Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 256124 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.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#146361 Jan 1, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
"guns were quite obviously created for one purpose - KILLING"
Are you sure?
I think guns were created as a more efficient means of launching projectiles.
Where that projectile went is irrelevant to WHY the first gun was made.
I may have to retract that last post.

“I am but a humble duck.”

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#146362 Jan 1, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
I know.
Your argument should be:
Guns can be weapons.
My argument is what it is. You haven't convinced me that they aren't weapons yet because you haven't convinced me that a gun isn't something designed or used for inflicting bodily harm.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#146363 Jan 1, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> Patriots do not try to change freedom, they defend it. Don't call yourself one clearly you are not!
Nice!

Three-points!

“Wrath”

Since: Dec 10

Is revenant

#146364 Jan 1, 2013
wilderide wrote:
<quoted text>
Come on, give us all a break. A car is not designed to be a weapon. A gun is. It's really that simple.
Again you are establishing a singular intent where more terms and intents apply. Can you say the same about airplanes when the first sale of an airplane was to the Army who had a military intent.

So since the military has used the airplane since its conception to kill people you have to define airplane=weapon.
Islamist use commercial airplanes as weapons .

Airplanes were designed to be weapons.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#146365 Jan 1, 2013
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
Reduced to quoting bumper stickers.
Perfect.
God made man. Sam Colt made them equal.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#146366 Jan 1, 2013
Eagle12 wrote:
<quoted text>
That's a bit too stringent for me.
What about bows and crossbows?
Bows and crossbows aren't designed to kill, they'll say.......

“Wrath”

Since: Dec 10

Is revenant

#146367 Jan 1, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
"guns were quite obviously created for one purpose - KILLING"
Are you sure?
I think guns were created as a more efficient means of launching projectiles.
Where that projectile went is irrelevant to WHY the first gun was made.
To get dinner and defend oneself period.
Of course everything that can be used to kill other people with...will be used to kill other people.
That's just how people are......

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#146368 Jan 1, 2013
TheBlackSheep wrote:
<quoted text>
If you argue that firearms were only intended to kill and that is why we should not have them, then TNT was intended for removing stumps and boulders; why can't I buy TNT? I can buy gallons of gasoline! No one blinks an eye at that! How much damage is done with gasoline vs. TNT?
What gun control folks want to do is demonize firearms, demonize anyone who wants to own one, and will use any definition or reason to do so, ignore anything to the contrary.
I know that there are a number of ex-military on here and they all sacrificed part of their lives to preserve our rights. Owning firearms is a right.
Driving a car is not a right. Cars have killed far more than civilians with firearms. Can cars only do the posted speed limit? Damn few are even talking about making that happen.
If you care about life, I would start with the top killer.
Your argument seems bass ackwards to me.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#146369 Jan 1, 2013
River Tam wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not sure what Bobblah writes. I've only read one of his posts. That was all I needed and I'm still not sure what it said.
foreverandever?

“I am but a humble duck.”

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#146370 Jan 1, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> Patriots do not try to change freedom, they defend it. Don't call yourself one clearly you are not!
Patriots are people who love, support, and defend their country.

I am trying to defend my country from itself.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#146371 Jan 1, 2013
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
RR uses capitals and punctuation.
I think we have to give him credit for that.
And, he has a slightly better opinion of gays.
But that's as far as I'll go.
Stop it.

You're getting all mushy.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#146372 Jan 1, 2013
WesTheDuck wrote:
<quoted text>
My argument is what it is. You haven't convinced me that they aren't weapons yet because you haven't convinced me that a gun isn't something designed or used for inflicting bodily harm.

Make up your mind....

"designed to inflict bodily harm"
"used to inflict bodily harm"

Which is it?

Any number of items can be used for the latter.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#146373 Jan 1, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Tazers *can* be lethal.
Bean bag guns *can* be lethal.
Assault rifles *can* be lethal.
OFFS.

“Wrath”

Since: Dec 10

Is revenant

#146374 Jan 1, 2013
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
You are getting desperate.
Ever hear the story that you can't get wounded by an M16?
We were told in training that the bullet was designed to be unstable and that once it entered flesh it started tumbling which caused major damage to multiple organs and massive blood loss.
Sounds kinda lethal to me.
So now you're trying to dance around the whole weapon thing by claiming that an assault weapon is not a LETHAL weapon.
Seriously?
A tazer is not a lethal weapon.
A bean bag gun is not a lethal weapon.
An assault rifle is a lethal weapon.
No you are skirting the issue that military tactics are in fact to wound and not kill
so you take 3 people out the fight.

That is the criteria of the design of an assault rifle.

I also said they can quite efficiently kill, but you asked intent
the intent is to wound.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#146375 Jan 1, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> To get dinner and defend oneself period.
Of course everything that can be used to kill other people with...will be used to kill other people.
That's just how people are......
Yup.

Hands kill people.

Hands were designed.

Hands are weapons.

ugh

What's wrong with these people?

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#146376 Jan 1, 2013
Anon wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, so now you would deny my right to recreational TNT?:)
I would NEVER do that.

Blowing shit up is cool!

“I am but a humble duck.”

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#146377 Jan 1, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Again you are establishing a singular intent where more terms and intents apply. Can you say the same about airplanes when the first sale of an airplane was to the Army who had a military intent.
So since the military has used the airplane since its conception to kill people you have to define airplane=weapon.
Islamist use commercial airplanes as weapons .
Airplanes were designed to be weapons.
"Airplane" is a vague and broad term.

Some airplanes are meant to be used as weapons. Some are meant for transportation. Whether or not something is a weapon depends on its design. Guns, at least the ones which I (and many others) want restrictions on, are very obviously weapons. Some guns are not weapons (for example - a flare gun or a gun designed for competitions), however, most are designed with an intent to do as much damage as possible.

“I am but a humble duck.”

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#146378 Jan 1, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Make up your mind....
"designed to inflict bodily harm"
"used to inflict bodily harm"
Which is it?
Any number of items can be used for the latter.
Designed to be used to cause bodily harm.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#146379 Jan 1, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Again you are establishing a singular intent where more terms and intents apply. Can you say the same about airplanes when the first sale of an airplane was to the Army who had a military intent.
So since the military has used the airplane since its conception to kill people you have to define airplane=weapon.
Islamist use commercial airplanes as weapons .
Airplanes were designed to be weapons.
Actually, airplanes original intent in the military was surveillance.

After a while, the pilots started to use their pistols to shoot at the enemy on the ground and then they started dropping bombs, by hand, out of the open cockpit.

"Airplanes are interesting toys but of no military value."
- Marshal Ferdinand Foch [Professor of Strategy, Ecole Superieure de Guerre](circa 1911)
He was Supreme Commander of Allied forces, 1918

"Aviation is good for sport, but for the Army it is useless!"
- Marshal Ferdinand Foch

Since: Sep 10

Hermosa Beach, CA

#146380 Jan 1, 2013
River Tam wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not sure what Bobblah writes. I've only read one of his posts. That was all I needed and I'm still not sure what it said.
That's why I missed Bobblah.

I scroll right past.

Just Results, same thing.

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) 1 min One way or another 40,831
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 7 min Bob of Quantum-Faith 16,390
Good arguments against Christianity 1 hr IB DaMann 114
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 2 hr _Susan_ 20,624
A Universe from Nothing? 2 hr Eagle 12 99
News Atheism Destroyed with One Scientific Question 3 hr par five 4
For Atheists: Why do You Call Theories "Scient... 3 hr NightSerf 276
More from around the web