Atheists on the march in America

Atheists on the march in America

There are 70645 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.

postscriptt

Albuquerque, NM

#66231 Dec 22, 2012
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>Second, speciation is not a magical process. it has been observed in the lab and the evidence for it extends to the very DNA in our bodies. You lack of understanding of a concept doesn't make the concept wrong.
Genetic mutations do not produce new genes and therefore new life forms. Scientists have yet to produce an entirely new species in laboratory experiments. There are gazillions of living things on planet earth but we never observe emerging "new" forms, we only observe extinctions. The proof of Intelligent Design is right there in front of geneticists in the exquisite structure and language of DNA. This data is not haphazard and disorganized as if it were created randomly, it is highly complex and intricately integrated implying the involvement of extraordinary intelligence.
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>No, the one making a positive existence claim is the one with the burden of proof. in this case, you have the burden to prove the existence of an intelligent designer.
A belief in Intelligent Design only becomes an issue when an atheist (a nonbeliever) makes it one! It is therefore encumbent upon the dissenter, or the atheist, to provide the evidence to prove his opposition.
postscriptt

Albuquerque, NM

#66232 Dec 22, 2012
LucindaW wrote:
<quoted text>
Matthew 7:6 "Give not that which is holy to dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you."
These people are not interested in different ideas and they have nothing of value to impart to the world. They want only to preserve their deceptions because they fear God. Leave them to preach to the choir. When their lives are done, only then will they know the Truth, too late.
Wise words indeed! I have taken them into consideration and thanks. While I don't think retribution awaits the unbeliever, I do think your advice is sound. No point in spinning my wheels. I will comment only on those posts that I think warrant a response deleting parts that have become tediously repetitious.
postscriptt

Albuquerque, NM

#66233 Dec 22, 2012
Publius2 wrote:
Why is it so improtant for atheists to evangelize?
Good point! Although I am not sure atheists seek converts as much as they try to qualify their lack of belief using science as justification.
postscriptt

Albuquerque, NM

#66234 Dec 22, 2012
emperorjohn wrote:
<quoted text> Too bad for you xtians, most cultures believed in many gods not one almighty one.
A belief in diety is a belief in diety whether expressed in the acceptance of many gods or one.

Since: Mar 11

Scottsburg, IN

#66235 Dec 22, 2012
Prove the designer and we can talk intelligent design until that time it is a Christhole fantasy nothing more.
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
Genetic mutations do not produce new genes and therefore new life forms. Scientists have yet to produce an entirely new species in laboratory experiments. There are gazillions of living things on planet earth but we never observe emerging "new" forms, we only observe extinctions. The proof of Intelligent Design is right there in front of geneticists in the exquisite structure and language of DNA. This data is not haphazard and disorganized as if it were created randomly, it is highly complex and intricately integrated implying the involvement of extraordinary intelligence.
<quoted text>
A belief in Intelligent Design only becomes an issue when an atheist (a nonbeliever) makes it one! It is therefore encumbent upon the dissenter, or the atheist, to provide the evidence to prove his opposition.
postscriptt

Albuquerque, NM

#66236 Dec 22, 2012
Circular arguments. Round and round they go - where they stop nobody knows.

Atheists on the march in America. Why are you marching? Are you looking for converts or recognition that your point of view is a viable alternative to religion? If so, this public forum is an opportunity for you to shine, to set an example, to convince people that atheism is the better way, the logical way, the intelligent way. But no, reading over your comments, what you do more often than not, is disregard everything as rubbish that doesn't agree your particular world view. Such an approach alienates people. It doesn't compel to want to be atheists.

On the other hand, I could be wrong. If the only reason atheists are on the march in America is to set themselves apart from others to avoid being lumped in with the common rabble, or what they perceive as the deluded masses, then they are merely conforming to nonconformity in an effort to elevate themselves.

Since: Mar 11

Scottsburg, IN

#66237 Dec 22, 2012
It's called theism half wit. Thou shalt not put any other gods before me.

I goes you just violated one of your precious commandments. A hellworthy offense yes?
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
A belief in diety is a belief in diety whether expressed in the acceptance of many gods or one.
Thinking

Leighton Buzzard, UK

#66238 Dec 22, 2012
Pointing out your religitard BS is not proselytising.
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
Good point! Although I am not sure atheists seek converts as much as they try to qualify their lack of belief using science as justification.

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#66239 Dec 22, 2012
postscriptt wrote:
But no, reading over your comments, what you do more often than not, is disregard everything as rubbish that doesn't agree your particular world view.
You mean, we identify rubbish *as* rubbish.

If you think that it isn't rubbish, then argue in favor of it. Go ahead.
Some Random Dude

Santa Cruz, CA

#66240 Dec 22, 2012
God said it. I believe it. That settles it.

Psyche!

Bwahahahahahahahaha!
postscriptt

Albuquerque, NM

#66241 Dec 22, 2012
Atheists make much ado about "faith" as opposed to reason, but what is reason if not "faith" in knowledge? You believe what you are told is true. You don't know with certainty that it is, but you have faith that it is. You don't realize that each person possesses faith despite their scientific or religious affiliations. Without it there would be no family groups, civilizations or governments. It may seem that the threat of legal punishment for example, holds our society together and controls the criminal element to insure more stable living conditions, but our laws are necessarily based on our faith that they will be followed. Otherwise they would be useless.

You have faith that there will be tomorrow. In fact, faith is a constant in each life. It underpins organizations and relationships, and it is based upon the innate, natural knowledge possessed by each of us that our lifes are sustained by the greater source that gave us birth. You cannot be alive without faith, yet faith can be distorted. It can move mountains, but it can also create catastrophes.

There is good faith, but there is also faith in "evil". In usual terms, faith takes it for granted that a certain desired end will be achieved, even though the means may not be known. In usual terms again, there is no direct evidence, otherwise you would have no need for faith. When you believe the worst will happen, you are showing quite real faith, but in a backwards manner. With no direct evidence of disaster that you can detect, you are convinced that it will occur. You have faith in what you believe will occur in other words, although a "misplaced faith".

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#66242 Dec 22, 2012
postscriptt wrote:
Atheists make much ado about "faith" as opposed to reason, but what is reason if not "faith" in knowledge?
No, reason is a *tool* that is used to understand the Universe. Because it has a successful track record, it does not require "faith" to use it.

Since: Mar 11

Scottsburg, IN

#66243 Dec 22, 2012
Reason can be objectively tested and verified. Something god cannot. He has been shy for 2000 plus years.
Drew Smith wrote:
<quoted text>
No, reason is a *tool* that is used to understand the Universe. Because it has a successful track record, it does not require "faith" to use it.

Since: Dec 06

Location hidden

#66244 Dec 22, 2012
postscriptt wrote:
Atheists make much ado about "faith" as opposed to reason, but what is reason if not "faith" in knowledge? You believe what you are told is true. You don't know with certainty that it is, but you have faith that it is. You don't realize that each person possesses faith despite their scientific or religious affiliations. Without it there would be no family groups, civilizations or governments. It may seem that the threat of legal punishment for example, holds our society together and controls the criminal element to insure more stable living conditions, but our laws are necessarily based on our faith that they will be followed. Otherwise they would be useless.
You have faith that there will be tomorrow. In fact, faith is a constant in each life. It underpins organizations and relationships, and it is based upon the innate, natural knowledge possessed by each of us that our lifes are sustained by the greater source that gave us birth. You cannot be alive without faith, yet faith can be distorted. It can move mountains, but it can also create catastrophes.
There is good faith, but there is also faith in "evil". In usual terms, faith takes it for granted that a certain desired end will be achieved, even though the means may not be known. In usual terms again, there is no direct evidence, otherwise you would have no need for faith. When you believe the worst will happen, you are showing quite real faith, but in a backwards manner. With no direct evidence of disaster that you can detect, you are convinced that it will occur. You have faith in what you believe will occur in other words, although a "misplaced faith".
postscript

Faith seeks understanding....(St. Anselm)

(Likewise understanding does not seek faith....You cannot make someone have faith with your understanding)

Faith without reason is blind, but reason without faith is empty....(Immanuel Kant)

Faith and reason are like two wings on which the human spirit rises to the contemplation of truth...(Blessed John Paul II...,Fides et Ratio(Faith and Reason))
postscriptt

Albuquerque, NM

#66245 Dec 22, 2012
Drew Smith wrote:
<quoted text>
No, reason is a *tool* that is used to understand the Universe. Because it has a successful track record, it does not require "faith" to use it.
Reason, a human function, utilizing knowledge and deliberation has a record of producing questionable deductions. The annals of history are filled with examples (often bloody) of the same faulty logic wheeling ceaselessly around the parade ground of the centuries.

As for the universe, the postulations of science are equally questionable. Some physicists say dark matter exists for example though it is unobservable. They continue to tinker with the idea theoretically however because they have "faith" in their reasoning that it is out there. Without faith, no scientific theory as yet unverified would survive long enough to be tested.
postscriptt

Albuquerque, NM

#66246 Dec 22, 2012
Robert F wrote:
<quoted text>
postscript
Faith seeks understanding....(St. Anselm)
(Likewise understanding does not seek faith....You cannot make someone have faith with your understanding)
Faith without reason is blind, but reason without faith is empty....(Immanuel Kant)
Faith and reason are like two wings on which the human spirit rises to the contemplation of truth...(Blessed John Paul II...,Fides et Ratio(Faith and Reason))
There is never faith without reason. Ask a Christian why he believes in God and he will give you a reason. Faith in God or man or nature is imperative, or all the facts of science are meaningless. No more than collected paraphernalia, or the categorizing of chaotic chaffs of chance without dignity.A kind of obsessed blind numbering of events within a universe in which events themselves (men and animals) are playthings of a mechanical process without intent.

With misplaced faith in a evil cause, man can suffer tragedy better than he can bear happiness in a universe without meaning, stripped of all the heroic elements that are part of his psychological heritage. He can at least grit his teeth and show contempt for the fate he believes controls his life, but a meaningless universe leaves him without recourse.

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

#66247 Dec 22, 2012
postscriptt wrote:
Reason, a human function, utilizing knowledge and deliberation has a record of producing questionable deductions.
A small percentage overwhelmed by the record of producing verifiable and *useful* deductions.
postscriptt wrote:
Some physicists say dark matter exists for example though it is unobservable. They continue to tinker with the idea theoretically however because they have "faith" in their reasoning that it is out there.
No, they tinker with the idea because they want to produce an explanation that is capable of explaining what is observed. "Faith" has nothing to do with it.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#66248 Dec 22, 2012
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
Genetic mutations do not produce new genes
Yes, in fact, they do. This is seen in the lab.
and therefore new life forms. Scientists have yet to produce an entirely new species in laboratory experiments.
What, exactly, do you mean by the phrase 'entirely new species'? Species are defined by the inability of one population to procreate with another. This has been seen in the lab and in the wild. The problem is that when speciation happens, it tends to be a small change (one type of mosquito to another) and you don't call that an 'entirely new species', even though it is.

The other factor is that *large* scale changes take a long time. Each stage is adaptation, but the changes accumulate over the generations. We do see this in the lab and in the wild, but because there are few (less than 100,000) generations, we don't expect to see the really large changes. But we *do* see these changes in the fossil record.
There are gazillions of living things on planet earth but we never observe emerging "new" forms, we only observe extinctions.
And this is simply false. We have seen new species of bacteria and of fruit flies in the lab. We have seen new species of mosquito in the wild.
The proof of Intelligent Design is right there in front of geneticists in the exquisite structure and language of DNA. This data is not haphazard and disorganized as if it were created randomly,
Actually, in fact, it is haphazard in the way you would expect from evolution and NOT ordered in the way you would expect from creation. Instead of having systems that are clearly well thought out and working seamlessly, living things have systems that are cobbled together, derived from previous systems, and are forced modifications who only 'logic' is that they allowed populations to survive.
it is highly complex and intricately integrated implying the involvement of extraordinary intelligence.
Actually, this is most definitely NOT what we see when we actually look at DNA over many species.
A belief in Intelligent Design only becomes an issue when an atheist (a nonbeliever) makes it one! It is therefore encumbent upon the dissenter, or the atheist, to provide the evidence to prove his opposition.
Wrong. The default for any existence claim is that the burden of proof is on the one making the positive existence claim. That is *your* job, not mine. Even if everyone believes in this mysterious intelligent agent, the burden of proof is on those who believe, not those who disbelieve.
buckwheat

Tulsa, OK

#66249 Dec 22, 2012
Where does your merciful god go when children are being hurt and killed? I suppose he's off somewhere working in mysterious ways, and demanding I not question him. Grow the fcuk up. god does not exist.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#66250 Dec 22, 2012
postscriptt wrote:
As for the universe, the postulations of science are equally questionable. Some physicists say dark matter exists for example though it is unobservable.
Who said it was unobservable? We *do* observe dark matter through its gravitational interactions. The problem is that you think observations only happen using light, which is simply wrong. While we would certainly *prefer* to observe using light (because light carries a lot of information), it is certainly possible to observe using other information carriers (like gravity).
They continue to tinker with the idea theoretically however because they have "faith" in their reasoning that it is out there. Without faith, no scientific theory as yet unverified would survive long enough to be tested.
Wrong yet again. We can use gravitational lensing to actually map out dark matter and see how it differs in location from ordinary matter. This is fairly new technology, but has produced some amazing results. perhaps you are too limited in what you think it means to 'observe'.

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 Scientific, Philosophical Case for God's Existe... 1 hr superwilly 181
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 1 hr Into The Night 95,399
Why creation? 13 hr Elganned 60
Atheism saved me Wed Amused 27
man Jun 18 blacklagoon 3 1
The atheists mind Jun 15 Elganned 63
News Atheism and Wonder Jun 14 Eagle 12 - 50