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.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#11511 Feb 6, 2013
insidesecrets wrote:
<quoted text>
The only difference between science's data and religion's data is that it lacks morality. The male dominated scientific community uses its power the same way the old Testament god used his power, to win friends and influence enemies. Like Jehovah, the scientist feels he has the prerogative to use power in any way he chooses. He believes his search for answers justifies any means, or sacrifices, not only on his part but the parts of others. Scientists become fanatics when they ignore the rights of others, and when they defile life in a misguided attempt to understand it.
Religion is chauvinistic, science is not.

As for "morality," religion makes up their morals just like everyone else. The only difference is that you justify horrible actions with your religion, which you cannot legitimately do with science.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#11512 Feb 6, 2013
insidesecrets wrote:
<quoted text>
I could explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you....
There's the crux of it. With scientific data, theories, assertions, basically everything, everyone understands it if they have enough study in the particular field, and everyone understands it the same. Your religious nonsense is always "interpreted" differently, always.

“Citizen_Patriot_ Voter_Atheist!”

Since: May 09

Earth,TX

#11513 Feb 6, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
There's the crux of it. With scientific data, theories, assertions, basically everything, everyone understands it if they have enough study in the particular field, and everyone understands it the same. Your religious nonsense is always "interpreted" differently, always.
That is because it is not acceptable as it is written, even for them.

Since: Mar 11

Scottsburg, IN

#11514 Feb 7, 2013
I just wonder how many other believers think we are made of god-stuff as well. They all need an enema!
Very Cynical Person wrote:
<quoted text>WouldnÂ’t that entail having a colonoscopy?

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#11515 Feb 7, 2013
insidesecrets wrote:
<quoted text>
The only difference between science's data and religion's data is that it lacks morality. The male dominated scientific community uses its power the same way the old Testament god used his power, to win friends and influence enemies. Like Jehovah, the scientist feels he has the prerogative to use power in any way he chooses. He believes his search for answers justifies any means, or sacrifices, not only on his part but the parts of others. Scientists become fanatics when they ignore the rights of others, and when they defile life in a misguided attempt to understand it.
You have no knowledge or experience of science. Because you are brainwashed by your cult, you have an opinion that has been drilled into you by your cult of liars.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#11516 Feb 7, 2013
insidesecrets wrote:
<quoted text>
The only difference between science's data and religion's data is that it lacks morality. The male dominated scientific community uses its power the same way the old Testament god used his power, to win friends and influence enemies. Like Jehovah, the scientist feels he has the prerogative to use power in any way he chooses. He believes his search for answers justifies any means, or sacrifices, not only on his part but the parts of others. Scientists become fanatics when they ignore the rights of others, and when they defile life in a misguided attempt to understand it.
Science never set out to answer morality questions. It set out to keep you alive through medicine, to feed you efficiently and cheaply through technology, and it lets you communicate your half arsed opinions about science to all of us here and now today.

You're allowed to think about morality because you're not thinking of what animal to kill next in the forest to feed your cave family with a life space of 30 years. And that is thanks to science, not religion.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#11517 Feb 7, 2013
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
You have no knowledge or experience of science. Because you are brainwashed by your cult, you have an opinion that has been drilled into you by your cult of liars.
Yadda. Yadda. Yadda. It doesn't take knowledge or intelligence to accept science's propaganda. It takes gullibility. LOL!

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#11518 Feb 7, 2013
It also takes deleting posts that make atheist's look like the fools they are.
Thinking

Poole, UK

#11519 Feb 7, 2013
Try that again using English grammar rules.

You wear your illiteracy like a badge of honour.
BBSting wrote:
It also takes deleting posts that make atheist's look like the fools they are.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#11520 Feb 7, 2013
BBSting wrote:
<quoted text>Yadda. Yadda. Yadda. It doesn't take knowledge or intelligence to accept science's propaganda. It takes gullibility. LOL!
Pssssst!

(I've got a couple of loaves and fishes that will feed you and your family for the rest of your lives. Cheap.)
insidesecrets

Santa Fe, NM

#11521 Feb 7, 2013
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
Science never set out to answer morality questions. It set out to keep you alive through medicine, to feed you efficiently and cheaply through technology, and it lets you communicate your half arsed opinions about science to all of us here and now today.
You're allowed to think about morality because you're not thinking of what animal to kill next in the forest to feed your cave family with a life space of 30 years. And that is thanks to science, not religion.
If humankind had not survived without modern science's conveniences, you wouldn't be here tooting science's horn. But survive they did, and that makes you a second rate mouthpiece for your favorite author of tall tales.

Since: Mar 11

Scottsburg, IN

#11522 Feb 7, 2013
Yet you believe humans are made up of god-stuff?
insidesecrets wrote:
<quoted text>
If humankind had not survived without modern science's conveniences, you wouldn't be here tooting science's horn. But survive they did, and that makes you a second rate mouthpiece for your favorite author of tall tales.
insidesecrets

Santa Fe, NM

#11523 Feb 7, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
Yet you believe humans are made up of god-stuff?
<quoted text>
The hamster is dead but the wheel is still spinning. Although exceedingly repetitious, you haven't gotten much mileage out of that one have you?(laugh)

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#11524 Feb 7, 2013
insidesecrets wrote:
<quoted text>
If humankind had not survived without modern science's conveniences, you wouldn't be here tooting science's horn.
But it, did and it continues to do so & so I will.
insidesecrets wrote:
<quoted text>
But survive they did, and that makes you a second rate mouthpiece for your favorite author of tall tales.
We're all alive thanks to science. Its because you're brainwwashed, you are unable to accept this fact, much like the fact of evolution.

Perhaps science frightens you.
insidesecrets

Santa Fe, NM

#11525 Feb 7, 2013
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
But it, did and it continues to do so & so I will.
<quoted text>
We're all alive thanks to science. Its because you're brainwwashed, you are unable to accept this fact, much like the fact of evolution.
Perhaps science frightens you.
What concerns me is science's lack of ethics, its amorality.

Thou shalt not kill even in the pursuit of ideals. That's clear enough. In practical terms, this means science cannot kill animals in experiments or destroy ecosytems for the common good, i.e. to protect and preserve the commonly assumed "higher" order of human life.

Man has killed for the sake of his ideals at least as much as he has killed for greed, or lust or the pursuit of power. How can scientists who engage in the same unethical practices while accusing Christians of being immoral, expect thinking people to take them seriously? In particular, when science has the power to destroy an entire planet.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#11526 Feb 7, 2013
insidesecrets wrote:
<quoted text>
What concerns me is science's lack of ethics, its amorality.
Thou shalt not kill even in the pursuit of ideals. That's clear enough. In practical terms, this means science cannot kill animals in experiments or destroy ecosytems for the common good, i.e. to protect and preserve the commonly assumed "higher" order of human life.
Is it immoral to kill bacteria to cure a disease? Is it immoral to drain a swamp to prevent malaria? Both of those are natural conclusions from your position, but I think most people would strongly disagree.

Since: Mar 11

Scottsburg, IN

#11527 Feb 7, 2013
It was your assertion remember? Do you wish to take it back? You know how you say we are made of god-stuff? And yes several have laughed their @ss off at your stupidity.

It's almost sad you are so ignorant but can't see just how stupid you make yourself look.

We don't need to hear how you killed the hamster, probably sent the poor rodent up your Christhole.
insidesecrets wrote:
<quoted text>
The hamster is dead but the wheel is still spinning. Although exceedingly repetitious, you haven't gotten much mileage out of that one have you?(laugh)

Since: Mar 11

Scottsburg, IN

#11528 Feb 7, 2013
It's science working hard to save and conserve the planet and all life you babbling idiot.

Hey next time you are sick don't take that antibiotic ok? After all modern science made that and it may poison your god-stuff.
insidesecrets wrote:
<quoted text>
What concerns me is science's lack of ethics, its amorality.
Thou shalt not kill even in the pursuit of ideals. That's clear enough. In practical terms, this means science cannot kill animals in experiments or destroy ecosytems for the common good, i.e. to protect and preserve the commonly assumed "higher" order of human life.
Man has killed for the sake of his ideals at least as much as he has killed for greed, or lust or the pursuit of power. How can scientists who engage in the same unethical practices while accusing Christians of being immoral, expect thinking people to take them seriously? In particular, when science has the power to destroy an entire planet.
insidesecrets

Santa Fe, NM

#11529 Feb 7, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Is it immoral to kill bacteria to cure a disease? Is it immoral to drain a swamp to prevent malaria? Both of those are natural conclusions from your position, but I think most people would strongly disagree.
If science did not feel a need to destroy nature in order to understand it, then it would not feel compelled to kill anything hoping to discover reasons for human diseases. Common sense dictates that if you want to know what human health is all about, you begin by studying humans who are healthy. Better to endeavor to understand the dynamics of being, the mind-body relationship then to destroy life.

Draining swamps, cutting down entire forests, degrading the landscape with strip mining, polluting the atmosphere, waterways and soil with toxic chemicals, and pushing species out of their natural habitats among other destruction, would not be necessary if human over population and gluttony weren't completely ignored.

Modern humankind unchecked is like a plague of locusts devouring everything in its path. Aside from reducing our numbers, we need to recover, and reclaim much more of the American wilderness. About 50% would be a fair and reasonable compromise. We have yielded too much too easily. It is time to start shoving cement, iron and machinery in the opposite direction before the entire nation, before the whole planet, becomes one steaming, stinking overcrowded high-tech ghetto.
insidesecrets

Santa Fe, NM

#11530 Feb 7, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
It's science working hard to save and conserve the planet and all life you babbling idiot.
Hey next time you are sick don't take that antibiotic ok? After all modern science made that and it may poison your god-stuff.
<quoted text>
I don't take prescribed medication. What you THINK can literally make you sick and can also make you well. What you THINK can have a greater influence on the outcome of an illness then the medication you take.

It is environmental groups, people who care about the earth who are pressuring science to find non-destructive, less aggressive, more benign sustainable ways to meet the exorbitant demands overpopulation creates.

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 Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 27 min Paul Scott 30,412
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 53 min Dogen 70,361
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... 3 hr Paul Scott 3,818
News Atheists on the march in America (Aug '09) 8 hr greymouser 70,631
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 8 hr Eagle 12 258,476
News Why Atheism Will Replace Religion (Aug '12) 19 hr John 14,736
How To Get To Heaven When You Die Fri Eagle 12 87
More from around the web