Don't dictate beliefs

Sep 5, 2012 Full story: The Star Press 11,175

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

Full Story

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#7999 Dec 9, 2012
“My argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust. But how had I got this idea of just and unjust? A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line. What was I comparing this universe with when I called it unjust? If the whole show was bad and senseless from A to Z, so to speak, why did I, who was supposed to be part of the show, find myself in such a violent reaction against it?... Of course I could have given up my idea of justice by saying it was nothing but a private idea of my own. But if i did that, then my argument against God collapsed too--for the argument depended on saying the world was really unjust, not simply that it did not happen to please my fancies. Thus, in the very act of trying to prove that God did not exist - in other words, that the whole of reality was senseless - I found I was forced to assume that one part of reality - namely my idea of justice - was full of sense. If the whole universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning: just as, if there were no light in the universe and therefore no creatures with eyes, we should never have known it was dark. Dark would be without meaning.”
C.S. Lewis

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#8000 Dec 9, 2012
“If the solar system was brought about by an accidental collision, then the appearance of organic life on this planet was also an accident, and the whole evolution of Man was an accident too. If so, then all our present thoughts are mere accidents - the accidental by-product of the movement of atoms. And this holds for the thoughts of the materialists and astronomers as well as for anyone else's. But if their thoughts - i.e., Materialism and Astronomy - are mere accidental by-products, why should we believe them to be true? I see no reason for believing that one accident should be able to give me a correct account of all the other accidents. It's like expecting the accidental shape taken by the splash when you upset a milk-jug should give you a correct account of how the jug was made and why it was upset.”
C.S. Lewis

“There are those who hate Christianity and call their hatred an all-embracing love for all religions.”
G.K. Chesterton
KJV

United States

#8001 Dec 9, 2012
derek4 wrote:
“If the solar system was brought about by an accidental collision, then the appearance of organic life on this planet was also an accident, and the whole evolution of Man was an accident too. If so, then all our present thoughts are mere accidents - the accidental by-product of the movement of atoms. And this holds for the thoughts of the materialists and astronomers as well as for anyone else's. But if their thoughts - i.e., Materialism and Astronomy - are mere accidental by-products, why should we believe them to be true? I see no reason for believing that one accident should be able to give me a correct account of all the other accidents. It's like expecting the accidental shape taken by the splash when you upset a milk-jug should give you a correct account of how the jug was made and why it was upset.”
C.S. Lewis

“There are those who hate Christianity and call their hatred an all-embracing love for all religions.”
G.K. Chesterton
Nice post!

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#8002 Dec 9, 2012
The sky wizard was not amused when dim failed to read the spam about Einstein before posting it.

Lmfao!
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
Lol!
It's what Dim lovingly refers to as the "abracadbra method of creation"

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#8003 Dec 9, 2012
Morons oops I mean Mormons are such idiots. Do you wear your magical Mormon underwear?

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahah a!
Sambrotherofnephi wrote:
<quoted text>
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.

“Blue Collar Philosopher”

Since: Nov 08

Texas, USA

#8004 Dec 9, 2012
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
I have no interest in your personal “feelings” on what may have transpired. I simply posted a news item.
Contact the web page and let them know you object. Maybe they'll change it to suit you, lol.
[Don't hold your breath waiting for them to acknowledge you.]
LMAO
So, what you got beside "feelings" backing your belief system? You base your life around "feelings" and you have no interest in mine? Seems you have all the makings of a good Christian.
KJV

United States

#8005 Dec 9, 2012
RHill wrote:
<quoted text>So, what you got beside "feelings" backing your belief system? You base your life around "feelings" and you have no interest in mine? Seems you have all the makings of a good Christian.
You are no expert on Christians.

We are Gods little warriors attacking Satan's army of slim balls

LMAO

“Blue Collar Philosopher”

Since: Nov 08

Texas, USA

#8006 Dec 9, 2012
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
News is news. It tells it like it is.
You would never stoop to a level to cast Christians in a bad light, would you?
LMAO
“Just as the city of Charlotte, N.C., gears up to host the Democratic National Convention, an atheist group is mounting a billboard campaign attacking the religious faiths of President Obama and GOP challenger Mitt Romney.
The signs, paid for by American Atheists Incorporated (AAI) and appearing along keylocal highways, include messages such as: "Christianity: Sadistic God, Useless Savior" and "Mormonism: Magic Underwear, Baptizes Dead People, Big Money, Big Bigotry."
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/08/22/si...
“Talk about making a mistake everyone can see! Atheists in California have done a disservice to their own crusade to spread atheism by launching a new billboard campaign that ascribes a false quote to Thomas Jefferson. That's right, they've essentially become liars for atheism.”
http://www.chicagonow.com/publius-forum/2011/...
Atheists have no Messiah telling us to turn the other cheek. In any case, where better to put the truth than on a billboard? BTW ... I've never heard of a Crusade to Spread Atheism. Dispel ignorance and superstition ... what's left is pretty close to atheism ... if you feel compelled to hang a name on it. Some call it a Renaissance. I like to think of it as freeing your mind ... like on "The Matrix".

The person that wrote that article, the paper that printed it and the Topix poster that brought it here, all have similar motives ... none are involved with improving the education of those kids. Education and religion don't mix.

“Blue Collar Philosopher”

Since: Nov 08

Texas, USA

#8007 Dec 9, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
You are no expert on Christians.
We are Gods little warriors attacking Satan's army of slim balls
LMAO
Oh really? Ask me a question about Christians ... any question ... I dare ya!

I'm sure Satan's army of slim balls are shaking in their hooves.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#8009 Dec 9, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>You are no expert on Christians.

We are Gods little warriors attacking Satan's army of slim balls

LMAO
Slim balls?

Laughing MY ass off.
KJV

United States

#8010 Dec 9, 2012
RHill wrote:
<quoted text>Oh really? Ask me a question about Christians ... any question ... I dare ya!

I'm sure Satan's army of slim balls are shaking in their hooves.
You're a hoot!

LOL

As far the condition of you and your cohorts I'll have take your word for it that you're all shaking in your hooves.

Please don't feed the Monkeys!

LMAONN

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#8011 Dec 9, 2012
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
Slim balls?
Laughing MY ass off.
Everyone is slim compared to trailer park Christians...

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#8012 Dec 9, 2012
derek4 wrote:
you're powerless and weak

I flush you down the drain with the dirty bathwater.
LMAO
What a beautiful person you are. How can I tap into whatever spiritual wellspring it is that you are connected to?

Seriously, you have as much chance of selling people on your religion posting like you do as a publicly drunken alcoholic staggering door to door while stinking of booze has of trying to sell people on the virtues of alcoholism.

I just thought that you might like to know in case that's not what you were going for.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#8013 Dec 9, 2012
RHill wrote:
<quoted text>
I love "Peanuts", Charlie Brown and "A Charlie Brown Christmas" ... never had a problem with any of it. There's a lot of philosophy in "Peanuts" and plenty to start young people thinking. The problem is NOT Charlie Brown, the problem is busing school children to a Church to see it. I've never been to any kind of event at a church that wasn't a poorly disguised sermon of some kind. You want to see "A Charlie Brown Christmas" at public school ... pop it in the DVD player. Don't use my school taxes to bus the kid's off for a sermon. I say kudos to the Society of Freethinkers!!! You want a field trip? How about the Museum of Natural Science!!!
Hey there! Nice to have you with us.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#8015 Dec 9, 2012
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
I very much doubt Dim will respond to this as he's wary of you.
I don't know if he's wary of me or not. I believe that Dim doesn't read most of my posts and doesn't know what I have been saying about him. Nor would he likely properly interpret it if he had. He was oblivious that his post on Charlie Brown directly contradicted him even as he offered it as supporting evidence.

I know he reads some of my posts because he's referred to them at times. But he is incurious, and probably really doesn't care about what is said about him, so I consider the exceptions just accidents that occurred when his eyes fell onto one of them before realizing who it was from.

But that is more than fine. It's ideal. Wouldn't you prefer that Dim didn't address you or answer your comments about him? Are those comments ever informative or satisfying?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#8016 Dec 9, 2012
Khatru wrote:
You keep right on posting, my caliginous friend.
LOL. Good word. That's at least three from you in just a few days, including "panache" and "aplomb."

You might know from that I'm also a logophile, and keep various word documents (pun intended) about interesting words. One such list is words that sound like they mean the opposite of what they actually do mean, to which I've just added caliginous. The word sounds to me like it should have something to do with warmth or light:

OPPOSITE SOUNDING WORDS

Enervate - sap, deplete
Puissant - powerful
Quean - lewd Woman
Pulchritude – beauty
Redoubtable - evoking respect
Restive - restless
Spendthrift – wasteful person
Matriculate – enter
Licentious - unrestrained by law or general morality
Toothsome - sexually alluring
Ingenuous – sincere
Firmament – the heavens
Inflammable - burnable
Meretritious – prostitute-like, vulgar, tawdry
Cupidity - greed
Prosaic - dull, unimaginative
Nonplussed – in a state of utter perplexity.
Caliginous – dark, dim, obscure

Enervate sounds like energize. Restive sounds like restful. Shouldn't the firmament be the hard stuff under is? Shouldn't puissant mean pussified and licentious legal? Meritricious sounds like meritorious. Would you like to be fixed up with somebody described as toothsome or pulchritudinous? And why respect somebody who is described as redoubtable?

==========

Just for the fun of it, here are three more word such lists. I'm certain that you can discern their themes:

[1] Animadversion - an unfavorable or censorious comment, or the act of criticizing.
[2] Aspersion - a damaging or derogatory remark, or the act of slandering.
[3] Calumny - false and malicious statement designed to injure a reputation
[4] Castigate - criticize or punish someone severely.
[5] Censure - strong or vehement expression of disapproval
[6] Contumely - insolent or insulting language or treatment.
[7] Defamation - unjustified injury of the reputation of another, as by slander or libel; calumny
[8] Derogate – disparage, belittle
[9] Ignominy - disgrace; dishonor; public contempt, shameful or dishonorable quality or
[10] Impugn - question the truthfulness or validity of a statement.
[11] Invective - vehement denunciation, vituperation, an insulting or abusive word or expression
[12] Obloquy - censure, blame, or abusive language, especially by numerous persons, the bad repute resulting from it
[|3] Opprobrium - a shameful act or the disgrace of a shameful act.
[14] Oppugn - oppose with argument; criticize adversely; call in question
[15] Pejorative – disparaging or belittling.
[16] Reproach - find fault with; blame; censure, upbraid.
[17] Reprove - reprimand or censure someone.
[17] Upbraid - condemn or criticize severely.
[18] Vituperation - verbal abuse or castigation; violent denunciation or condemnation.

[1] Criticaster - shitty or inferior critic
[2] Grammaticaster – shitty or inferior grammarian
[3] Historiaster - shitty or inferior historian
[4] Logicaster – shitty or inferior logician
[5] Mathematicaster - shitty or inferior mathematician
[6] Medicaster – shitty or inferior physician
[7] Musicaster – shitty or inferior musician
[8] Philosophaster - shitty or inferior philosopher
[9] Poestaster - shitty or inferior poet
[10] Politicaster – shitty or inferior politician
[11] Scientaster – shitty or inferior scientist
[12] Theologaster – shitty or inferior theologian

[1] apostasy - desertion of a post or of a religion
[2] apocryphal - of doubtful authenticity
[3] apotheosis - elevation to god status
[4] apologetics - theological defense
[5] apostolic - related to a missionary or disciple
[6] apocalypse - the violent end of the world

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#8017 Dec 9, 2012
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
It's child abuse, pure and simple.
Suffer the little children, right enough.
Hitchens called the Catholic priesthood the "No Child's Behind Left" program.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#8018 Dec 9, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
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... )"
Can't you do anything about the strange characters that appear in your posts? It makes them too hard to read. I tried to read this, but quit. Perhaps you can correct them by hand before you hit the "Post Comment" button.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#8019 Dec 9, 2012
KJV wrote:
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."
And it's a good thing that they do. Our moral system is evolving, which is why your Old Testament god, the bellicose monster Jehovah, morphed into your New Testament god, the gentle Jesus, complete with a whole new law. Amazingly, you go on talking about the existence of an absolute, objective morality, and that you have access to it.

We've made a lot of updates since Jesus time, and now consider much of his moral character inadequate. The latest version is in the Affirmations of Humanism.

Christians are assimilating secularists values, just more slowly, and never admitting or even acknowledging secularist contributions, giving all the credit to some god instead despite the fact that it also evolving along with prevailing ethical values.

How did you know to give up stoning children to death if not from men that simply rejected that law of your Old Testament? Jehovah never recanted it, did he? It was a freethinker that simply said nonsense, and most of the West agreed.

Later, secularists told you to stop burning people, later still, to stop trying to own people as slaves or beating them when you did. You assimilated all of that, but still somehow credit the god.

You remain oblivious to the value of rational, compassionate ethics and the part that it has played in reshaped your thinking. The bible is not your source of ethics. If it were, you would obey it all.

But you don't. You cherry pick according to an external standard, as if recognizing that much of your bible's values are immoral. By what standard then do you pick and choose which of the 613 Commandments to ignore? Secular humanist standards, that's which ones.

And today, we are teaching the Christian world more moral refinements, such as that gay and atheist people are not immoral, that women are not subordinate to men, that a liberal education and critical thinking are better than authoritarian indoctrination and magical thinking, and that a stem cell is not a citizen. You haven't signed on to any of those yet, but no matter. We'll eventually prevail there, too.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#8020 Dec 9, 2012
KJV wrote:
I enjoy reading them!... Derek4 keep up the posting I enjoy reading them.
So do I. And as you've likely seen, I enjoy commenting on them.

I look at them all. Derek is my main retriever on this thread. He's also my least liked Christian here, so his posts get the bulk of my energy on "Don't Dictate."

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
Our world came from nothing? 2 min Reverend Alan 718
Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038 (Apr '12) 12 min Thinking 22,931
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 15 min Thinking 1,022
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 48 min Bozo the Clown 228,597
Heaven 1 hr Carchar king 6
Atheists forgetting the meaning of freedom 4 hr Jaimie 154
Another week, another atheist demands we call h... 4 hr Thinking 8

Atheism People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE