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.

“Blue Collar Philosopher”

Since: Nov 08

Texas, USA

#7968 Dec 9, 2012
derek4 wrote:
AGAIN:
"A parent who had a problem with the play’s content notified the local atheist group of the field trip."
I expect the parent has MANY problems and needs to get a life.
I've a feeling the troubled parent, having seen "A Charlie Brown Christmas" as Charles Schulz intended it on TV a few bazillion times, objected to the Christianized version as presented in that House of Ill Repute. I doubt if the poor, scraggly xmas tree made glorious by love, was the central message there. Wanna bet?

Since: Aug 12

Location hidden

#7969 Dec 9, 2012
Darwinism - Ruining dreams of retards since evolution began
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
You probably are making a wise decision when you just “drop by occasionally”, and I commend you for that. We wouldn't miss you if you weren't here. Actually, I don't recall anything memorable you've ever written.

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#7970 Dec 9, 2012
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm curious.
Do you have a life outside of topix?
He certainly doesn't have one on Topix....

Since: Mar 11

Scottsburg, IN

#7971 Dec 9, 2012
Hey... Uhmm seriously... No really... Are you still arguing for the invisible sky wizard creating everything?
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
You probably are making a wise decision when you just “drop by occasionally”, and I commend you for that. We wouldn't miss you if you weren't here. Actually, I don't recall anything memorable you've ever written.

Since: Mar 11

Scottsburg, IN

#7972 Dec 9, 2012
Not a life and not a friend in the world that one.
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm curious.
Do you have a life outside of topix?

“Citizen_Patriot_ Voter_Atheist!”

Since: May 09

Earth,TX

#7973 Dec 9, 2012
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL
Not forgetting the talking snakes and donkeys and bread baked with shite.
ROFLMAO!!
Just a partial list is enough to make a sane persons skin crawl in revulsion. They drink the substantiated blood of their dead zombie, how much more is needed, to call the Christain cult crazed?

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#7974 Dec 9, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Meathead.
You're a painfully stupid little man, Dim. Khatru tells you right here in his post that he reads yours. We all do, and we have all commented on them. Only in your impoverished imagination are people saying that they "don't read [your] posts."

You, on the other hand, make a point of announcing that you don't read the posts of others between announcements that those responses didn't impress you enough. This is why you are called Dim.
I very much doubt Dim will respond to this as he's wary of you.

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#7975 Dec 9, 2012
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
You have no facts. You don't want your life cluttered with facts.
The facts I post are all still in place, and more science fraud reports are showing up in the news every day. Your futile attempts to rebut them are sad jokes. This is because you're powerless and weak – powerless to change what science magazines and news reports say on fraudulent science and science misconduct; powerless to rewrite history. You're weak. Your comments never get off the ground. Just like you – sitting there on your fat rump and never getting off the ground.
So let's face it – you're nothing but a failure all around, and a miserable one.
I flush you down the drain with the dirty bathwater.
LMAO
Here's just ONE example of the hundreds I've posted already – let's take a look at it again, and thank you for inviting me to re-post it for you:
From Science Daily:
Facts in Scientific Drug Literature May Not Be
(May 29, 2012)— A growing concern with fraud and misconduct in published drug studies has led researchers at the University of Illinois at Chicago's Center for Pharmacoeconomic Research to investigate the extent and reasons for retractions in the research.
"We were surprised to find the proportion of retractions due to scientific misconduct in the drug literature is higher than in general biomedical literature," said Simon Pickard, associate professor of pharmacy practice and senior author of a study published in the journal Pharmacotherapy.
Nearly three-quarters of the retracted drug studies were attributed to scientific misconduct, he said, "which includes data falsification or fabrication, questionable veracity, unethical author conduct, or plagiarism. While these studies comprise a small percentage of the overall literature, health care professionals may rely on this evidence to make treatment recommendations.
These studies can affect the treatment of thousands of patients, since scientific publications are often printed months in advance.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/05/...
Let me know if I can post some more like this fer 'ya, Khatru. And you say you don't read my posts when you say you don't “plough through” the material – I still recall you saying that, and more than once. Then you turn around and say you've “torn to shreds”[my] posts? How do you do that if you haven't ploughed through them? You have a shredded brain.
You've “ploughed through” too many comic books.
LMAO
Ah, Dim.

You keep right on posting, my caliginous friend.

Your posts are a fine advert that demonstrates the strength of science and how it will always weed out the small percentage of fakes. Such a shame your religion doesn't monitor its adherents with the same high standards.

Although it's nice of you to credit me with tearing your posts to shreds, I did say "we" and not "me". Try and pay attention, Dim.

Now, show me that Einstein link of yours again - the one you posted where Albert states that Christianity would be so much better if it were purged of any subsequent additions after the Jesus myth.

It's so nice to know that you wholeheartedly agree with Albert on this - otherwise, you'd never have posted it.

ROFLMAO!

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#7976 Dec 9, 2012
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
You probably are making a wise decision when you just “drop by occasionally”, and I commend you for that. We wouldn't miss you if you weren't here. Actually, I don't recall anything memorable you've ever written.
Given that original thought is a concept alien to you, I'm not surprised to hear you saying this.

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#7977 Dec 9, 2012
derek4 wrote:
The problem with atheists, and you included, is that everything doesn't revolve around YOU
Your double-standards belie your phoney sense of outrage.

You're the whackjob who believes that the universe was created for him and that his god died for him.

Nothing is more conceited and self-centred than that.

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#7978 Dec 9, 2012
RHill wrote:
<quoted text>
The "point" of the news story was to cast Atheist's in a bad light. Who could object to children enjoying such a harmless diversion? ONLY the EVIL ATHEISTS OF COURSE!!! It's manipulation at a shockingly crude level ... Godbots lap it up. The "hidden message" of the story is that religionists will stoop to any level to draw children into their web of deceit. Way to go. Keep up the good work.
It's child abuse, pure and simple.

Suffer the little children, right enough.

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#7979 Dec 9, 2012
swerty wrote:
Darwinism - Ruining dreams of retards since evolution began <quoted text>
LOL

Darwin has killed Dim's god.

You'll also find no anti-Semitism in the works of the great man.

Contrast that with Dim's belief system which is full of it.

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#7980 Dec 9, 2012
Givemeliberty wrote:
Hey... Uhmm seriously... No really... Are you still arguing for the invisible sky wizard creating everything?
<quoted text>
Lol!

It's what Dim lovingly refers to as the "abracadbra method of creation"

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#7981 Dec 9, 2012
Reason Personified wrote:
<quoted text>Just a partial list is enough to make a sane persons skin crawl in revulsion. They drink the substantiated blood of their dead zombie, how much more is needed, to call the Christain cult crazed?
Lol

Weird. Such a funny belief system.

You don't just get to drink your god's blood but you also get to eat him.

So funny.

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#7982 Dec 9, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
I recall the "white lie" lessons from the leaders every Sunday and every Seminary class before going to real school....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.
Must be a different church you are talking about. We are taught honesty and we don't have "12 bishops at the top." There are 12 apostles that help the modern church function just as Christ had 12 apostles in His time to help operate His church.

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#7983 Dec 9, 2012
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
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.
When I have taught people about Jesus Christ as a missionary I invite them to follow the basic outline of the scientific method. It confirms truth when the tested hypothesis is correct.

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#7984 Dec 9, 2012
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>Damn? 3 people!
Religious scientists don't "prove" religion just like atheists scientists don't "prove" there is no god. And if we are going to go with this logic, there are far, far more atheist scientists than there are religious scientists. Personal beliefs are personal beliefs.
Oh, sorry if it seemed like was trying to prove a religion exists with a scientist head count. I didn't mean for it to come across that way. I was responding to a statement by swerty who wrote:
"Religion is just for people who don't understand science."

My counter was that there are people who understand science and follow a religious belief.
KJV

United States

#7985 Dec 9, 2012
Khatru wrote:
Hi Dim

You keep right on posting links that support purging Christianity of any subsequent additions after the Jesus myth. You hear?
I love the way the Atheist like puppet boy treat the the Theist as if we are the minority in the world simply because they out number on the atheist boards.

Lets take a look a reality.

Now pay close attention to the last entry and it name "Atheist" vs "non-religious"
2nd to last.

IF THEY WERE THE SAME THEY WOULD HAVE LISTED THEM THAT WAY!

The CIA World Factbook gives the world population as 7,021,836,029 (July 2012 est.) and the distribution of religions as Christian 33.35%(of which Roman Catholic 16.83%, Protestant 6.08%, Orthodox 4.03%, Anglican 1.26%), Muslim 22.43%, Hindu 13.78%, Buddhist 7.13%, Sikh 0.36%, Jewish 0.21%, Baha'i 0.11%, other religions 11.17%, non-religious 9.42%, atheists 2.04%.

Wow. A whole 2.04% you guys are kicking some ass. LOL

Type all the lies you want survey after survey shows Atheist below 2.5%

They can seem to understand that we're here for the same reasons that people go to the Zoo. Something's you have to see to believe.
KJV

United States

#7986 Dec 9, 2012
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>Catholic?

You mean mainstream Christianity?

I've heard they've got a new catch phrase......

"Pass me another altarboy; this one's split"
Atheist?

"Singer went on to explain that he is a “consequentialist.” For the benefit of the philosophically challenged let me explain “consequentialism” in a nutshell: If you like the consequences it’s ethical, if you don’t like the consequences it’s unethical. Thus, if you enjoy child pornography and having sex with children it’s ethical, if you dislike child pornography and having sex with children it’s unethical. In an article entitled “Heavy Petting,” Singer likewise gave his stamp of approval to bestiality. As a reward for producing such pearls of wisdom, he has been granted the privilege of teaching our children “ethics” at an Ivy League university. Moreover, he is by no means the only atheistic philosopher industriously engaged in greasing the precarious slope on which Western society totters. Hence, my “plea” to atheists, for the philosophical groundwork for the acceptance of pedophilia has already been put in place by such philosophers.

Joel Marks, Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at the U. of New Haven, who for 10 years authored the “Moral Moments” column in Philosophy Now, made the following, rather shocking about-face in a 2010 article entitled,“An Amoral Manifesto.”

“This philosopher has been laboring under an unexamined assumption, namely that there is such a thing as right and wrong. I now believe there isn’t…The long and short of it is that I became convinced that atheism implies amorality; and since I am an atheist, I must therefore embrace amorality…I experienced my shocking epiphany that religious fundamentalists are correct; without God there is no morality. But they are incorrect, I still believe, about there being a God. Hence, I believe, there is no morality.( http://www.philosophynow.org/issue80/An_Amora... )"
KJV

United States

#7987 Dec 9, 2012
Khatru wrote:
Mainstream Christianity's Commandments:

http://www.algemeiner.com/2011/08/29/a-plea-t...

Thou shalt not question us. Ever.

Thou shalt respect, obey and, for ye highest amongst us, dutifully facilitate depraved, child-abusing clerics who after all are god's appointed ones.

Thou shalt, at our will, mutilate babies and children to appease our...ahem...child-loving god.

Thou shalt only apply thy troublesome Earthly laws to us when we say so.

Thou shalt not dare be born of a sexuality that will inhibit our congregation-building baby farming, nor protect thyself against spreading deadly disease should it have the same effect on our farming targets.

Thou shalt ignore our own god's bizarre concept of all people being equal in his eyes. Ha!

Thou shalt prolong the agony of dying loved ones for as long as is inhumanly possible.

Thou shalt not believe anything as inconvenient to us as that Jesus fellow’s so called 'Sermon on the Mount'. As if he'd have anything useful to inspire the likes of us!

Thou shalt fund our lovely, privileged lives whether you are one of our unthinking slaves or an eternally damned self-thinker.

Thou shalt accept as unquestionable truth whatever inhuman, illogical, barbaric, divisive, discriminatory or plainly ludicrous pronouncements we happen to utter.
"It is axiomatic that in the world of the atheist there is neither morality nor immorality, only a morality. This is often misunderstood to mean that atheists have no values. That conclusion would clearly be erroneous. To associate atheism with amorality is not to say that atheists have no values, they certainly do; amorality is a commentary, not on the existence of values, but on the significance of those values. Since in the atheistic worldview we are nothing more than upright walking primates, our value systems have no more significance than those of our jungle dwelling relatives. In the Darwinian view, the human is to the cockroach as the cockroach is to the paramecium. To imagine that we are something “more” is just that: a product of the human imagination."

"For the atheist, morality is simply a word that is used to describe the type of system that an individual or society subjectively prefers. Each society establishes, maintains, and modifies its values to suit its own needs.

“Morality is the custom of one’s country and the current feeling of one’s peers. Cannibalism is moral in a cannibalistic country.”(Samuel Butler)

Since these values are nothing more than reflections of the prevalent subjective preferences they obviously will shift and metamorphose to accommodate changing needs and attitudes."

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 "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 1 min Endofdays 69,977
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 16 min Subduction Zone 30,113
News Tampa Teacher @LoraJane Hates Christians, Promo... 2 hr Eagle 12 437
News Atheism and cowardice (Nov '11) 15 hr Roy 12,673
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... 17 hr yehoshooah adam 3,779
Evidence for God! (Oct '14) Wed superwilly 579
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) Tue Eagle 12 258,469
More from around the web