Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

Full story: Webbunny tumblelog

Atheism requires as much faith as religion? bearvspuma : The only problem with this rationalization is that ita s assuming all athiests are so because theya re intelligent in the ways of science and reasoning and all people that believe in a form of god are unintelligent.
Comments
200,301 - 200,320 of 224,053 Comments Last updated 30 min ago

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#208708
Jan 28, 2014
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Skombolis wrote:
Heh
I suppose nothing wrong with being a kid at heart so long as you still get the pleasure of adult things
I got a feeling "Laura" knows sex or socializing isn't an option so might as well run around in his jammies
Meh, maybe its not his fault and his village just doesn't have many girls in it?
Laura Metha?

He's a bit strange but usually humorous.

And he's a fellow gun nut, so I gotsta excuse his antics a wee bit.

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#208709
Jan 28, 2014
 
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Leaving the law as it is also has no effect on me.
So what?
Legalization of polygamy would also have no effect on me.
So what?
Making it a crime for being under 6'6" would also have no effect on me.
So what?
Your only objection to polygamy is likely religious as well. Have you ever read Robert Heinlein's The Moon is a Harsh Mistress? It has some interesting things to say about society's narrow view on marriage.

There once was a man from Lime
Who had three wives at a time
He was once overheard
Saying one is absurd
And two at once is a crime

Your 6'6" argument is quite silly, since such a law WOULD cause harm to others. While you might not be harmed by it, someone would.

The laws against gay marriage and polygamy are arbitrary, based on religion. They are not based on someone actually being harmed.(This is not to say that the way Mormons practice it does not cause harm to some. Their practices often involve coercion or underage girls. But that is a separate issue from polygamy itself. In practice, there are cases where more than two people live together, just not officially married.)

As usual, your arguments are lame, having been given very little thought.

“Ungood doubleplus duckspeak.”

Since: Dec 12

jill hart photography

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#208710
Jan 28, 2014
 
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>What basis in reality does the Matrix have?
Technology and humans exist.
blacklagoon

Brookline, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#208711
Jan 28, 2014
 
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Batman doesn't care about us.
Now you're getting it, Batman isn't real and neither is your God, neither one of them care about us because both are fictitious characters. You finally came around to logic and reason, good for you!

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#208712
Jan 28, 2014
 

Judged:

1

1

1

HipGnosis wrote:
well you've spent an awful lot of font here debating atheism and science. What's that make you?
It always tickles me when posters become so full of themselves they become oblivious to the fact that they're throwing their dung right into a headwind.
Oh.

I thought one can't believe in atheism or science.

I mean, that's what the Topix Atheist! spouts.....

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#208713
Jan 28, 2014
 

Judged:

1

Sock Puppet Master wrote:
There might be a god
scaritual wrote:
I suppose there could be.
Agnostics.

Blah...

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#208714
Jan 28, 2014
 
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
HA HA!!!
No I don't.
<quoted text>
Yup. That's the mold.
Guys do guy stuff and girls do girl stuff.
You call it enculturation.
I call it natural.
So when bonobos engage in same sex activity, do you call that natural?

Or dogs? Or bulls? Or...

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#208715
Jan 28, 2014
 
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Right. That's what I said.
You rule out deity claims preemptively, but your mind is not closed to them.
I get what you are saying. It's just that it's self-contradictory and absurd.
But thanks for the generosity.
Personally, I consider a claim of a deity to be an extraordinary claim. And as they say, such a claim requires extraordinary evidence.

The evidence part. So far, totally lacking.

Until such extraordinary evidence is forthcoming, the deity option is not on the table as far as I am concerned.

Believing because you want to believe...that is irrational.

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#208716
Jan 28, 2014
 
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do you assume God isn't natural?
If God were natural, then there would be some way to measure and observe Him. Then we wouldn't need faith and your whole rationale would fall apart.

“The eye has it...”

Since: May 09

Russell's Teapot

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#208717
Jan 28, 2014
 

Judged:

1

1

1

RiversideRedneck wrote:
I don't care.
Sure you do. Whether you understand or comprehend it, you just denied the deities I listed in the previous post made in response to you.

Also, I've seen you state that science is a "god" to atheists and others, then deny and debate science - because it contradicts your deity belief, and then attempt to insert your deity belief into the scientific process - when there is no scientific evidence for your deity.

BTW, a link you supplied earlier, said this:

"After many excavations in the Middle East, archaeologists have found Ancient writings called "cuneiform" writings that date back all the way to 3500 B.C.

Adam was still alive at that time, and so writing could have gone back even farther."

Ar Ar, do you agree with that statement made at the link you supplied, or not?
RiversideRedneck wrote:
I don't spend my time debating religions or gods I don't believe in.
You do.
RiversideRedneck wrote:
You see, I'm not atheist.
That's correct. That's good(for atheism). You do more for atheism as a theist than you ever could as an atheist.

That's true of many theists.

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#208718
Jan 28, 2014
 

Judged:

1

It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Interesting post.
I recall in one of the early Star Trek movies, there is a very powerful, godlike being that claims to actually be God. And it needs the use of the Enterprise.

Kirk says, "Excuse me. Why would God need a starship?"

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#208719
Jan 28, 2014
 
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Marriage and legal marriage are the same thing.
When the government defines legal marriage, it defines marriage.
You advocate same-sex couples wanting government to define marriage, but criticize others for doing the same.
You are criticized because you define things so that some are discriminated against.

Is there something here that you find too difficult to understand?

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#208720
Jan 28, 2014
 
Plato 636

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text...

Laws 8.836c-e, in which Plato discusses what laws should regulate sexual conduct. It's plain that Plato sees a historical decline in morals since the time of Laius.

"Suppose you follow nature's rule and establish the law that was in force before the time of Laius. You'd argue that one may have sexual intercourse with women but not with men or boys. As evidence for your view, you'd point to the animal world, where (you'd argue) the males do not have sexual relations with each other, because such a thing is unnatural. But in Crete and Sparta your argument would not go down well, and you'd probably persuade nobody. However, another argument is that such practices are incompatible with what in our view should be the constant aim of the legislator - that is, we're always asking,'which of our regulations encourages virtue, and which does not?' Now then, suppose in the present case we agreed to pass a law that such practices are desirable, or not at all undesirable - what contribution would they make to virtue? Will the spirit of courage spring to life in the soul of the seduced person? Will the soul of the seducer learn habits of self-control? No one is going to be led astray by that sort of argument - quite the contrary. Everyone will censure the weakling who yields to temptation, and condemn his all-too-effeminate partner who plays the role of the woman. So who on earth will pass a law like that? Hardly anyone, at any rate if he knows what a genuine law really is."

Plato, Laws [636c]“And whether one makes the observation in earnest or in jest, one certainly should not fail to observe that when male unites with female for procreation the pleasure experienced is held to be due to nature, but contrary to nature when male mates with male or female with female, and that those first guilty of such enormities were impelled by their slavery to pleasure.”
http://www.interlog.com/~girbe/ethics7.html

Aristotle
Nichomacean Ethics Book 7, Section 5:
“Some things are not naturally pleasant, but can become so through injury, habit or congenital depravity. And for each unnatural pleasure there is an abnormal state of character. There is the brutish character, as in those tribes around the Black Sea who eat human flesh. Also, morbid states, like nail-biting or homosexuality … may have been acquired by habit, for instance if someone has been sexually misused as a child.”
__________

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#208721
Jan 28, 2014
 
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Marriage and legal marriage are the same thing.
When the government defines legal marriage, it defines marriage.
You advocate same-sex couples wanting government to define marriage, but criticize others for doing the same.
You can define marriage for yourself however you want. Marry Dave if you want to. Or don't.

But you want to define it for everyone in ways that do not allow equal treatment for everyone.

Pressing their principles on everyone is, IMHO, one of the greatest sins of religion.

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#208722
Jan 28, 2014
 
Divinity Surgeon wrote:
Technology and humans exist.
The technology does not exist.

Try again.

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#208723
Jan 28, 2014
 

Judged:

2

2

1

blacklagoon wrote:
Now you're getting it, Batman isn't real and neither is your God, neither one of them care about us because both are fictitious characters. You finally came around to logic and reason, good for you!
"Batman is real, I own a few of his movies."
-Tide

It is your opinion that God isn't real.

Why can't you get that?

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#208724
Jan 28, 2014
 
Happy Lesbo wrote:
<quoted text>
.. not in Utah or Arizona ..
Anywhere.
blacklagoon

Brookline, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#208725
Jan 28, 2014
 
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>You don't have things in your life one might characterize as blessings? Family or friends that love you. Opportunities to do things that bring you joy. A genuine concern about the suffering of others. And so on?
Man has free will and the capacity for both good and evil. There is no question man chooses to do a lot of bad. But he also chooses to do a lot of good.
Life itself IMO is a miracle and a blessing.
What would you feel showed God did care?
And who do you feel would be to blame between man and God (assuming God exists) if there are enough resources to feed and house everybody in the world but those resources are disproportionately spread out in part due to the wealth and power of some?
You might characterize these things as "blessing" I would say they are good fortune brought on mostly by how I treat others and what I have accomplished through hard work and dedication.

I don't believe in miracles, and the word blessing is meaningless to me.

If God was real, which reject out of hand, all he would have to do to alleviate the misery and suffering caused by centuries of divisiveness is reveal himself to ALL of mankind. Not the religious BS about "truly believe in God and he will reveal himself to you." Really reveal himself, emblazoned across the sky for all to see, his affirmation that he is the one true God, a message written on the face of the moon doing the same, followed by his appearing simultaneously to every individual on the planet, and his affirmation that he was the creator of the universe and all things in it.

I would never blame God for the disproportion of wealth and resources, thats on man. But I would blame him for sitting idly by while millions of children starve to death. And I would blame him for inefficient design of the human body, specifically the lack of an adequate defense mechanism against the millions of parasitic organisms that have killed millions.

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#208726
Jan 28, 2014
 
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>
So fixated Laura
Your posts are always like some weird combination of trolling, ignorance, and mental instability
There must not have been a high premium on education or intelligence in that village you grew up in
Be honest, you still run around pretending a flashlight is a lightsaber don't you?
:)
No I just told you the deal. make what you want out of it.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#208729
Jan 28, 2014
 
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013...

Promoting marriage does not ban any type of relationship: Adults are free to make choices about their relationships, and they do not need government sanction or license to do so. All Americans have the freedom to live as they choose, but no one has a right to redefine marriage for everyone else.

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

6 Users are viewing the Atheism Forum right now

Search the Atheism Forum:
Title Updated Last By Comments
Our world came from nothing? 2 hr Patrick 186
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 3 hr Patrick 832
The numbers are in: America still distrusts ath... 3 hr Patrick 16
Of Interest InTheNews 4 hr Patrick 3
20+ Questions for Theists (Apr '13) 4 hr Patrick 359
Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038 (Apr '12) 4 hr Patrick 21,382
Atheism Destroyed At Last! - The Debate Of The ... Wed Patrick 1,285
•••
•••