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
64,421 - 64,440 of 70,983 Comments Last updated Tuesday Aug 5

Since: Dec 06

Location hidden

#67150 Jan 18, 2013
Henry wrote:
<quoted text>
The more people are educated, the more are atheists. That is quite logical why they are on the forward march! But in the age of nuclear age we do have very little time to stay alive! Capitalism has to be abolished in order to survive!
Hello Henry

Sounds like you are in a desperate place....

Now I am not saying atheists are more or less educated. But if a person, or generation is more educated, wouldn't it seem more likely a solution could be found to modify capitalism.

Rather than lay blame on capitalism, as another failed "ism", the incentives must be made a source of wealth. In other words the definition of wealth must change. To abolish it would crash the whole system. It would be chaos.

Since: Dec 06

Location hidden

#67151 Jan 18, 2013
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>
Maybe "felling" is the wrong word.
Let me put on my Spock ears:
If there is an all-powerful, all-knowing, honest deity who cares about us and what we do, and who has promised to answer our prayers, logic dictates there is evidence of his existence.
(At this point I'm not saying what would or wouldn't "count" as evidence, or if the evidence exists, or not.)
<quoted text>
This god is supposed to be everywhere, so distance could not be an issue.
<quoted text>
But mountains aren't all powerful, and they aren't interested in what we do.
<quoted text>
Well, if there were an elephant in my kitchen, I would see, hear, and smell the evidence. And an elephant isn't even all powerful. But my main point was that in some cases, you can prove a negative.
Maybe we do have to agree to disagree.
Rose Hoho

Well...,lets disagree to agree(smile).

I am just trying to understand, so in the end, my point is not that I prove or disprove God's existence based on evidence. But if I can understand someone elses view, then I have better understanding....

I would say, that distance does make a difference in determing if one can "see" God....Using the elephant again, if you were 20 miles away, I doubt you could see the elephant. Or if your eyeball were right on the elephant, you could not see the elephant. So the distance becomes important between the object and viewer.

In modern spiritualism, there is this "sense" of seeing God. But I would deny this is God. And I think this is where most are lacking in understanding.

Why?

If God is Truth, then one is bonded to Truth by definition, and this is Religion.
But if Religion is Truth, then one is bonded to Oneself, and is therefore a Lie.

(If one looks infinitely far, or infinitely within, then one is bonded....In other words practicing Religion.
If one looks on the surface or within an infinite framework, then one is bonded to Oneself, and practicing a Lie.)

It is the incorrectness, the flaw one sees, the Lie, not in God, but in the individual in practicing Religion that makes brings doubt on God's existence.

So the "sense" of seeing God becomes a Lie, as spiritualism is merely looking at oneself. This makes the practioner of spiritualism a Liar.

Since: Dec 06

Location hidden

#67152 Jan 18, 2013
Drew Smith wrote:
<quoted text>
And the evidence for any of this is...?
<quoted text>
Quantum mechanics doesn't say that you can't observe an electron. It says only that you can't identify the electron's *exact* location.
<quoted text>
But if one has no evidence for the existence of the mountain, on what rational basis can one claim that the mountain exists?
<quoted text>
Why not?
Drew Smith

That is my posit....The evidence will be developed....It might be that my posit is part of the evidence. I will have to think on the symmetry of this a bit. But the evidence itself may be assymetrical.

Actually an electron is mostly space, so what are we apparently observing? I don't know.

Does one need evidence for a rational basis/claim?
This is actually two question.
In general, I think no for both, because one might use reason instead of evidence.

Answer: I could be led into a room blindfolded and hear someone turn a light switch. By reason I think it is either to turn it on or off. There is no evidence the light is on or off.

So the question is the light on, or off, I cannot determine and that there is no evidence?

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

#67153 Jan 18, 2013
Robert F wrote:
<quoted text>
I am just trying to understand, so in the end, my point is not that I prove or disprove God's existence based on evidence.
It is good that you realize there is no evidence for any deities.
Robert F wrote:
<quoted text>
I would say, that distance does make a difference in determing if one can "see" God....Using the elephant again, if you were 20 miles away, I doubt you could see the elephant. Or if your eyeball were right on the elephant, you could not see the elephant. So the distance becomes important between the object and viewer....
So this god you speak of is 20 miles away?
Robert F wrote:
<quoted text>
In modern spiritualism, there is this "sense" of seeing God. But I would deny this is God. And I think this is where most are lacking in understanding.
Why?
If God is Truth, then one is bonded to Truth by definition, and this is Religion.
But if Religion is Truth, then one is bonded to Oneself, and is therefore a Lie.
(If one looks infinitely far, or infinitely within, then one is bonded....In other words practicing Religion.
If one looks on the surface or within an infinite framework, then one is bonded to Oneself, and practicing a Lie.)
It is the incorrectness, the flaw one sees, the Lie, not in God, but in the individual in practicing Religion that makes brings doubt on God's existence.
So the "sense" of seeing God becomes a Lie, as spiritualism is merely looking at oneself. This makes the practioner of spiritualism a Liar.
To paraphrase you -- It is hard to debate with someone when their brain doesn't function well. Your logic is atrocious and your rhetoric is sub-par. Apparently you're just tossing word-salad out there in the hopes of some kind of lame obfuscation. Kind of funny, in a pathetic sort of way.

Since: Dec 06

Location hidden

#67154 Jan 18, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
Wow my iPhone changed is to I! Holy hells bells stop the presses! Lmfao!
Again how do we have the concept and notion of god? All you said was, well because humans can have such a notion.
Well gee wiz captain obvious! Humans talking about the notion of god have a notion of god! Whew doggies you are really on a roll now! Now where do these notions come from retard? Stop obfuscating what I said it's not helping you.
Now since you lack the IQ or perhaps the intellectual honesty, most likely both, let me answer the question that you keep hiding from.
The notion of god came from ancient people as an explanation for what they observed around them. They lacked the understanding and tools that we have today and were just doing their best. They believed there was a wind god for example who blew the wind as he saw fit, they even had rituals before traveling to try to make the wind blow with them rather than against them. This ritual was performed and at that time the wind direction changed and now we have these ancient people thinking their silly dance could change the wind direction. This superstition is passed down through the generations. Later they had gods of the trees, animals, water, sun, and so on after a while the superstition had people thinking there was a god for everything that they could perform rituals do to do their bidding. When things went their way in the field that meant the wheat god was with them. When the crop went south the wheat god was angry or acting mysteriously! Perhaps the wheat god wasn't pleased with their dancing and chanting he needs more right? So let's kill some animals and pour their blood on the field! Hey it worked a week later the wheat started growing again! Good thing to because children would be sacrificed if it didn't!
And following this pattern we pretty much can sum up how we have the notion of god passed down to us.
Now today we know that there is no reason to sacrifice children to make crops grow as we have agricultural developments that actually work time and time again. We don't need to dance around brandishing our buttocks to the wind so it blows in the proper direction we just check the weather on our phone and plan accordingly. Today we laugh at such notions of dancing for the wind. Today we would be horrified if a farmer went on TV and said he was going to sacrifice his children so his crops would grow better. Our understanding is better and with that the superstitious ways of the past seem quaint and at times horrifying.
The ancient people were mistaken Robert. They lived in the shadow of superstition and delusion. Today we can be free of that. Break those chains of superstitious slavery Robert, the wind doesn't care if we taunt it by brandishing our buttocks at it.
<quoted text>
Givemeliberty

Well....Its hard to answer a chicken/egg issue.

A notion is different than a concept. So it hard to make a single answer in both catagories.

So let me go with the concept you express.
You think because society is more complex, that people now, compared to a mere 2000, 5000, 10000,....etc years ago, because they did not have the tools for our complex society, were not sophisticated in their thinking? And therefore we should cut our ties with the past...?

Your explanation of "primitive" society assigning observation to form concepts may not be complex, but that does not mean they were wrong. In fact they were correct, otherwise we would not exist.

On the other hand....

As a matter of fact, with our modern society, we have greater natural and manmade disasters in many cases that were not present in the past.(Mainly, I am thinking ecological disaster.) So, at some point, when the ecology is dead, life will cease in a modern complex society, and your supposition that we should break with the past will cause the collapse.

So the opposite may be true. Modern notions will cause extinction

Givemeliberty or give me death....

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

#67155 Jan 18, 2013
Robert F wrote:
<quoted text>
Drew Smith
That is my posit....The evidence will be developed....It might be that my posit is part of the evidence. I will have to think on the symmetry of this a bit. But the evidence itself may be assymetrical.
Actually an electron is mostly space, so what are we apparently observing? I don't know.
Does one need evidence for a rational basis/claim?
This is actually two question.
In general, I think no for both, because one might use reason instead of evidence.
Answer: I could be led into a room blindfolded and hear someone turn a light switch. By reason I think it is either to turn it on or off. There is no evidence the light is on or off.
So the question is the light on, or off, I cannot determine and that there is no evidence?
Can something be said to exist when there is no way of observing or measuring it?

If so, how can you really know that it's not just a part of your imagination?

Further, how can anyone else know except to accept your personal testimony. But then, if I accept your testimony as true, then how do I not accept everyone else's as also being true?

That would be utter madness which would leave one accepting claims of invisible fire-breathing dragons as readily as accepting any god claim.

No, I'll stick with what can be observed and/or measured.

Since: Dec 06

Location hidden

#67156 Jan 18, 2013
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
It is good that you realize there is no evidence for any deities.
<quoted text>
So this god you speak of is 20 miles away?
<quoted text>
To paraphrase you -- It is hard to debate with someone when their brain doesn't function well. Your logic is atrocious and your rhetoric is sub-par. Apparently you're just tossing word-salad out there in the hopes of some kind of lame obfuscation. Kind of funny, in a pathetic sort of way.
Hedonist

No I said, "my point is not that I prove or disprove God's existence based on evidence."

Read it a couple of times.

The logic of seeing, is not thought about much anymore. It needs to be explained by analogy. In other words, an elephant at 20 miles away is like God is beyond the speed of light at the edge of the observable universe....(I could explain the concept). But I don't think that would give you any pleasure(smile).

Kind of funny is better than no funny....

I am slow in a pathetic kind of way.

And I don't like to drive fast either....Stop. Look and smell the roses.

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

#67157 Jan 18, 2013
Robert F wrote:
<quoted text>
No I said, "my point is not that I prove or disprove God's existence based on evidence."...
Convenient since there is no evidence for any deity's existence.
Robert F wrote:
<quoted text>
... God is beyond the speed of light at the edge of the observable universe.......
You just type out whatever nonsense pops into you head.

Since: Dec 06

Location hidden

#67158 Jan 18, 2013
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
Can something be said to exist when there is no way of observing or measuring it?
If so, how can you really know that it's not just a part of your imagination?
Further, how can anyone else know except to accept your personal testimony. But then, if I accept your testimony as true, then how do I not accept everyone else's as also being true?
That would be utter madness which would leave one accepting claims of invisible fire-breathing dragons as readily as accepting any god claim.
No, I'll stick with what can be observed and/or measured.
Hedonist

You must understand that the enjoyment I have in smelling a rose, is not shared. Nor do some even like roses, because of the thorns.

I don't make anyone take what is freely given. Smell the Rose of Sharon.

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

#67159 Jan 18, 2013
Robert F wrote:
<quoted text>
Hedonist
You must understand that the enjoyment I have in smelling a rose, is not shared. Nor do some even like roses, because of the thorns.
I don't make anyone take what is freely given. Smell the Rose of Sharon.
And not a word on point in your entire reply. It is hard to debate with someone when their brain doesn't function well.

I certainly hope you are an exemplar of Poe's Law. If not you need serious help.

Since: Dec 06

Location hidden

#67160 Jan 18, 2013
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
Convenient since there is no evidence for any deity's existence.
<quoted text>
You just type out whatever nonsense pops into you head.
Hedonist

Sorry. I thought you might be able to conceptualize.

Since: Dec 06

Location hidden

#67161 Jan 18, 2013
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
And not a word on point in your entire reply. It is hard to debate with someone when their brain doesn't function well.
I certainly hope you are an exemplar of Poe's Law. If not you need serious help.
Hedonist

Sorry. I thought you took seriously took pleasure....

Since: Dec 06

Location hidden

#67162 Jan 18, 2013
Sorry I meant to say you seriously took pleasure....

You are getting me confused. I always thought hedonists were serious pleasure seekers....

You have no humor.
Thinking

Leighton Buzzard, UK

#67163 Jan 18, 2013
What breed of rose can only be smelled once? Do tell.
Robert F wrote:
<quoted text>
Hedonist
You must understand that the enjoyment I have in smelling a rose, is not shared. Nor do some even like roses, because of the thorns.
I don't make anyone take what is freely given. Smell the Rose of Sharon.

Since: Apr 11

Santa Monica, CA

#67164 Jan 18, 2013
Robert F wrote:
<quoted text>
Rose Hoho
Well...,lets disagree to agree(smile).
I am just trying to understand, so in the end, my point is not that I prove or disprove God's existence based on evidence. But if I can understand someone elses view, then I have better understanding....
I would say, that distance does make a difference in determing if one can "see" God....Using the elephant again, if you were 20 miles away, I doubt you could see the elephant. Or if your eyeball were right on the elephant, you could not see the elephant. So the distance becomes important between the object and viewer.
In modern spiritualism, there is this "sense" of seeing God. But I would deny this is God. And I think this is where most are lacking in understanding.
Why?
If God is Truth, then one is bonded to Truth by definition, and this is Religion.
But if Religion is Truth, then one is bonded to Oneself, and is therefore a Lie.
(If one looks infinitely far, or infinitely within, then one is bonded....In other words practicing Religion.
If one looks on the surface or within an infinite framework, then one is bonded to Oneself, and practicing a Lie.)
It is the incorrectness, the flaw one sees, the Lie, not in God, but in the individual in practicing Religion that makes brings doubt on God's existence.
So the "sense" of seeing God becomes a Lie, as spiritualism is merely looking at oneself. This makes the practioner of spiritualism a Liar.
Yeah, we'll have to agree to disagree.

Since: Mar 11

Chicago, IL

#67165 Jan 18, 2013
1:It's not hard to answer as we have the writings, art and other remnants of how these people believed. They thought doing rituals and such could change the weather or crops growth and so on. You are grasping at straws.

2: It has nothing to do with the complexity of the society nor did I say that. I said we have advancements in our observational abilities that allow us to better understand the body and world around us. Which is why we no longer smack our buttocks for an hour taunting the wind god into blowing in the direction we want. We enjoying examining our past generations to see how they lived and cheer when they got something right and cringe or laugh when they got something wrong.

3: The ancient societies had it right? So you are claiming that sacrificing a child to the harvest god will really help the crops grow all year? Are you batsh!t insane?

4: Some of us are not gracious guests for our stay here and now like then there are selfish greedy people who could care less about preserving the earth and only focus on profit or their wants. But this is hardly a modern development our ancient people's hacked down forests and over fished and hunted causing extinction and damage. They just didn't have the bulldozers lol!

Your dream about the past being so wonderful is a fantasy not based in reality at all. You would be lucky to reach adulthood back then and your quality of life would be atrocious in comparison. Religion and belief in god will bring about our extinction far faster than anything else. That is the gospel truth.( sorry I couldn't help myself there :p)
Robert F wrote:
<quoted text>
Givemeliberty
Well....Its hard to answer a chicken/egg issue.
A notion is different than a concept. So it hard to make a single answer in both catagories.
So let me go with the concept you express.
You think because society is more complex, that people now, compared to a mere 2000, 5000, 10000,....etc years ago, because they did not have the tools for our complex society, were not sophisticated in their thinking? And therefore we should cut our ties with the past...?
Your explanation of "primitive" society assigning observation to form concepts may not be complex, but that does not mean they were wrong. In fact they were correct, otherwise we would not exist.
On the other hand....
As a matter of fact, with our modern society, we have greater natural and manmade disasters in many cases that were not present in the past.(Mainly, I am thinking ecological disaster.) So, at some point, when the ecology is dead, life will cease in a modern complex society, and your supposition that we should break with the past will cause the collapse.
So the opposite may be true. Modern notions will cause extinction
Givemeliberty or give me death....

Since: Mar 11

Louisville, KY

#67166 Jan 18, 2013
We have humored your nonsense haven't we? You're whole argument is just silly and childish you are claiming that you can't demonstrate god but then say go is on the outside of the speed of light or whatever which is you making a claim for god!

You rely on all these what ifs and maybes which basically just says, god is there but impossible to detect. And again if this was so how did the ancient people detect them? Walk with gods, eat with gods, hunt with gods, go to war with gods fighting along side them, wrestling gods all night, even having sex and babies with gods yet we are unable for the last 2000 years to detect them?

Did the gods all become shy? Or were they all just made up on purpose or by mistaken observation?

I will go with option two as the most likely.
Robert F wrote:
Sorry I meant to say you seriously took pleasure....
You are getting me confused. I always thought hedonists were serious pleasure seekers....
You have no humor.

Since: Dec 06

Location hidden

#67167 Jan 19, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
1:It's not hard to answer as we have the writings, art and other remnants of how these people believed. They thought doing rituals and such could change the weather or crops growth and so on. You are grasping at straws.
2: It has nothing to do with the complexity of the society nor did I say that. I said we have advancements in our observational abilities that allow us to better understand the body and world around us. Which is why we no longer smack our buttocks for an hour taunting the wind god into blowing in the direction we want. We enjoying examining our past generations to see how they lived and cheer when they got something right and cringe or laugh when they got something wrong.
3: The ancient societies had it right? So you are claiming that sacrificing a child to the harvest god will really help the crops grow all year? Are you batsh!t insane?
4: Some of us are not gracious guests for our stay here and now like then there are selfish greedy people who could care less about preserving the earth and only focus on profit or their wants. But this is hardly a modern development our ancient people's hacked down forests and over fished and hunted causing extinction and damage. They just didn't have the bulldozers lol!
Your dream about the past being so wonderful is a fantasy not based in reality at all. You would be lucky to reach adulthood back then and your quality of life would be atrocious in comparison. Religion and belief in god will bring about our extinction far faster than anything else. That is the gospel truth.( sorry I couldn't help myself there :p)
<quoted text>
Givemeliberty

1. But science today proposes that the wind from the wings of a butterfly on the otherside of the world will be the cause of a hurricane on this side of the world....If that isn't grasping at straws, I don't know what is...?

2. I am not defending religous practices, as they may or may not be correct.

3. You paint ancient religion with such a broad stroke, there is no picture, just a canvas with one color.

4. You have a point. Some ancient societies notoriously abused their natural resources, and suffered extinction, or near extinction. But here is where you break down, if the ancients had bull dosers to destroy everything, then why is modern mad doing the same?

You are kind of saying, that ancient and modern man suffer from having some lunatics running the world and wrecking it for everyone. And this I agree. But it is because of human vice that drives the destruction.....I just saw an interesting documentary on Cameroon, where the natives have reduced the forest, due to farming, and frogs were disappearing. Their main source of protein was/is from frogs, now they hunt the tadpoles. They were offered pigs, but really didn't want them....

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#67168 Jan 19, 2013
Robert F wrote:
<quoted text>
Givemeliberty
1. But science today proposes that the wind from the wings of a butterfly on the otherside of the world will be the cause of a hurricane on this side of the world....If that isn't grasping at straws, I don't know what is...?
I just want to jump in on this one. The so-called butterfly effect is an aspect of the mathematical equations of fluid flow. In practice, it simply shows that our ability to predict the weather is inherently limited by our ability to accurately measure weather phenomena. Because of the instability of the mathematical equations themselves, we may never be able to predict weather two months ahead of time. That is because even unmeasurably small differences (like the wind from butterfly wings) can grow to very large scale differences (like hurricanes) over such a time period. It is far from guaranteed that this particular sequence will happen, but the instability does affect our ability to accurately predict, even when the equations we use are known to be correct.

Since: Dec 06

Location hidden

#67169 Jan 19, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
We have humored your nonsense haven't we? You're whole argument is just silly and childish you are claiming that you can't demonstrate god but then say go is on the outside of the speed of light or whatever which is you making a claim for god!
You rely on all these what ifs and maybes which basically just says, god is there but impossible to detect. And again if this was so how did the ancient people detect them? Walk with gods, eat with gods, hunt with gods, go to war with gods fighting along side them, wrestling gods all night, even having sex and babies with gods yet we are unable for the last 2000 years to detect them?
Did the gods all become shy? Or were they all just made up on purpose or by mistaken observation?
I will go with option two as the most likely.
<quoted text>
Givemeliberty

"William Falconer, The Shipwreck (1762), Canto I, line 104.

The test of a first rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function."

You are assuming that observation is the basis of an "either/or" decision. While true in a practical empirical way, this may or may not be true....At last! We have gotten to what is true!? Took a little while. Thank you for having humored my nonsense, though that may be more patience and tolerance on your part....

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 7 min KiMare 226,249
Should Uninformed Opinion Be Respected? 1 hr Tuco Blondie 18
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 2 hr ChristineM 900
Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038 (Apr '12) 2 hr MUQ1 21,499
The Ultimate Evidence of God 2 hr Thinking 53
Our world came from nothing? 3 hr Thinking 403
100% Faith Free 3 hr Reason Personified 10
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

Atheism People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••