Atheists on the march in America

Atheists on the march in America

There are 70650 comments on the TurkishPress.com story from Aug 26, 2009, titled Atheists on the march in America. In it, TurkishPress.com reports that:

When South Florida atheists held their first meeting, they were just five friends, having a beer at a bar.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at TurkishPress.com.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#65561 Dec 5, 2012
Wrathbone wrote:
<quoted text>
The phrase, changed the wording, was used in a metaphoric sense, dummy.
At least within the dogma of religion the poor, the prostitute, the workingman, the scholar can become the saint. But within the confines of science, mankind is stripped of altruism and self - determination, his drives forever predetermined by genetic coding and neurotic conditioning.
The survival of the fittest theory is science's grandest example of amoral posturing. Compassion and sympathy not only went out of style, their expression was considered evidence of duplicity.
Encouraged by Freudian delusions and still operating under evolution's false premise [survival of the fittest] western civilization is faced with a thematic situation in which no individual is trustworthy but is automatically biologically geared to undertake any course to ensure survival. Survival of the fittest has mutated into might makes right. The arms race and destructive nuclear devices became necessary because we now believe we belong to a species that kills to survive. A species that lacks the grace of the natural world, while retaining an overly exaggerated beastliness, projected by science as man's natural state of existence. As a result of this lack of morality, the human animal is spreading his killer genes through the use of technology. Sadly, the natural world and its ecosystems have become fair game. This is science's amoral legacy. This is your god.
You call me a "dummy" then you pull the old "metaphor" canard, which is nothing more than the "context" canard really. Then you go and completely twist logic and reality to justify your ill-conceived notions. Without religion, everyone makes their own destiny, purpose, and reason, they are determined beneficial or detrimental based on their actions only. Your religion is the one taking away their right to choose, by force feeding them a destiny, purpose, and reason. It's religion that destroys the will, it's religion that drains one of purpose, it drains one of self fulfillment, it destroys a person's self image by turning them into a shell, making them believe that they are incapable of accomplishing anything, making them fear everyone and anything that is different. It's nothing more than a justification for acts of destruction and violence, that is what religion is.
barefoot2662

Tulsa, OK

#65562 Dec 5, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet, no one has proven that consciousness exists beyond the brain, we can trace consciousness in the brain, so where's your evidence that it exists outside of the physical brain?
When the brain dies, the consciousness ends. NO spirit, no soul, no light, nothing.

Since: Mar 10

Location hidden

#65563 Dec 5, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
You call me a "dummy" then you pull the old "metaphor" canard, which is nothing more than the "context" canard really. Then you go and completely twist logic and reality to justify your ill-conceived notions. Without religion, everyone makes their own destiny, purpose, and reason, they are determined beneficial or detrimental based on their actions only.
An eye for an eye? I blast your god, you blast mine, or what you think is mine. In many ways, you are quite religious.

Reality creation involves a study of consciousness. Without that knowledge you will have no control over what you experience. Your environment is the physical picture of your thoughts, emotions and beliefs made visible. You are the living picture of yourself. You project what you think you are outward into flesh. Your feelings, you conscious and unconscious thoughts, all alter and form your physical image. This is fairly easy for you to understand. It is not so easy, however, to realize that your feelings and thoughts form your exterior experience in the same way, or that the events that appear to happen to you are initiated by you within your mental or psychic inner environment.

I am not a bible thumping fundie, nor am I a clueless atheist. You simply must stop assuming that everyone who disagrees with science is religious.

Modern science rightly rebelled against the excesses, exaggerations and superstitions of religion and against a rigid system of beliefs that encouraged man to interpret the natural world only in the light of his religious dogmas. Yet science went overboard to prove itself, adopting many of religion's authoritative characteristics and denying the existence of any phenomenon [consciousness] that is not observable according to its own set of limited measurements, or does not agree with its basic theories.

Science claims it seeks the truth, but the literal interpretation of physical reality is as limiting as the literal interpretation of the bible!

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#65564 Dec 5, 2012
Wrathbone wrote:
<quoted text>
An eye for an eye? I blast your god, you blast mine, or what you think is mine. In many ways, you are quite religious.
Reality creation involves a study of consciousness. Without that knowledge you will have no control over what you experience. Your environment is the physical picture of your thoughts, emotions and beliefs made visible. You are the living picture of yourself. You project what you think you are outward into flesh. Your feelings, you conscious and unconscious thoughts, all alter and form your physical image. This is fairly easy for you to understand. It is not so easy, however, to realize that your feelings and thoughts form your exterior experience in the same way, or that the events that appear to happen to you are initiated by you within your mental or psychic inner environment.
I am not a bible thumping fundie, nor am I a clueless atheist. You simply must stop assuming that everyone who disagrees with science is religious.
Modern science rightly rebelled against the excesses, exaggerations and superstitions of religion and against a rigid system of beliefs that encouraged man to interpret the natural world only in the light of his religious dogmas. Yet science went overboard to prove itself, adopting many of religion's authoritative characteristics and denying the existence of any phenomenon [consciousness] that is not observable according to its own set of limited measurements, or does not agree with its basic theories.
Science claims it seeks the truth, but the literal interpretation of physical reality is as limiting as the literal interpretation of the bible!
I don't have any gods, sorry, try again.

Since: Apr 11

Los Angeles, CA

#65565 Dec 5, 2012
Independent wrote:
<quoted text>You should really try to explain how a human eye or any eye evolved. It is so complex and irreducible complexity comes to mind here. What came first? The brain or the eye? Can't have one without the other for evolution to succeed. They have to continually 'evolve' together and the species needs to not become extinct for the concept of vision to prosper. Then you have the issue of different classes of creatures, whom are not even related, also "evolving" vision. The odds are astronomical, there fore we are all created by a creator. Evolution has the same chance of becoming, as a tornado tearing through a junkyard and when everything has settled, there is a Boeing 747 airliner, full of jet fuel, waiting for a pilot. A beautiful butterfly in all it's grandeur , requires a creator, as does an intricate pocket watch. Life cannot simply evolve because with time anything is possible, if that were the case, then the planets in our solar system that are not gaseous, would have had some sort of life thriving on each and everyone of them, but as far as we know, they don't.
You are just copying talking points from creation "science" web sites.
If something complex requires a creator, then who created the creator?

Since: Mar 11

Chicago, IL

#65566 Dec 5, 2012
I sense a special pleading argument along the lines of, God exists outside of time and space!
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>
You are just copying talking points from creation "science" web sites.
If something complex requires a creator, then who created the creator?
John

United States

#65567 Dec 6, 2012
It's safe to assume today will pass without one antitheist willing to debate the evidences of their ???? vs my something. A forum about nothing LOL. What loons!

Since: Apr 11

Los Angeles, CA

#65568 Dec 6, 2012
John, I'm willing to debate. Still.
1. If god exists, there is evidence of his existence.
2. There is no evidence of his existence.
3. There is no god.

We've yet to deal with point one.
Do you think it's possible for god to exist, yet there be no evidence of his existence?

A simple yes or no question. At this point we aren't dealing with what that evidence would be, or even if the evidence exists.

Stump John, ask him to debate. Again.
Lucy greyxx

UK

#65569 Dec 6, 2012
Obama making rasist remarks secret camra http://youtu.be/oH6W4sGKxqs

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#65570 Dec 6, 2012
Rose_NoHo wrote:
John, I'm willing to debate. Still.
1. If god exists, there is evidence of his existence.
2. There is no evidence of his existence.
3. There is no god.
We've yet to deal with point one.
Do you think it's possible for god to exist, yet there be no evidence of his existence?
A simple yes or no question. At this point we aren't dealing with what that evidence would be, or even if the evidence exists.
Stump John, ask him to debate. Again.
He won't answer, he's SchlockofGod junior. Say something, then whoever disagrees he claims is wrong without ever presenting any evidence, then declares victory. It's a symptom of all delusions.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#65571 Dec 6, 2012
It's a hilarious collection of myths thanks.
Wrathbone wrote:
<quoted text>
For an atheist, you seem to be obsessed with the bible. You bring it up more often than your proponents. Perhaps your time would be better spent figuring out the reason why.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#65572 Dec 6, 2012
postscript wrote:
<quoted text>
Nothing is random, least of all consciousness which is far more mobile than you will ever comprehend. You are wrong. You are both here and there. We are all multidimensional. There are channels of interrelatedness, connecting all physical matter - channels through which consciousness flows.
Nice claims. Any evidence?
The physical sciences pretend that the centuries exist one after another, while physicists realize that all events are simultaneous.
False.
Archeologists merrily contine to date the remains of "past" civilizations, never asking themselves if the past they record is the one relative to their point of perception.
Simply delusional.
There is more in heaven and earth, Gomer, than is dreamt of in your feeble philosophy.
All too true. But your delusions are not part of it.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#65573 Dec 6, 2012
postscript wrote:
<quoted text>
You atheists are a riot. You revere scientists, but only when they agree with your half-baked unsubstantiated notions.
No, actually, we revere observation, data, and testable hypotheses. A scientist gets status only to the extent that they can either provide data or explanations for the data. The goal is to figure out the truth no matter what it might be. That is done through observation, making hypotheses and testing those hypotheses: in other words, the scientific method.

YOU, on the other hand, simply want to prove your viewpoint is true. You misquote people to support your points. You falsify data to support your points. You ignore evidence that disproves your point. And you refuse to actually understand the facts that show your point is wrong. In the case above, you misquoted a scientist, taking his comments out of context and twisting them in a way that makes it look like the scientist supports your viewpoint, when in fact, he does not. The full story shows you are a liar that refuses to admit when you are wrong. For scientists, that is wrong. For religionists, that is simply apologetics.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#65574 Dec 6, 2012
digitaldan wrote:
<quoted text>
I've had no problem following postscript's comments on the nature of consciousness. What's your major malfunction?
The question isn't one of understanding postscripts comments. The question is whether they are true. PS has not supplied any reason to think the comments are, in fact, valid in the real world. On the other hand, all living things are made completely from 'non-living matter' since no atom in your body is alive. Life is a matter of organization and not of something special being added.

Since: Apr 11

North Hollywood, CA

#65575 Dec 6, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
He won't answer, he's SchlockofGod junior. Say something, then whoever disagrees he claims is wrong without ever presenting any evidence, then declares victory. It's a symptom of all delusions.
You are so right!

Since: Mar 10

Location hidden

#65576 Dec 6, 2012
POLYANNA. OOPS! I mean, Polymath257 <------- a prime candidate for natural deselection.

Since: Mar 10

Location hidden

#65577 Dec 6, 2012
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
No, actually, we revere observation, data, and testable hypotheses. A scientist gets status only to the extent that they can either provide data or explanations for the data. The goal is to figure out the truth no matter what it might be. That is done through observation, making hypotheses and testing those hypotheses: in other words, the scientific method.
YOU, on the other hand, simply want to prove your viewpoint is true. You misquote people to support your points. You falsify data to support your points. You ignore evidence that disproves your point. And you refuse to actually understand the facts that show your point is wrong. In the case above, you misquoted a scientist, taking his comments out of context and twisting them in a way that makes it look like the scientist supports your viewpoint, when in fact, he does not. The full story shows you are a liar that refuses to admit when you are wrong. For scientists, that is wrong. For religionists, that is simply apologetics.
In contrast, your comments are nothing more than the deluded rant of a card carrying pseudoscientist.

Since: Mar 10

Location hidden

#65578 Dec 6, 2012
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
On the other hand, all living things are made completely from 'non-living matter' since no atom in your body is alive. Life is a matter of organization and not of something special being added.
Just your run of the mill standard textbook scientific prejudices.
James

Brisbane, Australia

#65579 Dec 7, 2012
John

Saint Louis, MO

#65580 Dec 7, 2012
John wrote:
Rose continues to confuse belief and disbelief. You don't believe in God but you are reliant on him for even your nonclaim.
If Rose had a conscience she would have evidence of it.
There is no evidence Rose has a conscience
Rose has no conscience.
Your nothing is laughable Rose. You are desperate to avoid it.

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 requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 13 min Eagle 12 247,763
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 29 min Silent Echo 12,909
News In America, atheists are still in the closet (Apr '12) 1 hr Thinking 47,904
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 3 hr thetruth 2,358
News As an atheist, how do I maintain my relationshi... 3 hr Thinking 60
News Atheism, the Bible and sexual orientation 3 hr Thinking 30
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) Wed macumazahn 20,900
More from around the web