Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 254880 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.

Since: Jan 11

United States

#193407 Dec 17, 2013
Eagle 12 wrote:
I’m against homosexuals altering the traditional definition of marriage between men and women. A tradition has been in place since the very beginning of mankind.
This opinion has nothing to do with hate. But has everything to do with an established tradition.
That's disgustingly pathetic, even for a Christian.
Thinking

Windsor, UK

#193408 Dec 17, 2013
Same sex marriage becomes legal in England and Wales on March 29th 2014.
I won't feel any less married to my wife after that date. I just don't see what the fuss is.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriag...

71% now support same sex marriage wholeheartedly. Of course, we've still got embarassing backward folks like the islamic community holding the rest of us back but it was ever thus.

Maybe they'll grow up one day.
Eagle 12 wrote:
I’m against homosexuals altering the traditional definition of marriage between men and women. A tradition has been in place since the very beginning of mankind.
This opinion has nothing to do with hate. But has everything to do with an established tradition.

Since: Jan 11

United States

#193409 Dec 17, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Your concession is again accepted, you married bachelor.
I responded to what I thought, or hoped, was a lame joke.

If you need some English lessons, ask the Asian girl.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#193410 Dec 17, 2013
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
The condition of the proof is that "Tide" IS a married bachelor.
That condition is not met, so the conclusion is not sound.
Now there's a condition?

Shit, man.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#193411 Dec 17, 2013
Eagle 12 wrote:
<quoted text>
So you claim, but what we do know he was a Brit. Yes he did produce fraudulent evidence. Was it purposely or overzealousness?
What I find so interesting it took 40 years before this fraudulent evidence was uncovered. This was just one example of botched and fraudulent evidence making it’s way to the mainstream science unchecked.
Your science as you call it was late in it’s awakening, don‘t you think?
I do thank you for bringing up this matter.[tipping hat]
Bah. Fundies just love that one - and they get it wrong every time.

"As early as 1913, David Waterston of King's College London published in Nature his conclusion that the sample consisted of an ape mandible and human skull.[6] Likewise, French paleontologist Marcellin Boule concluded the same thing in 1915. A third opinion from American zoologist Gerrit Smith Miller concluded Piltdown's jaw came from a fossil ape. In 1923, Franz Weidenreich examined the remains and correctly reported that they consisted of a modern human cranium and an orangutan jaw with filed-down teeth." - Wiki.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#193412 Dec 17, 2013
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>Nope.
Marriage is already a concept that will not change if it involves gays.
There will be no conceptual changes to marriage unless same-sex spouses decide to start divorcing or abusing each other as a direct result of gay marriage.
Do you think that's likely to happen?
The conceptual change is from one man, one woman, to something different.

With voting, you walk in and vote. Then more people walk in and vote.

If you don't see the conceptual distinction, you must have your head up your ass.

But hey, MacNuggets, don't let your head being up your ass ruin your day!

Since: Jan 11

United States

#193413 Dec 17, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
"Tide with Beach wrote:
A woman only has the right to marry a woman in some states."
That's a pretty easy sentence to read.
Not so easy to explain.
That damn Topix Atheist! handbook.
LOL

Since: Jan 11

United States

#193415 Dec 17, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
...
There already is equality in marriage rights.
No there isn't.

Would you make the same argument for interracial marriage?

Before interracial marriage was allowed, was there equality in marriage rights?

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#193416 Dec 17, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
You have the right to marry a man. I don't have that right.
THAT is equality.
That's as far from equal as you can get.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#193417 Dec 17, 2013
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
No, not according to me. You're working off your misunderstanding that you've had ample opportunity to correct.
I've done all I can do to tell you what I meant by what I said.
I modified the proof from a conversational form that included a figure of speech into a formal proof. I did that to hopefully avoid this very problem.
The condition of the proof is that Tom, or whoever, IS a married bachelor.
Red herring is off the menu.
Would you like to discuss how this conditional proof can be applied to Bible God?
It can't be applied to anything because it is not a proof.

All it is is a restatement of nonexistence of a married bachelor.

It has no application to Bible God, or anything else.

And that's after you removed the element of self-contradictory description, and changed it to self-contradictory identity.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#193418 Dec 17, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes.
What's gonna happen when two lesbians divorce?
Do they both get to take everything?
Who gets the vaginamony?
Bog, you're stupid.

That'll either be set in the divorce settlement or by the courts. Same as any other divorce.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#193419 Dec 17, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
That doesn't mean there is no proof.
That's the logic you selectively miss.
Aaand we're back to Nessie. And your fallacious argument.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#193420 Dec 17, 2013
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
No there isn't.
Would you make the same argument for interracial marriage?
Before interracial marriage was allowed, was there equality in marriage rights?
No, there was not.

It was for the purpose of keeping the white majority from being contaminated by black persons' blood, and placing them in a position of inferiority by race.

As far as gender, it was equal. You couldn't marry a black woman or man.

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#193421 Dec 17, 2013
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>Trinity Site, White Sands NM, July 16, 1945.
Uh huh.

So you have done some nukes in your back yard to verify that?

Lots of people say God created this universe, and that E=MC^2. Just look around you to see the evidence. They even say you can prove God within yourself.

There was more than E=MC^2 to those bombs. Trinity was not proof, nor was Hiroshima. Those were bombs on this planet. Technological advances using existing material.

Come on, do an experiment yourself to prove that formula. You shouldn't need a nuke. Tell us how you did it.

You are confused about just what is proof. You were blinded by the light of the flash. You don't realize how much circular logic went into those deductions and how much those scientists are like priests.

May I point out how long those megalithic structures and other religion based technologies lasted? They evidently tapped into some source of energy. But none were known to explode in such fashion.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#193422 Dec 17, 2013
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
No there isn't.
Would you make the same argument for interracial marriage?
Before interracial marriage was allowed, was there equality in marriage rights?
Yes, everyone had equality.

I'm sure you won't understand that.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#193423 Dec 17, 2013
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>Bog, you're stupid.
That'll either be set in the divorce settlement or by the courts. Same as any other divorce.
Wait a tic.

If women are always right, what happens when two women disagree?

Since: Jan 11

United States

#193424 Dec 17, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Would you say that non-believers don't believe because it also fills a need?
LOL

You're so funny today.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#193425 Dec 17, 2013
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
I responded to what I thought, or hoped, was a lame joke.
If you need some English lessons, ask the Asian girl.
So I can learn Engrish?

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#193426 Dec 17, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
The conceptual change is from one man, one woman, to something different.
With voting, you walk in and vote. Then more people walk in and vote.
If you don't see the conceptual distinction, you must have your head up your ass.
But hey, MacNuggets, don't let your head being up your ass ruin your day!
That's not even nearly a change in concept. Just a change in participation.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#193427 Dec 17, 2013
River Tam wrote:
<quoted text>
That's as far from equal as you can get.
Why not?

You can't marry a woman.

I can't marry a man.

Tell me how that isn't 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 Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 6 min Knowledge- 11,141
News Why Do Atheists Ridicule Christianity? (May '11) 44 min ChristineM 9,555
News The war on Christmas (Dec '10) 1 hr Reason Personified 4,248
News Revered Artist Was an Atheist Who Rejected God.... 1 hr woodtick57 35
News Speaking for God 1 hr Amused 544
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 3 hr Brian_G 29,391
What is of greater value for humanity: Chrisita... 20 hr Uncle Sam 327
More from around the web