close to the extended infrastructure of church denominations and interdenominational groups. A lot of atheists attend or visit Universalist, Buddhist or other non-doctrinal groups just for developing new social circles.”
http://www.halfsigma.com/2009/01/atheism-is-a...

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#7918 Dec 8, 2012
Catholic newspaper “Alive”, calls atheists "losers and no-hopers"

“Atheists, however, believe that this is the only life there is, and while they have passing hopes in this life, they see death as ending everything. They do not hold to the most fundamental of all hopes, the hope of eternal life. In that sense they are no-hopers, as they themselves can recognise. Again, the deepest driving force, so to speak, in each of us is the yearning for happiness, a happiness that will last forever, and where all our desires are satisfied. Only God’s offer of himself could give us this complete, definitive fulfilment. Even atheists can know that from reason alone. And they can recognise that without such fulfilment all is lost, that they are the ultimate losers.”

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#7919 Dec 8, 2012
Atheism and Death: Why the atheist must face death with despair

“You or someone you know might be an atheist and you feel as though you have no despair when contemplating your death. I don't doubt that there are many atheist that, in fact, have no despair over death. But, for the atheist to live without despair, they must do so inconsistently.”

continued:

“Atheism cannot offer any comfort in the face of death. You see, everything we do includes some kind of hope. However, what kind of hope can the atheist give in the face of death? One may say that death is the final freeing of all desires and thus is good. Or that one can have hope in death if they are suffering. These really are just false hopes ...”

continued:

“After the death of his friend, Arthur Hallam, Alfred, Lord Tennyson composed his poem, "In Memorium". This poem show the stuggle he had as he wrestled with grief and the question of what ultimate power manages the fate of man. It shows the struggle he had between his realization of the consequences of his choice between atheism and God...“

Thine are these orbs of light and shade
Thou madest Life in man and brute;
Thou madest death; and Lo, thy foot
Is on the skull which thou hast made.

Are God and Nature then at strife
That Nature lends such evil dreams?
So careful of the type she seems
So careless of the single life,...

"So careful of the type?" but no.
From scarped cliff and quarried stone
She cries a thousand types are gone;
I care for nothing, all shall go.

"Thou makest thine appeal to me
I bring to life, I bring to death;
The spirit does but mean the breath:
I know no more." And he, shall he,

Man her last work who seem'd so fair
Such splendid purpose in his eyes,
Who rolI'd the psalm to wintry skies,
Who built him fanes of fruitless prayers,

Who trusted God was love indeed
And love creation's final law--
Tho' Nature, red in tooth and claw
With ravine, shrieked against his creed-

Who loved, who suffer'd countless ills
Who battled for the True, the Just,
Be blown about the desert dust,
Or seal'd within the iron hills?

No more? A monster then, a dream.
A discord. Dragons of the prime
That tear each other in their slime,
Were mellow music match'd with him.

O life as futile, then, as frail!
O for thy voice to soothe and bless
What hope of answer, or redress?
Behind the veil, behind the veil.

Atheism has parented this offspring, and it is her legitimate child--with no mind to look back to for his origin, no law to turn to for guidance, no meaning to cling to for life, and no hope for the future. This is the shattered visage of atheism. It has the stare of death, looking into the barren desert of emptiness and hopelessness. Thus, the Nietzschean dogma, which dawned with the lantern being smashed to the ground, now ends in the darkness of the grave.
http://contendforthefaith2.com/atheism.html

[How utterly depressing to be an atheist.]

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#7920 Dec 8, 2012
Hi Dim

You keep right on posting links that support purging Christianity of any subsequent additions after the Jesus myth. You hear?

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#7922 Dec 8, 2012
The one question atheists can't answer: "How do you live without hope?"

“I have been following my friend Peter Saunders series of posts based on 20 Questions Atheists Struggle to answer. It is an interesting series, and in it he attempts to engage with a group who simply don’t understand Christians. I am glad to see that the age-old craft of apologetics is far from dead. But there is one question he didn’t ask that to me at least is the most critical:

“How do you live without hope?”

I have lived now for more than 41 years. This is easily long enough to realize that this world is far from ideal. It really is a cruel world that almost seems to be thinking of ways to disappoint, damage, or ultimately destroy us. It surely can’t be long before I reach the half-way stage on my life if I haven’t already. Death, whether your own or others can bring bone-crushing sorrow, even to a Christian. So I ask,

How do you live without a hope in the after-life?

I simply cannot understand how someone faces life each day, believing that their existence and that of those they love can be permanently snuffed out in an instant. Believing that they will never meet again with those that have died. Believing that ultimately this short life is all there is.

But it is not just that. If you are an atheist by definition the universe is a random place. Everything within us cries out that there is something fundamentally wrong with the way the world works. Sin, sickness, and death feel like unwelcome invaders. Few willingly welcome any of them. Yet the Christian believes that behind a broken world there is a sovereign God who will one day fix it all, and in the meantime is working everything round for good to those who love him (Romans 8:28).

If you couldn’t look an enemy in the eye and say with Joseph “You meant it for harm, God meant it for good” how do you get through life?

How do you live without hope that a person who is loving will one day fix the worlds woes and is already turning around bad things to cause good results?”
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/adrianwarnock/20...

[Atheists don't think ahead. They try to block all those thoughts out. Only their bitterness, anger, and hostility fuel them to keep going from one day to the next.]

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.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... 52 min Messianic114 2,711
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 1 hr Science 61,551
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 8 hr Aura Mytha 28,325
The Dumbest Thing Posted by a Godbot (Jun '10) Mar 24 IB DaMann 5,970
Atheist Humor (Aug '09) Mar 22 Eagle 12 452
Deconversion Mar 20 Eagle 12 138
News Quotes from Famous Freethinkers (Aug '12) Mar 18 Eagle 12 2,043
More from around the web