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

#66313 Dec 23, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Presupposition, your entire post fails because of the presupposition here. Why must there be a "purpose" for life to exist?
If you have to ask that question, you have already allowed science to define your being as robotic, a machine that doesn't require meaning - an accidental procreative device that is simply taking up space on a speck in the corner of infinity for no reason whatsoever.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#66314 Dec 23, 2012
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
If you have to ask that question, you have already allowed science to define your being as robotic, a machine that doesn't require meaning - an accidental procreative device that is simply taking up space on a speck in the corner of infinity for no reason whatsoever.
It is you who is eliminating all possibilities, for when you can make your own purpose, you are in charge of your destiny. If you cannot make your own purpose, then you have no destiny.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#66315 Dec 23, 2012
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
Really? Science would have to define the meaning of life, give life purpose before it could purport to know who we are and why we we exist, let alone where our "place" in the universe is.
You assume there is a 'meaning of life' other than what *we* give it. We have learned about why we exist (how the materials that make us came together) and our place in the universe (on a very small planet around a medium sized star is a largish galaxy among hundreds of billions).
That's all good and well, but how does this information explain the dark side of human nature? Perhap the answer in hidden in dark stars, eh?:))
No, it doesn't explain this. Why would you expect it to? is that the only value it could have to you?
The public need not fund astrophysicist's search for elusive dark matter to feel humility when all it takes is something as inexpensive and simple as looking up in perfect silence at the stars. You may as well admit it before you dig yourself a deeper hole, astrophysics is science for the sake of science. It has done absolutely nothing to do with improving the human condition.
It is knowledge for the sake of knowledge, yes, indeed. And that is a very, very human value that inspires and motivates enough people to allow the search to be funded. And yes, knowledge for the sake of knowledge *is* improving the human condition.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#66316 Dec 23, 2012
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
If you have to ask that question, you have already allowed science to define your being as robotic, a machine that doesn't require meaning - an accidental procreative device that is simply taking up space on a speck in the corner of infinity for no reason whatsoever.
*We* give our lives meaning. Why would we expect there to be anything more than that? You are looking for some sort of 'cosmic meaning' because your fragile ego can't accept that fact that you are not important in the grand scheme of things. Because of that inability, you lose any sense of meaning in the here and now.
John

United States

#66317 Dec 24, 2012
You make the presupposition that there is no evidence without admitting you do not have the scientifically measurable evidence to support your position of nothing. You have placed limits on what may be limitless. You have placed limits where they need not be. Thus far I have seen no evidence provided by an atheist that would support what is disingenuously called natural mechanisms only. If you think there isn't evidence of design you would be wrong. Admittedly, this can not be proven using your constricting criteria, but nothing in this arena has been proven using this standard. You know this by now. That is why it is so frustrating to the forum when it's pointed out. Judging by the ever-growing anecdotal evidence of this forum overwhelmingly congregated by atheists, atheism is something else entirely. There is a large contingent of antitheists, a portion devoted to secular humanism, and some interplay with other assorted isms. The common denominator is that every single one of these positions is lacking in evidence. The notion that man is the be all end all is flawed in my opinion. Of course you wish to shirk any burden of proof. That's transparent and shows a weak position. Atheism has been co-opted by the new atheist. Much more vocal and commited to breaking down the populace writ large that actually do have a position. I've given more than enough opportunity for atheists to engage in debate that is not circular. The brilliance and weakness of atheism is no accountability. That's why it's not challenging to debate this topic with you loons. Apologies to the few that aren't driven by more than uncertainty. When Reagan debated Gorbachev on our nuclear arsenals each man had a position. If there was a political debate the political atheist would attack the other position and not have to be responsible for one himself. If one football team was atheist and the other was not they would have the ball on offense the whole game. Fumble, and the ball would be returned. This is what you ask for here, but is unacceptable in every other topic. I'm conservative btw. A rational freethinker. I'm sure you are a centrist LOL. What's the mushy middle thought on government size, abortion, tax rates?
If there isn't a position don't bother responding. How is the fence DREW, Curious, Mikey,,,,? You got the post wedged good and deep yet? Stump an antitheist! Ask it what it believes. Still going strong 63,630 plus posts in.
Still nothing about atheism in the atheist forum. No position, no post #. Lies, spin, ad hominem, and boredom.
Waiting for an example of what passes the cut for evidence from atheists. Cowards!

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#66318 Dec 24, 2012
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
PROVE IT! LOL!
Prove your god, there's a good liar. Lying like you have been for centuries.

Until you prove your fictitious god, f*ck him, I trust science.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#66319 Dec 24, 2012
John wrote:
You make the presupposition that there is no evidence without admitting you do not have the scientifically measurable evidence to support your position of nothing. You have placed limits on what may be limitless. You have placed limits where they need not be. Thus far I have seen no evidence provided by an atheist that would support what is disingenuously called natural mechanisms only. If you think there isn't evidence of design you would be wrong. Admittedly, this can not be proven using your constricting criteria, but nothing in this arena has been proven using this standard. You know this by now. That is why it is so frustrating to the forum when it's pointed out. Judging by the ever-growing anecdotal evidence of this forum overwhelmingly congregated by atheists, atheism is something else entirely. There is a large contingent of antitheists, a portion devoted to secular humanism, and some interplay with other assorted isms. The common denominator is that every single one of these positions is lacking in evidence. The notion that man is the be all end all is flawed in my opinion. Of course you wish to shirk any burden of proof. That's transparent and shows a weak position. Atheism has been co-opted by the new atheist. Much more vocal and commited to breaking down the populace writ large that actually do have a position. I've given more than enough opportunity for atheists to engage in debate that is not circular. The brilliance and weakness of atheism is no accountability. That's why it's not challenging to debate this topic with you loons. Apologies to the few that aren't driven by more than uncertainty. When Reagan debated Gorbachev on our nuclear arsenals each man had a position. If there was a political debate the political atheist would attack the other position and not have to be responsible for one himself. If one football team was atheist and the other was not they would have the ball on offense the whole game. Fumble, and the ball would be returned. This is what you ask for here, but is unacceptable in every other topic. I'm conservative btw. A rational freethinker. I'm sure you are a centrist LOL. What's the mushy middle thought on government size, abortion, tax rates?
If there isn't a position don't bother responding. How is the fence DREW, Curious, Mikey,,,,? You got the post wedged good and deep yet? Stump an antitheist! Ask it what it believes. Still going strong 63,630 plus posts in.
Still nothing about atheism in the atheist forum. No position, no post #. Lies, spin, ad hominem, and boredom.
Waiting for an example of what passes the cut for evidence from atheists. Cowards!
No proof of god. Keep rambling on about your anecdotal evidence (ie lies). There's a no god, there never has been and there never will be.

All there is in this world are two-bit liars who don't know when to sh*t up about their hallucinations.
postscriptt

Albuquerque, NM

#66320 Dec 24, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>It is you who is eliminating all possibilities, for when you can make your own purpose, you are in charge of your destiny. If you cannot make your own purpose, then you have no destiny.
All physical life has purpose and death is a shared destiny, but vision is the domain of human consciousness - the lack of which strips the self of all bold actions and the possibiity of greatness. Most atheists live inconspicuous ordinary lives - devoid of great deeds, heroes and challenges because they accept a vision of life that is sterile and mechanistic.

You live in a closed system of thought - how can you surmise that I am eliminating all possibilties when you are not aware of all possibilities?
postscriptt

Albuquerque, NM

#66321 Dec 24, 2012
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
You assume there is a 'meaning of life' other than what *we* give it.
That's just it, the meaning you give to life is based on scientific factoids - and it is only ONE version an infinite variety of probable versions.

Where do YOU begin and science end? Much of what you believe about life is crafted by science. You are a product of its system of beliefs - a subscriber to its sterile and mechanical vision that sees man as separate from creation - separate from himself - an chance finite being existing in infinity with no metaphysical connection to the universe - nothing more than a casual observer.

Just as there are parallel universes, there are duplicate selves. In the same way you cannot examine emotions without feeling them - you cannot examine the multidimensional nature of your own consciousness by denying its existence. You cannot explore the full force of life by standing apart in lofty isolation. You will not realize that what you see in the physical mirror is but a dim reflection of your true multidimensional nature. There are other boxes beside the one you live in and no end to the "within" of things, but you will never understand this unless you become acquainted with your "infinite" self. Seeking to know yourself is a creative endeavor and the core of all action. To understand the meaning of life, you must begin to think and feel for yourself - to trust your own experiences and impressions and not depend on science to examine and define them for you.

The value of knowledge lies in its application. Knowledge for the sake of knowledge is worse than no knowledge at all! To continue funding astrophysics and other fruitless scientific pursuits is a waste of hard earned taxpayer money. A journey inward is free - embark on that jouney and leave science to search for external elusive butterflies and pile up knowledge like books few will ever read.
postscriptt

Albuquerque, NM

#66322 Dec 24, 2012
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
No proof of god. Keep rambling on about your anecdotal evidence (ie lies). There's a no god, there never has been and there never will be.
All there is in this world are two-bit liars who don't know when to sh*t up about their hallucinations.
The fact that you keep reiterating the same rant, means you are not convinced that it's true.

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

#66323 Dec 24, 2012
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
Really? Science would have to define the meaning of life, give life purpose before it could purport to know who we are and why we we exist, let alone where our "place" in the universe is.
<quoted text>
That's all good and well, but how does this information explain the dark side of human nature? Perhap the answer in hidden in dark stars, eh?:))
<quoted text>
The public need not fund astrophysicist's search for elusive dark matter to feel humility when all it takes is something as inexpensive and simple as looking up in perfect silence at the stars. You may as well admit it before you dig yourself a deeper hole, astrophysics is science for the sake of science. It has done absolutely nothing to do with improving the human condition.
You really should try to do at least a modicum of basic research BEFORE posting stuff that makes you look soooooo pathetically simple minded --

" http://bit.ly/UiUm9D" ;

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

#66324 Dec 24, 2012
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
All physical life has purpose and death is a shared destiny, but vision is the domain of human consciousness - the lack of which strips the self of all bold actions and the possibiity of greatness....
Humans have the ability to dream. Okay.
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
...Most atheists live inconspicuous ordinary lives - devoid of great deeds, heroes and challenges because they accept a vision of life that is sterile and mechanistic....
Rash straw man stereotype. Your atheophobia is showing.
postscriptt

Albuquerque, NM

#66325 Dec 24, 2012
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
Humans have the ability to dream. Okay.{/QUOTE]

Dreams aren't real, remember? They are hallucinations, figments of the imagination, or the result of misfiring neurons. The only dreams atheists can call real are the ones played out in video games.

[QUOTE who="Hedonist"]<q uoted text>
Rash straw man stereotype. Your atheophobia is showing.
You attack the religious with vitriolic fervor, but when the shoe is on the other foot, you whine about being persecuted. If you can dish it out, you had better learn how to take it.
Thinking

Leighton Buzzard, UK

#66326 Dec 24, 2012
I didn't detect a whine, just someone calling you on your BS.
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
You attack the religious with vitriolic fervor, but when the shoe is on the other foot, you whine about being persecuted. If you can dish it out, you had better learn how to take it.

Since: Mar 11

United States

#66327 Dec 24, 2012
Merry Christmas everyone! Time to party like pagans!

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#66328 Dec 24, 2012
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
That's just it, the meaning you give to life is based on scientific factoids - and it is only ONE version an infinite variety of probable versions.
No, the *meaning* I give to life is not based on science. The facts about life are based on science, but not the meaning and impact of those facts on my life. Facts and meaning are two *very* different things.
Where do YOU begin and science end? Much of what you believe about life is crafted by science.
Science is a way of finding out the truth of things. meaning is how it affects our lives and how it impacts on what we consider to be important. Truth is *one* thing I find to be important, but far from the only thing. Love, music, literature, drama, etc are ALL valuable to me, but I don't mistake them for *truth*.
You are a product of its system of beliefs - a subscriber to its sterile and mechanical vision that sees man as separate from creation - separate from himself - an chance finite being existing in infinity with no metaphysical connection to the universe - nothing more than a casual observer.
On the contrary, I know that we are very much a part of the universe we inhabit. We are very definitely *not* separated from it. We are made from star-stuff. We live on a small planet, but we learn, we teach, we help each other, we love, we share. ALL of these have meaning to our lives even if they are irrelevant to the rest of the cosmos.
Just as there are parallel universes, there are duplicate selves.
Prove either one.
In the same way you cannot examine emotions without feeling them
Of course you can. Ever hear of brain scans? Ever watch someone having emotions? There are *plenty* of observables concerning emotions.
- you cannot examine the multidimensional nature of your own consciousness by denying its existence.
If you have to fully believe *before* there is evidence, then you are simply deluding yourself. If there is actual evidence that does not depend on previous full belief (but allows for skepticism), please present it.
You cannot explore the full force of life by standing apart in lofty isolation.
Who said you can? Science leads to truth. It does not tell us what is meaningful (that is our decision). Science gives us power to do many things. But it doesn't say *what* we should be doing with that power. Science gives us knowledge, but it does not give us wisdom. That comes through experience and attempting to find values that work.
You will not realize that what you see in the physical mirror is but a dim reflection of your true multidimensional nature. There are other boxes beside the one you live in and no end to the "within" of things, but you will never understand this unless you become acquainted with your "infinite" self.
Nice fantasy. Prove it.
Seeking to know yourself is a creative endeavor and the core of all action. To understand the meaning of life, you must begin to think and feel for yourself - to trust your own experiences and impressions and not depend on science to examine and define them for you.
But that *is* science at its best: observation and experience are the same. Impressions are not reliable for knowledge, as I have pointed out before. That is why we should require testability in all ideas.
The value of knowledge lies in its application. Knowledge for the sake of knowledge is worse than no knowledge at all!
I *strongly* disagree. Knowledge is a value in and of itself. All the better when it can be applied constructively, but that is far from the only way that knowledge is important.
To continue funding astrophysics and other fruitless scientific pursuits is a waste of hard earned taxpayer money.
Again, I strongly disagree. Searching for truth and knowledge is one of the higher values for us humans.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#66329 Dec 24, 2012
John wrote:
You make the presupposition that there is no evidence without admitting you do not have the scientifically measurable evidence to ....
So ... no evidence of your god yet? Then the logical and intelligent thing to do is remain atheist toward your god still. I will do that, thank you for reaffirming my position.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#66330 Dec 24, 2012
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
All physical life has purpose and death is a shared destiny, but vision is the domain of human consciousness - the lack of which strips the self of all bold actions and the possibiity of greatness. Most atheists live inconspicuous ordinary lives - devoid of great deeds, heroes and challenges because they accept a vision of life that is sterile and mechanistic.
You live in a closed system of thought - how can you surmise that I am eliminating all possibilties when you are not aware of all possibilities?
Other animals have visual sensory organ as well ... so ... what was your point?

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#66331 Dec 24, 2012
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
You attack the religious with vitriolic fervor, but when the shoe is on the other foot, you whine about being persecuted. If you can dish it out, you had better learn how to take it.
no such thing as god, you can give up the charade now liar.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#66332 Dec 24, 2012
postscriptt wrote:
<quoted text>
The fact that you keep reiterating the same rant, means you are not convinced that it's true.
Pointing out the fact that you have absolutely no proof of god is not a rant, its a fact.

You have no proof of god and hence you're a liar, trying to claim god is real when you don't have any evidence at all.

How can you sell us the morals of your god, when you yourself are immoral and are lying to us about a god that you have no evidence for?

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 "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 32 min eggosaurus 94,144
a prayer of salvation for those who are willing (Oct '17) 1 hr blacklagoon 3 138
News Egyptian Parliament considers outlawing atheism May 15 dollarsbill 5
Stephen Hawking, now a believer May 8 superwilly 20
The atheists trick May 8 Eagle 12 - 3
News The Anti-Christian Movement May 7 blacklagoon 3 25
News Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ... (Jun '17) May 5 Eagle 12 - 5,971