Atheists on the march in America

Atheists on the march in America

There are 70634 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.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#69583 Mar 13, 2013
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>
You expect John to make an "argument"?
Nope.

I wrote a little script to repeat my point that he cannot make a single argument in support of his fantasy-delusion.

So far? My script has been accurate 100% of the time-- he never posted a single argument.

:)
Lincoln

United States

#69584 Mar 13, 2013
Bergoglio almost never granted media interviews, limiting himself to speeches from the pulpit, and was reluctant to contradict his critics, even when he knew their allegations against him were false, said Rubin.
Failure to confront Argentine dictatorship

That attitude was burnished as human rights activists tried to force him to answer uncomfortable questions about what church officials knew and did about the dictatorship's abuses after the 1976 coup.

Many Argentines remain angry over the church's acknowledged failure to openly confront a regime that was kidnapping and killing thousands of people as it sought to eliminate "subversive elements" in society. It's one reason why more than two-thirds of Argentines describe themselves as Catholic, but fewer than 10 per cent regularly attend mass.

Under Bergoglio's leadership, Argentina's bishops issued a collective apology in October 2012 for the church's failures to protect its flock. But the statement blamed the era's violence in roughly equal measure on both the junta and its enemies.
Lincoln

United States

#69585 Mar 13, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Athiesm is not promoted in a public school you idiotic moron.
In any case? Tell the WHOLE story:
The court stated that they used what is called a legal fiction-- the legal fiction is that "atheism is a religion", so that an atheist innmate in prison gets equal treatment by the prison for his atheism.
Prior to that? Only Genuine Christards™ got special privileges from the equally Genuine Christard™ prison officials.
It was UNEQUAL treatment under the law. So the atheist prisoner sued, and won.
Legal fiction.
Look it up, you simpering baboon.
Evangelical atheists try to promote atheism in schools but usually fail

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#69586 Mar 13, 2013
Lincoln wrote:
<quoted text>
Evangelical atheists try to promote atheism in schools but usually fail
Explain how.
John

United States

#69587 Mar 13, 2013
John wrote:
<quoted text>
BS, and you know it. Lying for nothing tsk, tsk. I asked a question in 2009 on page one that hasn't been answered in a relevant way. Just put up this so called answer.
I've asked if you have any evidence in this arena that meets your own criteria? Ignored.
I've asked how you would decide what is most or least likely of the following: always was, prime mover, something from nothing, or any other option. Show your work. Ignored.
Those have been asked dozens of times in the last few weeks alone.
Your accountable position of belief is? Yeah, you forgot it again.
Feign ignorance if you want as to the arena of discussion. I do need to reiterate what you have nonengaged in for years with every post.
Yeah, put up the post. I have been clear I don't debate nothing and expect an accountable position of belief.
Your turn for an evidence free retort.
Stump an antitheist! Ask them what they believe.
Atheism exposed 101
Lincoln

United States

#69588 Mar 13, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Explain how.
Attempt to suppress Bible Clubs in Public School.
Worry about Intelligent Design.
Get frantic if a Manger Scene is in a Public School.
John

United States

#69589 Mar 13, 2013
Another day of ineptitude from the antitheists.*Note to lurkers* They have gone almost four years without giving one accountable position they are willing to debate. Three years without an example of evidence that meets their criteria for evidence. These are angry agenda driven folks that don't give a damn about the evidence.
If you want to subject yourself to this farce by all means see for yourself. Antitheists you could also just cut and paste one of the 66,800 posts to show otherwise.
Stump an antitheist! Ask them what they believe. True
science that is repeatable and observable.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#69590 Mar 13, 2013
John wrote:
<quoted text>
I believe you are sincere and we would have no issues away from this forum. I think you are amongst a group that has corrupted what had been merely disbelief. You forget I have asked the forum what they believe. What I believe is irrelevant.
How do you measure the following: prime mover, always was, something from nothing. I find the default position of using a God you don't believe in as a crutch for a nonclaim.disingenuous. Nonclaims don't have over 60,000 posts.
It's no accident there is no evidence provided that meets your criteria. It's no accident no one will provide an accountable position to debate vs a prime mover. I disagree with points made and some of your assumptions. There are imo reasons and evidences to believe in a prime mover, but you are correct I don't debate nonclaims.
This is different and perhaps you could address the antitheists among you.
Thank you for being civil.

I am interested in what points i made that you disagree with, but I don't expect you tell me unless you still remember.

I think the argument still confuses me. Is it that "prime mover" is being dismissed?

What is the "criteria" they have for your claim that they don't use in investigating the other possibilities?

You could be right about me not being the same type of atheist as those in this forum.... But If i can get a better understanding of what the argument is I would like to jump in.

I think the only reason I addressed you first is because .. When I entered this forum topic ... I saw what reminded me of a Peewee Herman movie.
Peewee: I know you are but what am I!?
Neighbor: I know you are but what am I!?
Peewee: I know you are but what am I!?
Etc... Etc... Etc...
Only it was "I don't have to give my evidence, what's yours?!" From both sides instead. And being the atheist typically is only rejecting a claim... I then went to you as the believer holds the burden of proof.

And as I continue to follow i see copy and paste from both sides with little effort to understand each other being both sides have decided the other has nothing on any value to say.

I would even assume both sides have made their cases over the years but the arrogance has blocked it out.

Most of what I see on these forums is "I'm right, you're wrong, now I'm going to try and back you into a corner". I would prefer... "I believe my thoughts are accurate, naturally, but you disagree. Lets have an honest discussion and not let our emotions get the better of us"

I won't lie I have to apologize because i assumed you would continue to insult me, point fingers, and categorize/dismiss me... But I was wrong. The last couple responses you gave to me have been nicer than I gave you credit for.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#69591 Mar 13, 2013
Lincoln wrote:
<quoted text>
Attempt to suppress Bible Clubs in Public School.
Worry about Intelligent Design.
Get frantic if a Manger Scene is in a Public School.
Wow, so you are for having a theocracy.

Public institutions are regulated by the government, the government cannot pick sides, therefore it also cannot fund any religious "club" or any religious activity, period. That's not only the best way for a government to operate, it's also the law in the US. "Intelligent Design," the sugar coating for creationism, is not scientific, so it doesn't belong in science class, end of story.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#69592 Mar 13, 2013
Lincoln wrote:
<quoted text>
Attempt to suppress Bible Clubs in Public School.
Worry about Intelligent Design.
Get frantic if a Manger Scene is in a Public School.
Oh, also, that's not "pushing" or "teaching" atheism, it's simply enforcing the law and keeping the government neutral. If you don't like it, move to Iran.
Lincoln

United States

#69593 Mar 14, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow, so you are for having a theocracy.
Public institutions are regulated by the government, the government cannot pick sides, therefore it also cannot fund any religious "club" or any religious activity, period. That's not only the best way for a government to operate, it's also the law in the US. "Intelligent Design," the sugar coating for creationism, is not scientific, so it doesn't belong in science class, end of story.
Realism in Christian America.
Public School teachers, being human take sides.
Any student can google Intelligent Design and find its' many problems.
Schools in 2013 are internet schools.
The story does not end where you wish, smart phones have changed the classroom.
Peace
Lincoln

United States

#69594 Mar 14, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, also, that's not "pushing" or "teaching" atheism, it's simply enforcing the law and keeping the government neutral. If you don't like it, move to Iran.
The law you favor did Not keep religion out of schools,
it created more Republicans. Government neutrality is a myth.
Martin Luther King Jr. defied laws he felt were wrong.
So do Christian teachers every day?
Peace
Lincoln

United States

#69595 Mar 14, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>This post of yours? Not an argument for either a "something" or a "prime mover".
So I get to keep my $2,000.
You are still the coward.
Imagine you post on here
because you can't say this stuff at work.
John

United States

#69596 Mar 14, 2013
Absolutely. Right back at ya. Originally I simply asked the forum what they believed and noted that antitheism is in my experience all too often the default. Being a believer is/was irrelevant. I was accurate and antitheists showed their true colors, lashing out against a God they don't believe in and a God I was not attempting to shove down their throats.
Ruling out possibilities is not freethinking. We don't know what we don't know. Attacking/marginalizing belief isn't intellectually honest when nothing meets the repeatable and observable standard. Four years of no evidence in the atheism forum is enough for me to conclude this. I've asked the question hundreds of times and many claim to have provided it, but that's a lie. No sugarcoating it.
The conversation devolved quickly as (the way I see it) their was a group attack effort to bring this God they seem to hate into the equation. This did not dissuade me as I chose to stay on point. I was clear my intentions were not to make any claims, I was an am.simply pointing out intellectual dishonesty.
I continued trying to get the "rules" for evidence after all attempts to get answers to legitiamate questions failed. I sought these rules in response to the neverending attacks to further expose the forum. I offered to debate the evidences/reasons I believe in a prime mover vs any accountable position of belief that meets the criteria I was given. This challenge was not accepted. There will be claims otherwise but I guarrantee you won't find what I've asked. Now imagine doing this dance for four years simply because I refuse to debate nothing. I didn't set out to mock simple disbelief, that fine but this isn't that and I think you know it.
Name a subject I get to ask all the questions on and your job is to defend it, over and over and over and over again. How about science? Get my point? It's even more ridiculous considering I've exposed the standard. Remember my question regarding evidence quantification? Never answered relevantly.
Nonbelievers like yourself leave pretty quickly and they should. You may find it glib but what is the point of a forum about nothing? This is an agenda that stifles true freethought.
A simple I don't know...end forum would have sufficed. Now its a game to me to see how many years this forum will be intellectualy dishonest in their fight for nothing.
I appreciate your consideration but I've done this multiple times with decent folk like yourself. I won't debate in front of the kids without the reasonable prerequisites I've asked for. A simple no to my question should have been the response years ago LOL. Back to cut and paste.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#69597 Mar 14, 2013
John wrote:
<quoted text>
Atheism exposed 101
This post of yours? Not an argument for either a "something" or a "prime mover".

So I get to keep my $2,000.

You are still the coward.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#69598 Mar 14, 2013
John wrote:
Another day of ineptitude from the antitheists.*Note to lurkers* They have gone almost four years without giving one accountable position they are willing to debate. Three years without an example of evidence that meets their criteria for evidence. These are angry agenda driven folks that don't give a damn about the evidence.
If you want to subject yourself to this farce by all means see for yourself. Antitheists you could also just cut and paste one of the 66,800 posts to show otherwise.
Stump an antitheist! Ask them what they believe. True
science that is repeatable and observable.
This post of yours? Not an argument for either a "something" or a "prime mover".

So I get to keep my $2,000.

You are still the coward.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#69599 Mar 14, 2013
John wrote:
Absolutely. Right back at ya. Originally I simply asked the forum what they believed and noted that antitheism is in my experience all too often the default. Being a believer is/was irrelevant. I was accurate and antitheists showed their true colors, lashing out against a God they don't believe in and a God I was not attempting to shove down their throats.
Ruling out possibilities is not freethinking. We don't know what we don't know. Attacking/marginalizing belief isn't intellectually honest when nothing meets the repeatable and observable standard. Four years of no evidence in the atheism forum is enough for me to conclude this. I've asked the question hundreds of times and many claim to have provided it, but that's a lie. No sugarcoating it.
The conversation devolved quickly as (the way I see it) their was a group attack effort to bring this God they seem to hate into the equation. This did not dissuade me as I chose to stay on point. I was clear my intentions were not to make any claims, I was an am.simply pointing out intellectual dishonesty.
I continued trying to get the "rules" for evidence after all attempts to get answers to legitiamate questions failed. I sought these rules in response to the neverending attacks to further expose the forum. I offered to debate the evidences/reasons I believe in a prime mover vs any accountable position of belief that meets the criteria I was given. This challenge was not accepted. There will be claims otherwise but I guarrantee you won't find what I've asked. Now imagine doing this dance for four years simply because I refuse to debate nothing. I didn't set out to mock simple disbelief, that fine but this isn't that and I think you know it.
Name a subject I get to ask all the questions on and your job is to defend it, over and over and over and over again. How about science? Get my point? It's even more ridiculous considering I've exposed the standard. Remember my question regarding evidence quantification? Never answered relevantly.
Nonbelievers like yourself leave pretty quickly and they should. You may find it glib but what is the point of a forum about nothing? This is an agenda that stifles true freethought.
A simple I don't know...end forum would have sufficed. Now its a game to me to see how many years this forum will be intellectualy dishonest in their fight for nothing.
I appreciate your consideration but I've done this multiple times with decent folk like yourself. I won't debate in front of the kids without the reasonable prerequisites I've asked for. A simple no to my question should have been the response years ago LOL. Back to cut and paste.
This post of yours? Not an argument for either a "something" or a "prime mover".

So I get to keep my $2,000.

You are still the coward.
John

United States

#69600 Mar 14, 2013
...I'll keep my 2,001.00 dollars since you have failed to provide evidence or the accountable position you consistently lie has been done.

Thank you for helping me expose your kind puppet.

Stump an antitheist! Ask them what they believe. True science that is repeatable and observable.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#69601 Mar 14, 2013
John wrote:
...I'll keep my 2,001.00 dollars since you have failed to provide evidence or the accountable position you consistently lie has been done.
Thank you for helping me expose your kind puppet.
Stump an antitheist! Ask them what they believe. True science that is repeatable and observable.
Nope. The above is still more of your lies-- not an argument, not any facts in support of your "prime mover".

Of course, you don't have any facts-- or even a single argument.

All you have are lies; lies which you think repeating makes them less of a lie-- it doesn't.

You're still a coward, though.

And yes-- science is repeatable and observable. Which is why evolution is science, and your "prime mover" isn't.

“Sombrero Galaxy”

Since: Jan 10

I'm An Illegal Alien

#69602 Mar 14, 2013
John wrote:
Ruling out possibilities is not freethinking. We don't know what we don't know. Attacking/marginalizing belief isn't intellectually honest when nothing meets the repeatable and observable standard.
You are correct when you say "We don't know what we don't know." That is why it is wrong for us to pass off legends or myths as fact. But that is exactly what you religious people are doing when ou say that God is real and the buybull is the word of God. You passing off a mere claim as fact. What If I said that the world was created by a Giant Spaghetti monster and his giant noodles? Or supposed I said that the world was created by a magical unicorn with a large dyck and to achieve salvation; humans must rub the dycks of horses? There is as much evidence for those claims as to your buybull being the work of God.

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) 11 min Ronnie 33,883
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 1 hr thetruth 255,484
News Atheist group in Kenya tests boundaries of reli... 1 hr thetruth 20
church disowns Trump for being too gay friendly 1 hr thetruth 4
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 1 hr thetruth 3,674
News The Atheist Delusion': Ray Comfort's Masterpiece 1 hr thetruth 57
Religion is the cause of war and most suffering... 1 hr thetruth 131
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 1 hr thetruth 14,805
More from around the web