Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

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. Full Story

“cdesign proponentsists”

Since: Jul 09

Pittsburgh, PA

#147172 Jan 4, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, on a plane firing a weapon such as a gun is suicidal. Had they been armed it would have resulted in nearly identical results anyway.
FYI: http://kwc.org/mythbusters/2004/01/mythbuster...

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#147173 Jan 4, 2013
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
I guess you're pretty clueless as to what a bullet will do to a pressurized aircraft, eh?
While its not like what they depict in movies, with everybody getting sucked out the windows, it would entail oxygen masks and emergency descent at best.
I'm pretty sure air Marshalls use a light load and frangible rounds.
I sure as hell don't want some redneck yahoo with the brains of a tick carrying a loaded weapon aboard any plane I'm on.
Rapid depressurization of an enclosed structure alters it's weight very quickly. The wings of a jet are designed for a specific weight, with some variance but not that much. It would put stress on the wings as well as push the craft into a tailspin or barrel roll, the escaping gas has the same force as a small jet engine. A barrel roll would snap both wings off, because of the changing weight. Then you also have a deformation of the fuselage, which would shift the air currents around it causing even more erratic movement. Of course all of this depends on the size and location of the hole created, but you get the idea, it's a lot of variables and very few golden scenarios.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#147174 Jan 4, 2013
TheBlackSheep wrote:
There are other factors to consider, as I said in the precious post, few golden scenarios. I wasn't talking about people being "sucked" out either. ;)

“cdesign proponentsists”

Since: Jul 09

Pittsburgh, PA

#147175 Jan 4, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
There are other factors to consider, as I said in the precious post, few golden scenarios. I wasn't talking about people being "sucked" out either. ;)
No worries! Just putting information out there.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#147176 Jan 4, 2013
http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Ossuary-ho...

Disproven. Sad that you that naive! What next you gonna bring up the shroud of Turin?

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahah a!

You should remain silent and let people ponder your idiocy rater than open your mouth and remove all doubt.
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Disproven?
Oh, because you say so?

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#147177 Jan 4, 2013
TheBlackSheep wrote:
<quoted text>
No worries! Just putting information out there.
Funny thing, did you notice my typo. I have started laughing about it and I can't stop now.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#147178 Jan 4, 2013
For the dozenth time Josephus and Tacitus among several others. Yes te same two guys Christians love to use as secular historians for Jesus also wrote about Hercules and they wrote much more about Hercules and on greater detail.

Again these are Jewish historians who did not worship the Hellenistic gods and both verify Hercules.

Not opinion. Fact.

Oh and you can't use the argument that people today still worship Jesus because you already totally discounted the temples and statues built for Hercules by worshippers of him as proof that he existed so naturally we will hold Jesus to the same standard.

So all things judged equally we have by far more historical proof for Hercules than we have for Jesus.
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Then present it...

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#147179 Jan 4, 2013
Why don't you learn English you ignorant c@cks@cker?

And wipe your chin.
SCIENCEandRELIGION EVIL wrote:
<quoted text>Why don't you Religious nut cases talk about what those evil scientist is doing this planet and You MAd Scientist talk about what the religious is doing to world.

“cdesign proponentsists”

Since: Jul 09

Pittsburgh, PA

#147180 Jan 4, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Funny thing, did you notice my typo. I have started laughing about it and I can't stop now.
I am very dyslexic! I can barely spell 'typo'!:) I am going to look though!

“cdesign proponentsists”

Since: Jul 09

Pittsburgh, PA

#147181 Jan 4, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Funny thing, did you notice my typo. I have started laughing about it and I can't stop now.
I t is great that you are secure enough to laugh at yourself! But I cannot find the typo.:(
KJV

United States

#147182 Jan 4, 2013
BobEasy wrote:
<quoted text>Exactly right. At least someone gets it!
"jack13 wrote:
<quoted text> You're right on! Before people starts to claim athiests have "faith", they should look up the word "faith." "

Merriam - Webster

Faith : firm belief in something for which there is no proof.

be·lieve:
1 a : to have a firm religious faith
b : to accept something as true

athe·ist: one who believes that there is no deity

re·li·gion:
: commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
2 : a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices

Atheist is a religion.
They even have their own church.

"Posted else where by derek4

From: The Columbus Dispatch:

February 4, 2011

Church, without God

“Stan Bradley likes Bible stories, admires Martin Luther and uses expressions such as 'heavens, no.'

The Lithopolis man is president of a local congregation and rarely misses a Sunday service. Occasionally, he goes to his wife's church instead.

For these and other reasons, Bradley considers himself religious.”

He is also an atheist.

continued:

“Like Bradley, some atheists participate in organized religion for its social and psychological benefits.”

continued:

“Churches are great places to find friends, support and youth education, so nonbelievers and believers alike join congregations to fill those needs, he said.

He has spoken to elderly and sick people who can no longer go to church and they say they most miss the feeling of community.

Recent research from Harvard University and the University of Wisconsin backs him up. It found that religious people tend to be happier than nonreligious people, not because of belief but because of the friendships found at church.”
http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/faith...

“religious people tend to be happier than nonreligious people”[I have said this all along, and my posts are still on the board to confirm it. Now you hear it straight from the atheist, lol.]"

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#147183 Jan 4, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey you are the on who claimed a gun kept YOU safe. Not your children or anyone elses children but YOU, you selfish moron.
We were talking about MURDER weapons, not common sense.
It is not common sense to point a loaded weapon designed to kill people at a childs head and pull the trigger, that does not stop guns being used in that way but it is most certainly not common sense
That is so typical of a MURDER weapon lover to fall back on citing common sense precautions as the reason he owns a gun. What total bollocks - you own a gun because you are a weak minded moron who wants to feel like a big macho man.
Its not that I dislike guns, they have their place in the military and even when adequately monitored in official security situations (but even that fail as is shown by the Swiss murder statistics).
What I do dislike is the morons like you who make false claims (something you do often) about what you are unwilling to consider. Those ignorant morons who see guns as a comfort in the arms race they call their life
Life has much more to offer than living in fear of some dickhead like you having a mental breakdown and shooting someones children.
What bothers you is that someone of relative insignificance could in fact blow your head clean off.

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#147184 Jan 4, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope but it will get rid of children being murdered with guns
In fact it would not , but it would reduce your ability to do anything about it.

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#147185 Jan 4, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes its true, people can flip their lid whether they are armed or not
The difference is that if you flip you lid when you are not armed then you cant shoot people.
If you are determined to kill someone then you have to get close and personal to do it and it is also true that not so many people are capable of doing that even when the perp is mentally disturbed
Are you willing to discuss this in the terms of Sudan or Somalia?

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#147186 Jan 4, 2013
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
Really?
Is that the level of paranoia you live with every day?
That's sad.
No but it is the level of reality you should consider.

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#147187 Jan 4, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no argument for Britain, guns are highly regulated, ownership of handguns is illegal, even for sporting purposes.
However this more or less ties in with the middle America babble belt theme
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-BmJ0sd4XzTA/UBGlpDV...
With the added huntin, shootin n fishin further up north
And this one correlates the number of gun deaths
http://cdn.thedailybeast.com/content/dailybea...
And the babble belt
http://cdn.theatlanticcities.com/img/upload/2...
Not an exact match but pretty close
But you continue to murder each other, you only have reduce the means. As an added bonus you have no ability to resist anything I could take over your country by politics alone , you effectively eliminated any opposition outside Parliament.
This means you have NO CHOICE AND no ability to resist.

Wise flew out the window. America will give up its power, when you pry it from it's cold dead ........

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#147188 Jan 4, 2013
NightSerf wrote:
<quoted text>
TNT, along with other explosives, is a very useful substance, but it is also too dangerous in the hands of the untrained and unskilled to allow unlicensed personnel to have access to it. Nor are there any non-industrial uses for it that I can think of. Firearms are less dangerous and more useful for the general population and can be used effectively with far less training. They are also the weapons of choice when crimes are being committed, and homicide rates tend to be lower for societies in which they are less available.
It all comes back to the basic tradeoff between security and personal freedom. I tend to lean more toward the latter, which is why I dislike many of the provisions of the so-called Patriot Act. I don't own any firearms, but I'm comfortable with the fact that many of my friends and acquaintances do and that some have carry permits. But it does make sense to clearly define where the line between the two is drawn.
Good move or face the will of majority that said...Don't tread on me....

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#147189 Jan 4, 2013
Eagle12 wrote:
Give a boy a squirt gun.
And he will shoot the girls on the nipples every time.
Squirt guns dont shoot girls on their nipples.
Boys do.
Hey you talk like girls don't like a titty too?

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#147190 Jan 4, 2013
NightSerf wrote:
<quoted text>
I am not against the ownership and proper use of firearms, but sloppy thinking about the issue does not help to define what is proper and what is not. You seem to be projecting a hypothesis on me that I have never articulated. Protest sign? Where did you get that? Calling a fire arm a "device for delivering a projectile to a target at high speed" is a diversionary semantic tactic. You own belief in peace through superior firepower show that you don't really define them that way either.
There is a difference between force and violence, and force, even deadly force, is sometimes, but rarely, a necessary response to violence. Peace does not come about because of superior firepower but because most people prefer peace over violent conflict. That's why the homicide rate in the U.S., while higher than Canada or the U.K., is still quite low--4.8 per 100,000 in 2010. With or without guns, we could all kill others if we chose to do so. All but an incredibly tiny minority choose not to. smaller but still overwhelming majorities choose not to victimize others in any way at all. Peace comes from that choice, not firepower.
Your opinion is noted , peace as always come from a superior vantage point unless you did surrender.

Fuckwits like you in fact would surrender at the sight of death .
But patriots would in fact give you the freedom to even type your words now.

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#147191 Jan 4, 2013
NightSerf wrote:
<quoted text>
I am not against the ownership and proper use of firearms, but sloppy thinking about the issue does not help to define what is proper and what is not. You seem to be projecting a hypothesis on me that I have never articulated. Protest sign? Where did you get that? Calling a fire arm a "device for delivering a projectile to a target at high speed" is a diversionary semantic tactic. You own belief in peace through superior firepower show that you don't really define them that way either.
There is a difference between force and violence, and force, even deadly force, is sometimes, but rarely, a necessary response to violence. Peace does not come about because of superior firepower but because most people prefer peace over violent conflict. That's why the homicide rate in the U.S., while higher than Canada or the U.K., is still quite low--4.8 per 100,000 in 2010. With or without guns, we could all kill others if we chose to do so. All but an incredibly tiny minority choose not to. smaller but still overwhelming majorities choose not to victimize others in any way at all. Peace comes from that choice, not firepower.
The proper method of discharging an automatic weapon , is the preferred enemy combatant designated by the UNITED SATES GOVERNMENT. Or do you protest this determination?
Just move along if your gonna die, your gonna die.

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
Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038 (Apr '12) 1 hr Dak-Original 22,293
Becoming a parent changed everything. 1 hr Reason Personified 17
Our world came from nothing? 2 hr Reason Personified 479
The problem of evil and hate (Oct '13) 4 hr Patrick 332
Respecting belief: why should you? And why shou... 4 hr Patrick 14
Atheist Babies 4 hr Patrick 39
How much faith it takes to believe in Evolution. 4 hr Patrick 194
•••

Atheism People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••