Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 239529 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.

“cdesign proponentsists”

Since: Jul 09

Pittsburgh, PA

#146346 Jan 1, 2013
wilderide wrote:
<quoted text>
"Nanny government" is whenever something you like is regulated. Conservatives give alot of lip service about getting government out of everyone's lives, yet want an enormous military to go global policing with. They also like the idea of the government regulating their often restrictive views on morality on everyone else. But God forbid anyone try and add a waiting period before they can buy a gun.
Now we are getting conservatism and liberalism in the mix?

I do believe that the federal government should not be in our daily lives and I believe that our military should be pulled back and out of other countries, unless of course we are there by there request. A friend should help a friend, most of the time.

Morality is based on the society in which you live, so while I do not believe that it is the governments right or responsibility to dictate morality, it still has to make laws on morality. Such as, Americans, in general, do not believe that we can kill our daughters for dishonoring the family. It seems that some nations are quite OK with this practice. What do we do? Do we make a law against murder or do we say that each individual has the right to their own morals.

If you believe that honor killing is morally right, then you are pissed that the government is dictating your morality. But if you believe that murder is wrong, then you want to live in a society that punishes murders.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#146347 Jan 1, 2013
wilderide wrote:
<quoted text>
And the police.
England would disagree with you.

Just sayin.

“ Knight Of Hyrule”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#146348 Jan 1, 2013
WesTheDuck wrote:
<quoted text>
Once again - your argument is flawed. Something's intent is not defined by how people use it (as I said - many people use books to prop things up. Doesn't mean books are made to do that, does it?). It is defined what the people who make it make it to do. Guns are made to harm.
Gun makers do not establish intent in civilian guns , unless they are specifically marketed as such.

For instance the mini 14 ranch rifle is marketed as a ranch target/ hunting /personal defense rifle. They make a target version and a tactical version.

The tactical version you could establish as a military/police style who's purpose and intent is to hurt people.
The other no.

Precision on the Range, at the Ranch, on Patrol or in the Woods. For decades, Ruger® Mini-14® rifles and Mini Thirty® rifles have been the choice for applications ranging from the farm and ranch, to the deep woods, to personal defense. Their short barrels and overall short length make them favorites in any application where maneuverability and ease of handling are priorities. With a variety of configurations from the standard Ranch Rifle, to the extremely accurate Mini-14® Target Rifle, to the Tactical models with ATI folding stock or compact barrel with flash suppressor - there is a Mini-14 or Mini Thirty to meet any demand.

Mini-14 or Mini Thirty to meet any demand.

Clearly one is made with the intent you claim , but only that one.

http://www.ruger.com/products/mini14/index.ht...

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#146349 Jan 1, 2013
WesTheDuck wrote:
<quoted text>
Few problems with the 2nd Amendment.
First, it was very likely intended for military. Not civilians. If the Founding Fathers wanted everyone to have the right to bear arms, they would have mentioned it in another, separate amendment. This is why for 200 years after the founding of our nation, it WASN'T considered a right to own a gun. Not until the mid 20th century.
Second, when it was written the only "arms" people had were inaccurate, single shot rifles. Using it as a standard for all modern weaponry is obviously outdated.
Owning something that has such a capability of damage should be a privilege. Not a right.
Let's not forget the large stake the weapons manufacturers have in this debate.

They made a killing (pun intended) on assault weapon sales after Sandy Hook.

That's because people KNEW that this could be the fatal blow to assault weapons.

Look at the spike in assault weapon sales after Obama was elected.

These are not rational people, but the manufacturers and dealers are making a killing (pun intended again) on their paranoia.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#146350 Jan 1, 2013
wilderide wrote:
<quoted text>
See? We agree.:)
Stranger things have happened......

:)

“ Knight Of Hyrule”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#146351 Jan 1, 2013
WesTheDuck wrote:
<quoted text>
Why should I?
America is my home. I want what is best for my home. You know - like a patriot.
Patriots do not try to change freedom, they defend it. Don't call yourself one clearly you are not!

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#146352 Jan 1, 2013
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
You changed from "intended" to "designed".
Try to be consistent.
Guns, except for purpose built, high precision, competition guns, are DESIGNED to kill.
They may well be, and are, bought for entirely different INTENDED purposes, such as plinking or target shooting.
But that in no way changes the fact that they are DESIGNED for killing.
And assault weapons, regardless of their INTENDED use, are DESIGNED for killing as many people in as little time as possible.
Guns are designed to fire a projectile.

Guns are intended to fire a projectile.

Period.

What one shoots the projectile at is not the design or intent of the gun.

Period.

“ Knight Of Hyrule”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#146353 Jan 1, 2013
WesTheDuck wrote:
<quoted text>
Few problems with the 2nd Amendment.
First, it was very likely intended for military. Not civilians. If the Founding Fathers wanted everyone to have the right to bear arms, they would have mentioned it in another, separate amendment. This is why for 200 years after the founding of our nation, it WASN'T considered a right to own a gun. Not until the mid 20th century.
Second, when it was written the only "arms" people had were inaccurate, single shot rifles. Using it as a standard for all modern weaponry is obviously outdated.
Owning something that has such a capability of damage should be a privilege. Not a right.
So you are a self proclaimed civics professor , I think not!

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#146354 Jan 1, 2013
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
I bet you stuck out your tongue when you hit the "post" button.
lol

Thumbs in my ears, saying "neener neener neener!"

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#146355 Jan 1, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm all for gun registration, proper ownership & use. I don't know why you're preaching to the choir....
Your argument is that guns are made for killing, I say you're wrong.
A gun isn't made for killing no more than a car is.
Do you know what a neutron star is?

The reason I ask is...

Oh, never mind.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#146356 Jan 1, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
If we outlaw guns, then only outlaws wil have guns.
Reduced to quoting bumper stickers.

Perfect.
Anon

Lakewood, OH

#146357 Jan 1, 2013
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course not. Not without a legitimate purpose and all the proper credentials.
But I fail to see your point.
What exactly is it?
Oh, so now you would deny my right to recreational TNT?:)

“In the beginning God Created..”

Since: Feb 12

Southern Illinois

#146358 Jan 1, 2013
Richardfs wrote:
<quoted text>
For once I agree with you but the laws here are A LOT tougher than you realise:-
1. You can only own a gun/s if you are a member of a gun club.
2. The gun/s must to be stored at the gun club.
3. Professional shooters can store their guns at home BUT the guns and ammo (and I think the bolts as well ) have to be store in separate locked safes.
4. Dumb-dumbs and AP are just out right banned.
5. All military 'style' weapons banned.
6. Saw off barrels banned.
7. Fully auto banned no matter the clip size
8. Silencers banned
Anything out side of this can get you jail time.
Does it stop people killing each; no but it does make it difficult.
That's a bit too stringent for me.

What about bows and crossbows?

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#146359 Jan 1, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
When it comes to making idiotic statements, it's very close between you and Pattiecake.
I think she wins.
But you come very, very close.
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.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#146360 Jan 1, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
What about ole Bobblow?
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.

“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!

“ Knight Of Hyrule”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#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.

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) 16 min Zog Has-fallen 19,106
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 19 min woodtick57 7,520
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 25 min thetruth 2,223
News Atheists' problem with the Bible (Sep '09) 2 hr Pete-o 7,504
News Phil Robertson talks against Atheists 13 hr Rosa_Winkel 134
News New Atheism's fatal arrogance: The glaring inte... 20 hr Knowledge- 6
News Richard Dawkins insists he's not an angry athei... Fri Thinking 2
More from around the web