Atheists on the march in America

Aug 26, 2009 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: TurkishPress.com

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

Comments (Page 3,151)

Showing posts 63,001 - 63,020 of70,907
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
postscriptt

Santa Fe, NM

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65686
Dec 9, 2012
 
Drew Smith wrote:
So far, you haven't successfully challenged the modern evolutionary synthesis. When do you plan to begin?
<quoted text>
Are you going to challenge the modern evolutionary synthesis, or just take potshots at Darwin, who died decades before the synthesis was created?
<quoted text>
That particular instance of quote mining is already addressed here:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/quotes/mine/p...
<quoted text>
That's his personal opinion. So what? Are you going to provide any actual *evidence* that refutes evolution, or just quote opinions?
<quoted text>
Already addressed here:
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC300.h...
Talkorgins again? Is that your ace in hole? Science is 99% opinion and 1% fact.
postscriptt

Santa Fe, NM

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65687
Dec 9, 2012
 
Thinking wrote:
We should be judged by our actions, not belief in myths.
<quoted text>
Since you believe you came from nothing, you're going nowhere ao why worry about judgements?

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65688
Dec 9, 2012
 
postscriptt wrote:
Talkorgins again? Is that your ace in hole?
If you're going to keep bringing up "problems" that have already been refuted by talkorigins, then I'm going to keep pointing out where in talkorigins your "problems" have already been refuted.

Got anything that *hasn't* been refuted yet?
postscriptt

Santa Fe, NM

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65689
Dec 9, 2012
 
Drew Smith wrote:
<quoted text>
If you're going to keep bringing up "problems" that have already been refuted by talkorigins, then I'm going to keep pointing out where in talkorigins your "problems" have already been refuted.
Got anything that *hasn't* been refuted yet?
Do you? It's all been hashed and rehashed a gazillion times over. The fact remains, religion can't prove God exists and science can't prove God doesn't exist. It's an endless circular argument - round and round it goes proving nothing. Using a raft of fallacious arguments based on the out-dated pseudo science of talkorigins doesn't make your assertions any more plausibe, or even intelligent for that matter.

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65690
Dec 9, 2012
 
Got anything that *hasn't* been refuted yet?
postscriptt wrote:
Do you?
I'm not the one here claiming that the theory of evolution has problems. If you want make such a claim, then support your claim with evidence.
postscriptt wrote:
The fact remains, religion can't prove God exists and science can't prove God doesn't exist.
Science has no burden of proof in that matter. Religion does. If you're going to claim that something exists, then provide some evidence to support the claim.

Otherwise, the rational position is to reject the claim.
postscriptt wrote:
Using a raft of fallacious arguments based on the out-dated pseudo science of talkorigins...
Funny how you have failed to indicate what is "outdated" or "pseudo science" among the content from talkorigins presented to you.

Why is that?
postscriptt

Santa Fe, NM

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65691
Dec 9, 2012
 
Drew Smith wrote:
.......
Content deleted due to redundancy.
Thinking

UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65692
Dec 9, 2012
 
Because unlike many religious people such as Hitler and his millions of christian followers, I strongly believe in doing the right thing now.

How does being "forgiven" by god for a shitty but eventually repentant-at-the-11th-hour life ever undo the hurt caused to others?
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
Since you believe you came from nothing, you're going nowhere ao why worry about judgements?
postscriptt

Santa Fe, NM

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65693
Dec 9, 2012
 
Thinking wrote:
Because unlike many religious people such as Hitler and his millions of christian followers, I strongly believe in doing the right thing now.
<quoted text>
Two World Wars and the purges of Stalin and Mao can hardly be attributed to religion. Hitler did his evil in the name of an insane and unscientific eugenics theory. But then how would atheists who profess no moral guide know what's right?

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65694
Dec 9, 2012
 
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
Content deleted due to redundancy.
In other words, you're afraid to address it. Yeah, we get that.
Thinking

UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65695
Dec 9, 2012
 
Unscientific he may have been but Hitler was a catholic leading a majority protestant Germany.

He probably thought he could murder because he would be forgiven by your shitty god myth.
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
Two World Wars and the purges of Stalin and Mao can hardly be attributed to religion. Hitler did his evil in the name of an insane and unscientific eugenics theory. But then how would atheists who profess no moral guide know what's right?
postscriptt

Santa Fe, NM

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65696
Dec 9, 2012
 
Thinking wrote:
Unscientific he may have been but Hitler was a catholic leading a majority protestant Germany.
He probably thought he could murder because he would be forgiven by your shitty god myth.
<quoted text>
And you? What's your moral guide, science?

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65697
Dec 9, 2012
 
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
And you? What's your moral guide, science?
Compassion. There are two aspects of morality, as I see it: thinking and caring. As the quote goes, knowledge without compassion is inhuman and compassion without knowledge is ineffective. So science does inform my morality, but there is no science of morality. Morality comes from the simple fact that we are all social animals and that compassion is an inherent part of our psychologies.
postscriptt

Santa Fe, NM

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65698
Dec 9, 2012
 

Judged:

1

polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Compassion. There are two aspects of morality, as I see it: thinking and caring. As the quote goes, knowledge without compassion is inhuman and compassion without knowledge is ineffective. So science does inform my morality, but there is no science of morality. Morality comes from the simple fact that we are all social animals and that compassion is an inherent part of our psychologies.
Under science's morality, anything goes if it furthers man's programmed agenda to control and dominate through its survival of the fittest theory. And where has this idea led us? Humans have run rampant across the face of this planet with little respect for it or other kinds of life precisely because they believe they have a scientific mandate to use the earth as they see fit. Is this the science that informs your morality?

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65699
Dec 9, 2012
 
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
Under science's morality, anything goes if it furthers man's programmed agenda to control and dominate through its survival of the fittest theory. And where has this idea led us? Humans have run rampant across the face of this planet with little respect for it or other kinds of life precisely because they believe they have a scientific mandate to use the earth as they see fit. Is this the science that informs your morality?
And that is why *compassion* is also required: not just knowledge. As I said.

I would also point out that it is the Biblical injunction to use the earth as we see fit that has motivated most of the wrongs you pointed out. Science only gives us knowledge. It does not say how we should *use* that knowledge.
Some Random Dude

Capitola, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65700
Dec 9, 2012
 
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
And that is why *compassion* is also required: not just knowledge. As I said.
I would also point out that it is the Biblical injunction to use the earth as we see fit that has motivated most of the wrongs you pointed out. Science only gives us knowledge. It does not say how we should *use* that knowledge.
Exactly. Our out-of-control population expansion and our subjugation of the rest of the animal kingdom is based squarely on the religiously propagated myth that the world was created for man and it's man's duty to conquer and rule it.
postscriptt

Santa Fe, NM

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65701
Dec 9, 2012
 
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
And that is why *compassion* is also required: not just knowledge. As I said.
I would also point out that it is the Biblical injunction to use the earth as we see fit that has motivated most of the wrongs you pointed out. Science only gives us knowledge. It does not say how we should *use* that knowledge.
If science is not responsible for compassion, where does it come from?
postscriptt

Santa Fe, NM

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65702
Dec 9, 2012
 
Some Random Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Exactly. Our out-of-control population expansion and our subjugation of the rest of the animal kingdom is based squarely on the religiously propagated myth that the world was created for man and it's man's duty to conquer and rule it.
You are confusing good stewardship with domination. "Be fruitful and mulitiply, and replenish the earth."

It is precisely the scientific idea that we are no more than resilient machines that fosters a lack of caring and compassion. Instead this egregious notion has proven to generate destructive behavior to self and others. One cannot say that science has not advanced civilization however, for we now know how to kill each other more efficiently.
Thinking

UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65703
Dec 9, 2012
 
Do you kill witches? If not, you ignore your bible.
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
And you? What's your moral guide, science?
Thinking

UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65704
Dec 9, 2012
 
Evolution.
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
If science is not responsible for compassion, where does it come from?
Some Random Dude

Capitola, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65705
Dec 9, 2012
 
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
You are confusing good stewardship with domination. "Be fruitful and mulitiply, and replenish the earth."
It is precisely the scientific idea that we are no more than resilient machines that fosters a lack of caring and compassion. Instead this egregious notion has proven to generate destructive behavior to self and others. One cannot say that science has not advanced civilization however, for we now know how to kill each other more efficiently.
There is some truth to your assertion that the scientific community has reduced the value of life to a set of natural laws (so to speak). However, I would say religion's mythical notion that man is essentially the climax of creation has played an equally important role in the great fallacy that is civilized thought. Through science/technology (agriculture specifically), man has leaned how to defeat the earth's ecological negative feedback system; allowing our population to grow unchecked. Religion has offered the justification. The difference is that while religion has taken misguided notions and ran with them; science has continued to study and advance our knowledge, and we have had the option of adjusting our behavior based on these new discoveries.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 63,001 - 63,020 of70,907
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

•••
•••
•••
•••