Atheists on the march in America

Atheists on the march in America

There are 70650 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.

Lincoln

United States

#72420 May 31, 2013
Ray puelerico wrote:
<quoted text>
ok sceps, lets do this. do you even know what point i wass trying to get at? because my you comment about microwaves it seems like you missed it.
Post in French- his native language!

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#72421 May 31, 2013
Lincoln wrote:
<quoted text>
No attack
Dawkins said he is an agnostic.
To you agnostic is a cult?
You are now calling Dawkins names?
are you in denial?
Peace
Still trying to attack dawkins because you cannot attack atheism.

Dishonest lying scum/

Since: May 13

Hightstown, NJ

#72422 May 31, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>the kind of slavery where you own another human being. clear and undeniable in the bible...
no, your own bible proves that the god the humans that wrote it is a myth. even the savior later is a myth as every single aspect of his life is stolen from previous religious cults.
all you have to do is read your cult's bible and it shows how immoral the god they created is. slavery,killing people that don't believe in him just because they don't believe.... a god that would abondon his children just because they don't pray to him correctly or enough? that god would be in jail in the real world... and you worship that crap? what a cult member you are!
i have three simple points that show that im more willing to work with the material than you at this point.

1. i have shown a full view of the bible on slavery in hebrew times. instead of dealing with the idea as a whole and showing the entirty of it, you posted verses that you didnt like. neither did you refute any of the posts i made even though my postis both histrical and backed biblicaly and culturally for its timeeriod.

2.you did not post how hebrew slavery is anything like western slavery, you merely said that te kind of slavery where you own someone welse is in the bible. i suppose you still dont understand the difference between western slavery, where you owned a person, and hebrew slavery, where they were bound to you with their services for a short time unless theywanted to stay with you. every seven yers a slave went free with money, maybe even a family. all those are things that a black slave in the west would never get unless they happened to get a good master. i can go on about the differences, but i would like you to at least deal with the material first, before i go on.

3. your view on the bible being stolen is a frigne view that no serious biblical or historical scholar takes eseriously, whether christian or not. the idea that its all stolen shows not that people take the bible seriously and therefor scrutinize it. its that people dont scrutinze it enough becase they dont take it seriously enough to take allangles aand do all the research.

the rest of it isnt replyable. im not into namecalling.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#72423 May 31, 2013
Ray puelerico wrote:
<quoted text>
ok sceps, lets do this. do you even know what point i wass trying to get at? because my you comment about microwaves it seems like you missed it.
You don't have a point until you prove the god you're here to lie about.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#72424 May 31, 2013
Lincoln wrote:
<quoted text>
Post in French- his native language!
Looks like the creationists are racist too.

Since: May 13

Hightstown, NJ

#72425 May 31, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>how else would you know they exist? is there anything that does exist for sure that doesn't fit that criteria?
heres a very short list. thoughts, your reason, your five senses, your mind, other peoples minds, the existance of the world around you, the principles by which you make experiments off of, and morals, just to name a few. in fact, the idea that all the world around you can be known by science is infact, not testable by science. the same with the five senses. so it is possible that some things must be deduced by reason and logic taking into account ideas that arent prejudiced by a faulty presupposition that all is material.

Since: May 13

Hightstown, NJ

#72426 May 31, 2013
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't have a point until you prove the god you're here to lie about.
ss, i was making a point on philosophy, not the existance of God. thats what you missed. second, you want me to argue with you about a God your going to say doesnt exist regardless of what is said?sure lol.

i believe the foundation of morals comes from God.

1. if god doesn exist, objective morals dont exist

2. they do exist

3. therefor god has to be the foundation for them

i believe that the begining of the universe points to God

1. everything that begins to exist has a reason for its beginning, and has a cause.

2. the universe began to exist

3. therefor the universe has a cause

4 the nature of that cause fits the description of God

5. therefor god is the begginer of the universe

i believe that the finetuning of the universe points to God

1. the finetuning in the universe can only be explained by 3 different hypothesis: necessity, chance, or design.

2. it isnt necessity or chance

3. therefore its designed

i belive that the information in dna points to God

1the genetic information found in dna can only be explained b 3 hypothesis: chance(evolution), necssity, or design.

2. its not evolution or necesity.

3. therefor its design

i belive that the meaning we try to grasp in life points to god.

without god, the world is objectively meaningless

2.but we as humans do strive for meaning in this world in a deeper way then just actions to and end.

3. this course of action only makes sense if theres a reason that we were made for.

therefor there is an objective meaning to strive for, and that meaning being placed by God

i believe desire points to god.

1.we have desires that need fulfilling (sex, food, water)

2. we sense in us a desre that cannot be fulfilled completely in this world.

#. therefor there must be a desire outside this world that fulfills it.

i kept the list short and only to the sylogisms. is there one that you want to focus on? mind you, im present ing the arguments, not suporting then yet, so these are not the complete arguments. if were gonna argue, i want you to pick one, and well argue one at a time.
Lincoln

United States

#72427 May 31, 2013
Speaking French is Not racism :-)
LOL
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
Looks like the creationists are racist too.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#72428 May 31, 2013
Ray puelerico wrote:
<quoted text>
ss, i was making a point on philosophy, not the existance of God. thats what you missed. second, you want me to argue with you about a God your going to say doesnt exist regardless of what is said?sure lol.
i believe the foundation of morals comes from God.
1. if god doesn exist, objective morals dont exist
2. they do exist
3. therefor god has to be the foundation for them
i believe that the begining of the universe points to God
1. everything that begins to exist has a reason for its beginning, and has a cause.
2. the universe began to exist
3. therefor the universe has a cause
4 the nature of that cause fits the description of God
5. therefor god is the begginer of the universe
i believe that the finetuning of the universe points to God
1. the finetuning in the universe can only be explained by 3 different hypothesis: necessity, chance, or design.
2. it isnt necessity or chance
3. therefore its designed
i belive that the information in dna points to God
1the genetic information found in dna can only be explained b 3 hypothesis: chance(evolution), necssity, or design.
2. its not evolution or necesity.
3. therefor its design
i belive that the meaning we try to grasp in life points to god.
without god, the world is objectively meaningless
2.but we as humans do strive for meaning in this world in a deeper way then just actions to and end.
3. this course of action only makes sense if theres a reason that we were made for.
therefor there is an objective meaning to strive for, and that meaning being placed by God
i believe desire points to god.
1.we have desires that need fulfilling (sex, food, water)
2. we sense in us a desre that cannot be fulfilled completely in this world.
#. therefor there must be a desire outside this world that fulfills it.
i kept the list short and only to the sylogisms. is there one that you want to focus on? mind you, im present ing the arguments, not suporting then yet, so these are not the complete arguments. if were gonna argue, i want you to pick one, and well argue one at a time.
There are not objective morals, morals are completely subjective.

Snowflakes are the result of water freezing at high altitude, why can't the universe also be the result of some other process?

The universe is not "fine tuned." You need to learn more physics to understand why.

Why must there be a reason? Why must that reason be objective?

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#72429 May 31, 2013
Ray puelerico wrote:
<quoted text>
ss, i was making a point on philosophy, not the existance of God. thats what you missed. second, you want me to argue with you about a God your going to say doesnt exist regardless of what is said?sure lol.
i believe the foundation of morals comes from God.
1. if god doesn exist, objective morals dont exist
2. they do exist
3. therefor god has to be the foundation for them
i believe that the begining of the universe points to God
1. everything that begins to exist has a reason for its beginning, and has a cause.
2. the universe began to exist
3. therefor the universe has a cause
4 the nature of that cause fits the description of God
5. therefor god is the begginer of the universe
i believe that the finetuning of the universe points to God
1. the finetuning in the universe can only be explained by 3 different hypothesis: necessity, chance, or design.
2. it isnt necessity or chance
3. therefore its designed
i belive that the information in dna points to God
1the genetic information found in dna can only be explained b 3 hypothesis: chance(evolution), necssity, or design.
2. its not evolution or necesity.
3. therefor its design
i belive that the meaning we try to grasp in life points to god.
without god, the world is objectively meaningless
2.but we as humans do strive for meaning in this world in a deeper way then just actions to and end.
3. this course of action only makes sense if theres a reason that we were made for.
therefor there is an objective meaning to strive for, and that meaning being placed by God
i believe desire points to god.
1.we have desires that need fulfilling (sex, food, water)
2. we sense in us a desre that cannot be fulfilled completely in this world.
#. therefor there must be a desire outside this world that fulfills it.
i kept the list short and only to the sylogisms. is there one that you want to focus on? mind you, im present ing the arguments, not suporting then yet, so these are not the complete arguments. if were gonna argue, i want you to pick one, and well argue one at a time.
seriously?

there is no reason to think that morals come from any god.

what makes you think everything has a reason? there is nothing to back up that guess...

you start with false premises and claim that is proof of god. how silly. you flunked philosophy , didn't you?

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#72430 May 31, 2013
Ray puelerico wrote:
<quoted text>
heres a very short list. thoughts, your reason, your five senses, your mind, other peoples minds, the existance of the world around you, the principles by which you make experiments off of, and morals, just to name a few. in fact, the idea that all the world around you can be known by science is infact, not testable by science. the same with the five senses. so it is possible that some things must be deduced by reason and logic taking into account ideas that arent prejudiced by a faulty presupposition that all is material.
jeez you are so poorly informed about the world you live in it is no wonder you got sucked into a cult that has already been proven to be false...

we can measure thoughts. have you heard of fMRIs? they show exactly how sections of the brain turn on for different thoughts and different types of brain activity.

by definition, your five senses can be seen felt and heard! how stupid....i think you had best stick to letting your cult think for you...you suck at it...

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#72431 May 31, 2013
Ray puelerico wrote:
<quoted text>
i have three simple points that show that im more willing to work with the material than you at this point.
1. i have shown a full view of the bible on slavery in hebrew times. instead of dealing with the idea as a whole and showing the entirty of it, you posted verses that you didnt like. neither did you refute any of the posts i made even though my postis both histrical and backed biblicaly and culturally for its timeeriod.
2.you did not post how hebrew slavery is anything like western slavery, you merely said that te kind of slavery where you own someone welse is in the bible. i suppose you still dont understand the difference between western slavery, where you owned a person, and hebrew slavery, where they were bound to you with their services for a short time unless theywanted to stay with you. every seven yers a slave went free with money, maybe even a family. all those are things that a black slave in the west would never get unless they happened to get a good master. i can go on about the differences, but i would like you to at least deal with the material first, before i go on.
3. your view on the bible being stolen is a frigne view that no serious biblical or historical scholar takes eseriously, whether christian or not. the idea that its all stolen shows not that people take the bible seriously and therefor scrutinize it. its that people dont scrutinze it enough becase they dont take it seriously enough to take allangles aand do all the research.
the rest of it isnt replyable. im not into namecalling.
you did not counter the fact that the god of your cult says you can own other humans. your god condones slavery, there is no way around it.

you forgot about where your god says if the slaves that you should set free after seven years had kids, you OWNED those kids.

i didn't say the whole bible was stolen, just the part of jesus. just about every single aspect of his being divine was stolen from previous religious cults. this also is not up for debate, it is a known fact. you can look at the previous religious cults that had the saviours born of a virgin, that walked on water that healed the sick that rose from the dead that rose others from the dead....all stolen.

your cult is a proven myth...

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#72432 May 31, 2013
Ray puelerico wrote:
<quoted text>
heres a very short list. thoughts, your reason, your five senses, your mind, other peoples minds, the existance of the world around you, the principles by which you make experiments off of, and morals, just to name a few. in fact, the idea that all the world around you can be known by science is infact, not testable by science. the same with the five senses. so it is possible that some things must be deduced by reason and logic taking into account ideas that arent prejudiced by a faulty presupposition that all is material.
perhaps you should try the long list of things that we know for sure exist that cannot be measured or observed....

Since: May 13

Hightstown, NJ

#72433 May 31, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
There are not objective morals, morals are completely subjective.
Snowflakes are the result of water freezing at high altitude, why can't the universe also be the result of some other process?
The universe is not "fine tuned." You need to learn more physics to understand why.
Why must there be a reason? Why must that reason be objective?
on the moral question, the moral issue comes up quite often. people say that god is evil, christians are evil, atheists are evil, all this stuff about evil. now it seems like for these issues to actually be valid, for evil o really exist, you need objective moral standards by which to judge them. so for example, it is wrong to breed children so that you can sell off their tastier parts. thats something i hope we can agree on. i also hpe that no matter where this kind of thing would happen, you would still agree that its wrong. so if you agree that there are some things that are objectively wrong, then you must also have that belief as higher than humans. so if that belief is not subject to human preference, then it must be grounded in something else, namely, in a transendentrce. but morals are not merely existant. morals must be prescribed or given as guidelines by an authority. so i say logically, the authority, the law maker must be God.

snowflakes happen to form because of the laws that control the freezing of water. the difference is that water freezing and forming a pattern isnt analagous to the universe wth all its variables forming in just the precise wa in order to allow for life. at best, the snowflake is an example of how natural procecies favor the simple to form patterns, but it becomes unreasonable to say the same when it comes to the universe. its too improbable.

i would like to know wh you say that the universe is not finetuned? it seems rather clear that finetuning is a factor in the way the universe is for life.

reason must be objective because none of anything we even post on here would make sense without reason being objective. were you refering to reason being objective or something else, it wasnt clear what exactly you ment.

Since: May 13

Hightstown, NJ

#72434 May 31, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>seriously?
there is no reason to think that morals come from any god.
what makes you think everything has a reason? there is nothing to back up that guess...
you start with false premises and claim that is proof of god. how silly. you flunked philosophy , didn't you?
when i say reason i mean that there is an explaination. my wording was off and so i correct it and i appologise. simple to fix my friend. now back to the arguments. do you want me to defend my claim that morals provide evidence for the existance of God? you seem rather interested in that one over the others, so maybe it would be interesting.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#72435 May 31, 2013
Ray puelerico wrote:
<quoted text>
on the moral question, the moral issue comes up quite often. people say that god is evil, christians are evil, atheists are evil, all this stuff about evil. now it seems like for these issues to actually be valid, for evil o really exist, you need objective moral standards by which to judge them. so for example, it is wrong to breed children so that you can sell off their tastier parts. thats something i hope we can agree on. i also hpe that no matter where this kind of thing would happen, you would still agree that its wrong. so if you agree that there are some things that are objectively wrong, then you must also have that belief as higher than humans. so if that belief is not subject to human preference, then it must be grounded in something else, namely, in a transendentrce. but morals are not merely existant. morals must be prescribed or given as guidelines by an authority. so i say logically, the authority, the law maker must be God.
snowflakes happen to form because of the laws that control the freezing of water. the difference is that water freezing and forming a pattern isnt analagous to the universe wth all its variables forming in just the precise wa in order to allow for life. at best, the snowflake is an example of how natural procecies favor the simple to form patterns, but it becomes unreasonable to say the same when it comes to the universe. its too improbable.
i would like to know wh you say that the universe is not finetuned? it seems rather clear that finetuning is a factor in the way the universe is for life.
reason must be objective because none of anything we even post on here would make sense without reason being objective. were you refering to reason being objective or something else, it wasnt clear what exactly you ment.
wow, you just keep on keepin on with the stupid...

again morals in no way prove some god. you can't make suppositions like that and call it a fact.

snowflakes exactly follow the laws of the universe what is special about that?

you don't even understand the false logic of your idea thta the universe is 'fine tuned' for life. life arose in the universe so of course it would be suited to the environment it arose in...

sad to think that people in this day and age can be as stupid as you...do you believe in witches and goblins also? sheesh!

Since: May 13

Hightstown, NJ

#72436 May 31, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>you did not counter the fact that the god of your cult says you can own other humans. your god condones slavery, there is no way around it.
you forgot about where your god says if the slaves that you should set free after seven years had kids, you OWNED those kids.
i didn't say the whole bible was stolen, just the part of jesus. just about every single aspect of his being divine was stolen from previous religious cults. this also is not up for debate, it is a known fact. you can look at the previous religious cults that had the saviours born of a virgin, that walked on water that healed the sick that rose from the dead that rose others from the dead....all stolen.
your cult is a proven myth...
i dont have to counter it. the fact that this is even being pushed shows a lack looking at the details. second, it is far from a fact that anything in the bible was stolen. your view has major flaws in it starting with the fact that the majority of even non christian biblical scholars dont hold this view. it also shows that you havent done detailed study of any of those claims. but for the sake of debate, whydont you defend that assu=ertion that the bible is a plagerism. we could go on, but my day was long. well get to this soon enough im sure.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#72437 May 31, 2013
Ray puelerico wrote:
<quoted text>
when i say reason i mean that there is an explaination. my wording was off and so i correct it and i appologise. simple to fix my friend. now back to the arguments. do you want me to defend my claim that morals provide evidence for the existance of God? you seem rather interested in that one over the others, so maybe it would be interesting.
really? so what is that explanation then? you really can't be serious to try and follow up on that...

sure, go ahead with your morals supposition. it in no way proves any god.

why is it most studies show that non-believers are more moral than you religious cult freaks then? looking at the crappy morals of your bible seems to explain that. one fo the worst moral guidebooks ever published. your myhtical god would be in jail in today's world if he were real...what a jealous, vindictive little prick of a god your cult invented...

Since: May 13

Hightstown, NJ

#72438 May 31, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>wow, you just keep on keepin on with the stupid...
again morals in no way prove some god. you can't make suppositions like that and call it a fact.
snowflakes exactly follow the laws of the universe what is special about that?
you don't even understand the false logic of your idea thta the universe is 'fine tuned' for life. life arose in the universe so of course it would be suited to the environment it arose in...
sad to think that people in this day and age can be as stupid as you...do you believe in witches and goblins also? sheesh!
if you followed my argument, youd see that its logically valid, and the conclusion follows from the premises. if you have a problem with a premise, point out the problem and we will discuss it. second, if you would have read the comment that kitty made, you would understand that i was saying that the comparison wasnt valid. second, when we see the extreme improbability that life would arise by chance in the universe, it is logical to say that something is designed. its like winning 10 poker hand in a row. someones gonna start saying the deck was rigged. so no theres no faulty logic here my friend. third, we arent talking about life being suited to the world its in, were talking about the idea that life would arise at all.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#72439 May 31, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>really? so what is that explanation then? you really can't be serious to try and follow up on that...
sure, go ahead with your morals supposition. it in no way proves any god.
why is it most studies show that non-believers are more moral than you religious cult freaks then? looking at the crappy morals of your bible seems to explain that. one fo the worst moral guidebooks ever published. your myhtical god would be in jail in today's world if he were real...what a jealous, vindictive little prick of a god your cult invented...
I agree.

Modern morals and ethics are superior to the bronze-age bible's in every single way you wish to measure them.

... meh.

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 Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 3 min superwilly 245,228
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 10 min Chimney1 20,736
John 3:16 26 min Thinking 100
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 58 min Mr_SKY 11,081
News Why Atheism Will Replace Religion (Aug '12) 11 hr thetruth 14,671
Atheists and the "Moses Syndrome" 15 hr Shizle 23
Atheists should stop feeding the stereotypes Mon Thinking 19
More from around the web