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
214,441 - 214,460 of 226,570 Comments Last updated 36 min ago

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#223356 Apr 6, 2014
BenAdam wrote:
<quoted text>
" I keep my sperm in a jar like sea monkeys." - RR
"Sperm is life but a fetus is not" -BenAssFucked

Since: Sep 10

Long Beach, CA

#223357 Apr 6, 2014
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> Your are demonstrating micro evolution and everybody agrees on that. No different in principal then Jacob controlled breeding of Laban's sheep and goats in Gen. 30.
What's that, Brother Marine?

You better reread your post, and perhaps try again.

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#223358 Apr 6, 2014
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Then you think you have peaches when you see the seedlings sprout.
That's counting chickens by counting eggs.
Or saying you have a car, when all you have is some of the parts.
Nah. All the parts are there, they're just growing, multiplying.

An unfertilized chicken egg, like the ones you buy at the store, are not life. They usually come from farms that only have hens, the eggs don't contain a fetus of any kind.

“Evolved hunter/gatherer”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#223359 Apr 6, 2014
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> Your are demonstrating micro evolution and everybody agrees on that. No different in principal then Jacob controlled breeding of Laban's sheep and goats in Gen. 30.
So?
The challenge was to present empirical evidence of evolution.
I did.
There was no stipulation that it be a particular definition of type of evolution. I asked before providing such empirical evidence.
I also included in my remarks that I have no evidence that evolution can cause one life form to evolve into a completely different species. I also made it clear that the empirical evidence I provided, ONLY showed that changes can be made WITHIN a species.

Learn to read.

“Love much, trust none”

Since: Jul 11

There

#223360 Apr 6, 2014
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> Your are demonstrating micro evolution and everybody agrees on that......
4 billion years of micro-evolution = macro-evolution.

“Love much, trust none”

Since: Jul 11

There

#223361 Apr 6, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
"Sperm is life but a fetus is not" -BenAssFucked
STFU, Pedo !

“Evolved hunter/gatherer”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#223362 Apr 6, 2014
Anon wrote:
<quoted text>
Frankly, that's an act of abject stupidity on the man's part. He's now dead, which will only add to the other person's guilt and depression which led him/her to the tracks in the first place.
Overruled. Pure conjecture.

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#223363 Apr 6, 2014
Aquarius-WY wrote:
I see, so then since it is assumed that the boyfriend/girlfriend scenario is "different" and it is necessary for you to know how and why she came to be on the tracks, changes your "he did not love him" exactly how?
Why do >you< place a condition on it? What could possibly be a logical reason that it is important in order for you to support your claim?
OK, let's say that it is a child and parent with the child on the tracks? How is the parent's self sacrifice not a case of unconditional love.
BTW Einstein, it was >you< who challenged anyone to describe ANY scenario and you would tell why it is not unconditional love.
How is a case where a mother is pushing her child onto the helicopter in an evacuation mission, in a war torn area, not an act of unconditional love when she stays behind, knowing she may well never see her child again?
Make your case on the FIRST scenario to start. You have yet to even attempt it Redneck.
Make THAT case.
Either scenario you posit is selfishness, not unconditional love. It is selfish because the person's own well-being becomes the top priority.

Unconditional love is the love that has no conditions, NO MATTER WHAT. So if a woman's son rapes her, beats her nearly to death after killing his own father and siblings, that mother would still love her son. Not happenin. There's always a condition to love.

“Evolved hunter/gatherer”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#223364 Apr 6, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
No shit, Homie Claus. You have unwittingly made my argument for me.
Horseshit Redneck.
You said that a sperm cell is NOT life.
Up ^there^ you claim that you did not.

Explain why the first scenario, the boyfriend/girlfriend scenario, is not a case of unconditional love.

“Evolved hunter/gatherer”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#223365 Apr 6, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Nah. All the parts are there, they're just growing, multiplying.
An unfertilized chicken egg, like the ones you buy at the store, are not life. They usually come from farms that only have hens, the eggs don't contain a fetus of any kind.
uuuuuuuummmmm
Not entirely true.
The latest is to promote fertilized eggs, as they contain nutrients which the unfertilized egg does not contain.

Is a fertilized chicken egg ... life?

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#223366 Apr 6, 2014
BenAdam wrote:
STFU, Pedo !
Pedo?!
Anon

Lakewood, OH

#223367 Apr 6, 2014
Aquarius-WY wrote:
<quoted text>
Overruled. Pure conjecture.
You can't overrule reality with idealism. Not everything has a Hollywood ending...

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#223368 Apr 6, 2014
BenAdam wrote:
STFU, Pedo !
"I like to avoid discussion by calling people erroneous names" -BenAssFucked.

Since: Apr 09

Elmont, Long Island NY

#223369 Apr 6, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
My only argument with you on this post, which I mostly agree with, is that "a life", as being a human life, doesn't begin until 12 weeks after conception. I believe that "a life" begins at the moment of conception.
The key word is BELIEVE.

You believe that "a life" begins at conception.

others believe that while a fertilized egg is alive, it isn't yet a sentient human life form.

Both sides have their arguments, their talking points and valid points. Since when does a fertilized egg, zygote, blastocyst, embryo, fetus become a human life is subjective and dependent on one's religion and or opinion shouldn't Americans be free to act based on their belief?

why should one's religion dictate what others can do?

Once a baby is born, there is no disputing that fact, the baby is free of its mother and an independent being.

“Evolved hunter/gatherer”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#223370 Apr 6, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
It matters. If she was on the train tracks because she wanted to end her life, and her man saved her and sacrificed himself instead, that was selfishness, not unconditional love.
Why was she on the tracks?
Giving up your life to save another is an act of selfishness?

<rolls eyes>

“Love much, trust none”

Since: Jul 11

There

#223371 Apr 6, 2014
Aquarius-WY wrote:
<quoted text>
Horseshit Redneck.
You said that a sperm cell is NOT life.
Up ^there^ you claim that you did not.
Explain why the first scenario, the boyfriend/girlfriend scenario, is not a case of unconditional love.
RR can't keep track of his stories. He is a pathological liar.

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#223372 Apr 6, 2014
Aquarius-WY wrote:

Horseshit Redneck.
You said that a sperm cell is NOT life.
Up ^there^ you claim that you did not.
Explain why the first scenario, the boyfriend/girlfriend scenario, is not a case of unconditional love.
No. That's not what I said.

A sperm cell is living, but it is not "a life", no more than a skin cell us "a life".

The boyfriend that saved his suicidal girlfriend's life by pushing her off the train tracks and was killed by the train in her stead is an example of an act of selfishness. Now the girlfriend has to live with not only her suicidal thoughts, but the fact that the man she loved is dead. The man did not think of her, he thought of himself. Self-sacrifice is not unconditional love.

Humans cannot posses a love without a condition.

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#223373 Apr 6, 2014
Aquarius-WY wrote:
<quoted text>
Since when is being "self conscious" a requirement to be human?
Is an adult comatose human "alive"? Is it a human life?
Does a human patient mysteriously become non-human the instant an induced coma is introduced?
Your claim of what constitutes a human life is ridiculous.
From as legal standing the fetus is never a person, it's rights are centered around the mother.
But scientifically it becomes developed enough to be conscious or an individual entity.
Here's the proof..



"Is an adult comatose human "alive"? Is it a human life?"
"Does a human patient mysteriously become non-human the instant an induced coma is introduced?"

A comatose person is still alive and still an entity but is an unconscious entity, and there is the possibility that person will regain consciousness and of course they are still alive rather than being dead. Comatose is much like sleeping , and there is a scale of coma to describe the level of consciousness.

http://www.trauma.org/archive/scores/gcs.html

As opposed to a very low score or vegetate state that requires the person to be connected to machines to stay alive, after a year is considered at that point the person is in a persistent vegetative state and consciousness may no longer be retrievable.
Which basically at this point a doctor may qualify the person is no longer an entity but should be allowed to die.

But here we are talking about an entity and taking away that status rather than giving it it that value due to development. Do you consider a person on life support for a year with severe brain injury and shows no sign of consciousness to still be a conscious being? Now as long as there is some sign of consciousness there maybe hope but at some point we let that hope go and just allow a person to die , rather than waste away in a dismal non existent state of consciousness. However this is much harder to define than when a entity has gained consciousness.

“Love much, trust none”

Since: Jul 11

There

#223374 Apr 6, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
.... There's always a condition to love.
I feel so sorry for you. Your life must be a living Hell.

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#223375 Apr 6, 2014
Aquarius-WY wrote:
uuuuuuuummmmm
Not entirely true.
The latest is to promote fertilized eggs, as they contain nutrients which the unfertilized egg does not contain.
Is a fertilized chicken egg ... life?
The latest? The latest what?

Yes, a fertilized chicken egg is life, just as a human female's fertilized egg is life.

Most eggs you buy at the store are not from free roam ranches, where hens and roosters live together. Most are from egg farmers that keep hens separate from the roosters, so their eggs are never fertilized.

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 to Defeat Religion by 2038 (Apr '12) 1 hr Dak-Original 21,530
Why Do Atheists Ridicule Christianity? (May '11) 7 hr Thinking 5,921
The Ultimate Evidence of God 11 hr James 68
The myth of the angry atheist 23 hr _Bad Company 3
Our world came from nothing? Mon Patrick 436
It seems there are more Atheists in the Christi... (Jun '13) Mon Patrick 13
Atheists forgetting the meaning of freedom Sat religionislies 58
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

Atheism People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••