Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 258515 comments on the Webbunny tumblelog story from Jul 18, 2009, titled Atheism requires as much faith as religion?. In it, Webbunny tumblelog reports that:

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.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Webbunny tumblelog.

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#217510 Mar 7, 2014
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Harris didn't make that claim in absence of an argument based on actions. Imo, he needed to include more about past behavior of violence, etc., but he didn't.
Anyways, your argument, and his, equate to the same thing. You'd call for pre-emptive strikes against high ranking Al Queda, regardless of whether they have personally killed anyone, b/c of their complicity in their dangerous and violent organization, which you claim we're at war with. Harris is interpreting your argument to suggest that calling for attacks on them is akin to attacking them for their propensity to act b/c of their belief system of jihad and all that.
It surprises me that you don't get that. Anyways, what are you smoking and will you share?
You have no grasp of how to discuss this subject.

Harris' premise relies totally on the absence of actions. He would not need to bother to convince us that actions can justify killing. He asserts the case for thought and beliefs justifying killing. That is his only point.

You do not understand the distinctions between killing for belief (Harris) and killing terrorists (my position). Maybe it would help you understand if you thought of it as our troops shooting a Nazi soldier on the battlefield in WWII when the soldier had not personally killed anyone.

I hope this helps you.
virtuanna

Texarkana, TX

#217511 Mar 7, 2014
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>
Gee, Nano, could you be any more egocentric? That was a comment to Buck, not you.
Nuh uh.
virtuanna

Texarkana, TX

#217512 Mar 7, 2014
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> If we resort to this, then governments can kill anyone without trial and say anything was the reason.
Cowboy justice only works under very extreme circumstances , as there is much potential for the abuse and circumvention of justice than there is the application of justice.
Which in short means that desperate measures only work in desperate situations, and they should never become normal.
Ahem!

" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Targeted_killing... ;

Tell that to the U.N.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#217513 Mar 7, 2014
virtuanna wrote:
<quoted text>Yes, I have and only one of them was a good dog. He was very protective of me and the yard, he killed any other animal that entered our yard, so I was never comfortable with the idea of leaving him alone, unsupervised, with a small child. The other dogs I had were even more aggressive than he was, snapping and growling at kids. Useless as pets.
Then you're doing it wrong.
OG Kush

Jacksonville, FL

#217514 Mar 7, 2014
virtuanna wrote:
<quoted text>Carl stole that from Marcello...
" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcello_Truzzi&... ;
...and he probably borrowed it from his mom.
It's natural that you should be filled with doubt, since you get so little right.
You are quite delusional yet I find it funny to read your posts.

Why not take you're religious passion to a library and pursue it by studying other competing religions?

Not only will you be surprised by whT you discover, you will come away will come away with a different point of view.

And that 'view' will be what I expressed in my post... doubt!

Since the early days,[the church] has thrown itself violently against every effort to liberate the body and mind of man.

It has been, at all times and everywhere, the habitual and incorrigible defender of bad governments, bad laws, bad social theories, bad institutions.

It was, for centuries, an apologist for slavery, as it was an apologist for the divine right of kings.

"Faith may be defined briefly as an illogical belief in the occurrence of the improbable ... A man full of faith is simply one who has lost (or never had) the capacity for clear and realistic thought. He is not a mere ass: he is actually ill." ~H.L. Mencken

If money is the 'root of all evil' why do churches ask for it?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#217515 Mar 7, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course Sam thinks that way, he's an intolerant dick.
Good rebuttal as always

“Be strong ...”

Since: Nov 10

...I whispered to my coffee

#217516 Mar 7, 2014
virtuanna wrote:
<quoted text>Whereas, you ALWAYS are....less.
Less what? Less moronic than you? That’s not very hard but thanks anyway
Atheist Silurist

Truro, UK

#217517 Mar 7, 2014

“Be strong ...”

Since: Nov 10

...I whispered to my coffee

#217518 Mar 7, 2014
virtuanna wrote:
<quoted text>AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHhahahah...look whose talking...the loon who insists she's disproven God with a "theory".
I have asked you to do the math and you seem to be SH|T SCARED of the result for some reason

I have asked you to explain KJV revelation 19:6 in relation to the equation and you seem SHIT SCARED to do so for some reason

And I have asked that my actual quote be used and not the BS made up crap that you hype right out of your lying fookwit excuse for brain and you can’t even do that.

And now it seems that you confuse the fact and theory and you confuse theory and guess. The equation is factual, it is proven again and again, you even use the benefits of the equation to post your hatred of the equation, such hypocrisy is only ever found among the terminally stupid.

So all you have left is irrational hysteria and ignorant mockery. This tells it’s own story.

My drearest nano brain, you have lost yet again, don’t you ever get sick of showing your a$$ in public?

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#217519 Mar 7, 2014
virtuanna wrote:
<quoted text>I've posted this...
http://old.richarddawkins.net/articles/871-ei...
article several times (from the original Time issue) on different threads over the last 3+ years and you loons have always ignored it, likely never even read it. Keep pretending he never said these things, just like an ostrich with its head in the sand...eventually it will come back to bite you in the ass. Reality hurts those who deny it too long.
Hiding: 24

Nano: 4

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#217520 Mar 7, 2014
scaritual wrote:
<quoted text>
No, being a Geomancer, http://www.topix.com/forum/ncaa/nevada-basket... , The Dave Nelson just entered a dimensional cromlech time portal and traveled into the past, to search for a culture that fully appreciates his unique talents.
Ah, well that's better than.

What a happy ending for him!

“Be strong ...”

Since: Nov 10

...I whispered to my coffee

#217521 Mar 7, 2014
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Hiding: 24
Nano: 4
Funny that. I just realised the hatred it vomited stunk of nano no brain

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#217522 Mar 7, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
“Reason is the greatest enemy that faith has; it never comes to the aid of spiritual things, but—more frequently than not—struggles against the divine Word, treating with contempt all that emanates from God ... Reason must be deluded, blinded, and destroyed. Faith must trample underfoot all reason, sense, and understanding, and whatever it sees must be put out of sight and ... know nothing but the word of God." - Martin Luther
KiMare wrote:
As to your quotes, here you go again...
http://blogs.christianpost.com/tentativeapolo...
Did you want to make an argument or even a bare claim to go with this? Were you defending Luther?

I did look at your link. It was pretty funny. This was part of the defense of Luther:

"Many of the passages in those volumes were transcribed by students after Luther the hot head had imbibed one too many pints of stiff German lager. Do you think that in all those pages there may be statements recorded which Luther may have later regretted? "

LOL. Whatever the source of Luther's inspiration - the holy spirit or alcoholic spirits - he has resonated with Christians throughout the centuries. He's the father of Protestantism, and just about as prominent a Christian as there is in history. How many men have a major denomination named after them? He and Calvin are all that come to mind.

Anyway, lets' look at some more of what this great and highly admired Christian had to say:

[1] "Reason should be destroyed in all Christians." - Martin Luther

[2] "Whoever wants to be a Christian should tear the eyes out of his Reason." - Martin Luther

Here he is on science:

[3] "People gave ear to an upstart astrologer [Copernicus] who strove to show that the earth revolves, not the heavens or the firmament, the sun and the moon. Whoever wishes to appear clever must devise some new system, which of all systems is of course the very best. This fool wishes to reverse the entire science of astronomy; but sacred scripture tells us [Joshua 10:13] that Joshua commanded the sun to stand still, and not the earth." - Martin Luther

Here he is on the fairer sex:

[4] "Even though they grow weary and wear themselves out with child-bearing, it does not matter; let them go on bearing children till they die, that is what they are there for." - Martin Luther

[5] "The word and works of God is quite clear, that women were made either to be wives or prostitutes." — Martin Luther

Here he is on Jews (truncated):

[6]“What shall we Christians do with this rejected and condemned people, the Jews? First, to set fire to their synagogues or schools and to bury and cover with dirt whatever will not burn. Second, I advise that their houses also be razed and destroyed. Third, I advise that all their prayer books and Talmudic writings, in which such idolatry, lies, cursing, and blasphemy are taught, be taken from them."

And here he is on honesty:

[7] "What harm would it do, if a man told a good strong lie for the sake of the good and for the Christian church … a lie out of necessity, a useful lie, a helpful lie, such lies would not be against God, he would accept them." - Martin Luther

Wad he drunk for all of that?
KiMare wrote:
Where did Martin Luther make that statement?
SMile.
I'm guessing Germany - perhaps in a barroom according to your link.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#217523 Mar 7, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
No, Harris is not arguing that at all. You are arguing that.
Harris suggests we may need to consider it moral and ethical to kill some people for something they believe, simply as a response to them believing it.
Then he falsely analogizes that with military combat against Islamic terrorism. Terrorism is not something believed. It is action.
Harris hates religious people. So he attacks religion at the most vulnerable point - Islamic extremism. He suggests the broad principle of killing people for certain beliefs by fabricating a false stepping-off point - combating terrorism.
It's clear and simple.
Here's some more moralizing from Harris:
Sam Harris in 2005: "I am one of the few people I know of who has argued in print that torture may be an ethical necessity in our war on terror."
Sam Harris in 2012: "We should profile Muslims, or anyone who looks like he or she could conceivably be Muslim, and we should be honest about it."
Yes, if you bothered to read Harris' entire passage, that's what he's arguing. You're just lying about it because the dishonesty you spout supports your belief system.

Yeah, I've repeatedly disagreed w/Harris' 2005 argument, in its entirety on these forums.

Have you even read the entire passages you quote from?

It really sounds like you haven't read the "propositions" passage in context. You keep garbling it.

Anyways, I still want what you're smoking.

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#217524 Mar 7, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Good rebuttal as always
Thanks, man.
OG Kush

Jacksonville, FL

#217525 Mar 7, 2014
virtuanna wrote:
<quoted text>It's supposed to be symbolic of "becoming one" in body and spirit with Jesus.
If we're all 'gods children'... what's so special about Jesus et. al.?

Gods?

Pick one, pick all.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_in_Buddhis...

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_in_Judaism

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_in_Islam

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_in_Hinduis...

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_in_Christi...

There appears be a one in five chance the anointed worshiper has the been indoctrinated into the wrong organized superstition and a entirely different heaven or paradise awaits.

It's a shame these gods don't have a 'sacred lottery' scratch off ticket for this clever multiple salvation choice.

"I turned to speak to God, about the world's despair; But to make bad matters worse, I found God wasn't there." ~Robert Frost

"Forgive, O Lord, my little joke on Thee and I'll forgive Thy great big one on me." ~Robert Frost

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#217526 Mar 7, 2014
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, if you bothered to read Harris' entire passage, that's what he's arguing. You're just lying about it because the dishonesty you spout supports your belief system.
Yeah, I've repeatedly disagreed w/Harris' 2005 argument, in its entirety on these forums.
Have you even read the entire passages you quote from?
It really sounds like you haven't read the "propositions" passage in context. You keep garbling it.
Anyways, I still want what you're smoking.
You are hung up on "propositions". It's about belief. He is addressing propositions "believed", not just propositions.

He is advocating killing people for their beliefs before they act on them.

It is not a proposition found to be acceptable in most places. Certainly not in the west, and certainly not in the war on terrorism.

It is also not a popular position he takes when he blames Jews for the Holocaust.

Do you sense a pattern?

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#217527 Mar 7, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
You have no grasp of how to discuss this subject.
Harris' premise relies totally on the absence of actions. He would not need to bother to convince us that actions can justify killing. He asserts the case for thought and beliefs justifying killing. That is his only point.
You do not understand the distinctions between killing for belief (Harris) and killing terrorists (my position). Maybe it would help you understand if you thought of it as our troops shooting a Nazi soldier on the battlefield in WWII when the soldier had not personally killed anyone.
I hope this helps you.
Hi, welcome. New to reading? Let's look at the quote in a slightly larger context and ignore the entire paragraph that I posted before where Harris goes into detail about beliefs and behavior.

"The link between belief and behavior raises the stakes considerably. Some propositions are so dangerous that it may even be ethical to kill people for believing them. This may seem an extraordinary claim, but it merely enunciates an ordinary fact about the world in which we live. Certain beliefs place their adherents beyond the reach of every peaceful means of persuasion, while inspiring them to commit acts of extraordinary violence against others."

For the slow of mind, the 5th word is "behavior."

Now turn to the last sentence, where Harris links "certain beliefs" to "acts of extraordinary violence..."

Did you do a lot of drugs in my absence? I've never seen worse reading comprehension from you. This is like explaining to an angry child how to cross the street.

What's the matter?

Don wanna!!!

Don't want to?

Don wanna!!!

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#217528 Mar 7, 2014
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
hahaha! The "science" of Intelligent Design!
You were utterly unable to answer my argument, and unable to show that:
1) ID has a theoretical framework (their own website explains that they don't, despite you claiming over and over that they do - and you were entirely unable to provide it, regardless of your grandiose claims).
2) ID is more than a simple inference based on false deductions. You were entirely incapable of explaining why ID is preferable to natural selection as an explanatory hypothesis. Your best was "because it really looks designed!" which is a joke, a ridiculously impoverished understanding of biological science and a pathetic plea for your theistic belief system.
It's cute, your presentation of our argument.
Here we go.

1. "their own website" Intelligent Design does not have a website.

2. I provided the theoretical framework - multiple times - you just didn't like it.

3. Intelligent design accepts natural selection, and does not claim to be "preferable to natural selection".

4. I have never once, in my life, offered "because it looks designed" as a reason for anything. You are lying.

4 major errors, and 4 lies in one post. That's the Hiding I remember.

This is why one does not allow a dishonest opponent to present his argument for him. But thanks for the effort.

If I want someone to lie about me, I'll phone my ex-wife.

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#217529 Mar 7, 2014
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Hi, welcome. New to reading? Let's look at the quote in a slightly larger context and ignore the entire paragraph that I posted before where Harris goes into detail about beliefs and behavior.
"The link between belief and behavior raises the stakes considerably. Some propositions are so dangerous that it may even be ethical to kill people for believing them. This may seem an extraordinary claim, but it merely enunciates an ordinary fact about the world in which we live. Certain beliefs place their adherents beyond the reach of every peaceful means of persuasion, while inspiring them to commit acts of extraordinary violence against others."
For the slow of mind, the 5th word is "behavior."
Now turn to the last sentence, where Harris links "certain beliefs" to "acts of extraordinary violence..."
Did you do a lot of drugs in my absence? I've never seen worse reading comprehension from you. This is like explaining to an angry child how to cross the street.
What's the matter?
Don wanna!!!
Don't want to?
Don wanna!!!
Let's look at the logic of your assertion - that Harris is addressing killing terrorists for their behavior, not killing people preemptively for their beliefs.

Are you ready? I know logic is foreign to you, so I'll make it simple.

If you are correct, why this: "This may seem an extraordinary claim,..."

It would not seem an extraordinary claim to suggest hunting and killing terrorists. We are already doing it. Nearly every western nation endorses it.

What is the "extraordinary claim"?

Do some peer-reviewed research on that while I eat a ham biscuit.

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) 28 min Into The Night 93,275
News American Atheists terminates its president over... 6 hr Duke for Mayor 7
News Scientific, Philosophical Case for God's Existe... Tue Graftedin1 75
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) Apr 14 blacklagoon 3 4,141
News The Anti-Christian Movement Apr 10 blacklagoon 3 11
News Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ... (Jun '17) Apr 9 Wisdom of Ages 6,048
a prayer of salvation for those who are willing Apr 2 blacklagoon 3 35