Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 258484 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: May 10

Location hidden

#194015 Dec 19, 2013
Outrage wrote:
<quoted text>

Ok Southern Boy,I'm in agreement with what u just said,your right about Hillary,but look at red nose cocaine Billy the Hope Arkansas Kid at the same time,both are a pos,don't give a rats ass,queers are perverts,that's the truth!Have a nice day you bunch of MORONS
Thanks. Always good to hear from the moderates.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#194016 Dec 19, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks for the lead. I found this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =KdocQHsPCNMXX
I'm also a Ricky Gervais and Eddie Izzard fan, and on the more serious side, Brian Cox.
Do you know of the late Bill Hicks?
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
No, but if you hum a few bars I'll try to pick it up.
Outrage

Texarkana, TX

#194017 Dec 19, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
I would have expected you to offer a few of those reasons without being asked.since I doubt that you merely want us to know that you reject such a notion, but might also like to see others do the same for whatever your reasons are.
<quoted text>
You seem to consider it inappropriate to use the power of calling hate hate even when the claim has merit. Why?
It ain't necessarily so,I wish you weren't necessarily so!
Thinking

Merthyr Tydfil, UK

#194018 Dec 19, 2013
Seen Ince, Izzard and Cox live. Ince and Cox present a science and comedy show on BBC Radio 4, maybe I've told you about it before. There are 47 .mp3s, all worth a download.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/series/timc

Loved Bill Hicks, shame he's gone. He was very well received in the UK. There's a little bit of him left in Denis Leary but Bill was a one off.
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks for the lead. I found this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =KdocQHsPCNMXX
I'm also a Ricky Gervais and Eddie Izzard fan, and on the more serious side, Brian Cox.
Do you know of the late Bill Hicks?
http://www.youtube.com/watch...

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#194019 Dec 19, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
I would have expected you to offer a few of those reasons without being asked.since I doubt that you merely want us to know that you reject such a notion, but might also like to see others do the same for whatever your reasons are.
<quoted text>
You seem to consider it inappropriate to use the power of calling hate hate even when the claim has merit. Why?
I'm all in favor of calling hate hate.

But the tactic is used for lots of things that are not hate.

Criticism of President Obama, in many circles, is ASSUMED to be racist.

Opposing being forced to work and pay for some woman's birth control pills when you don't know her or have the chance to bone her is called hating women.

Opposing same-sex marriage is called hating gays.

It's a daily thing, and it's propaganda.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#194020 Dec 19, 2013
Outrage wrote:
Bunch of nuts,always trying to disprove God,Can't do it huh...No intelligence here on this thread just a bunch of low life's,running around all mad because they know God really is who He said He is,The Great I Am!
Damn!

You figgered us out.
Outrage

Texarkana, TX

#194021 Dec 19, 2013
Eagle 12 wrote:
<quoted text>
I do not hate Gays, ever.
Yea right,I don't hate them either,sure would like to send them to another planet,let's see about Uranus....

“What game?”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#194023 Dec 19, 2013
Outrage wrote:
Bunch of nuts,always trying to disprove God,Can't do it huh...No intelligence here on this thread just a bunch of low life's,running around all mad because they know God really is who He said He is,The Great I Am!
You're on an atheism thread, Einstein.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#194024 Dec 19, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Like the barbarous act of killing defenseless children because a woman wants to protect her "reproductive rights"?

[QUOTE who="LuciFerr"]But it's ok to kill children in a war for 'god and country'?
RiversideRedneck wrote:
You have an evil mind to come up with nonsense like that.
Praise Sheesh.
Do you think you have a good argument here?

You just finished calling atheists bigots for thinking Christianity and many Christians were homophobic, and now you call someone evil for suggesting that children are killed by militaries right after your charged description of feticide.

You lose credibility when you call fetuses children, and also when you gratuitously throw in "defenseless." We know what they are we know they are defenseless. So are shrimp in a net.for about the same reason.

Sorry, but you don't seem to be able to guilt us with this stuff the way the church (and don't ask me for an address) guilts you with it. You keep trying, but we remain pro-choice. Apparently, most people don't have a problem with the concept without the coaching you got.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#194025 Dec 19, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Do you think you have a good argument here?
You just finished calling atheists bigots for thinking Christianity and many Christians were homophobic, and now you call someone evil for suggesting that children are killed by militaries right after your charged description of feticide.
You lose credibility when you call fetuses children, and also when you gratuitously throw in "defenseless." We know what they are we know they are defenseless. So are shrimp in a net.for about the same reason.
Sorry, but you don't seem to be able to guilt us with this stuff the way the church (and don't ask me for an address) guilts you with it. You keep trying, but we remain pro-choice. Apparently, most people don't have a problem with the concept without the coaching you got.
You lose credibility when you insist a fetus isn't someone's child. By all rights and purposes, it is.

I'm pro-choice also. I don't mean to determine what a person should or shouldn't do. It's choice, it's freedom.

But I won't turn my back and ignore the reality of it - killing a human.
Outrage

Texarkana, TX

#194026 Dec 19, 2013
River Tam wrote:
<quoted text>
You're on an atheism thread, Einstein.
Thank you,Einstein,yes I am..Sorry what pond did u crawl out of scum,oh I think u said river

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#194027 Dec 19, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
X is described by Y in self-contradictory terms.
The description by Y does not allow the conclusion that X does not exist.
It allows 3 possible conclusions:
A. The description is accurate, and X does not exist, or
B. The description is inaccurate, but X still does not exist.
C. X exists, and the description by Y is erroneous.
In the case of biblical descriptions, we both already agree that they are inaccurate.
Seems then we have to agree they do not preclude the existence of X.
If we are free to vary Y's description without constraint, we can change it to the description of a horse, or a Buick, or a waterfall. They can all be X - anything that exists that Y misdescribed, which is anything that exists (or could exist, but we're limiting X to actually existing things, so we'll consider only those)..

How about X being a god? Well, we don't know if such things exist, but let's say they do. OK. So? Should I start prying to it? Or anything else?

So where is this going? You haven't made generic gods more likely, you haven't saved the Christian god - just some generic god or gods that can be anything except the one that the bible (Y) describes.

I still say that Yahweh is the married bachelor of gods. Can we agree that that one is out?

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#194028 Dec 19, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
If we are free to vary Y's description without constraint, we can change it to the description of a horse, or a Buick, or a waterfall. They can all be X - anything that exists that Y misdescribed, which is anything that exists (or could exist, but we're limiting X to actually existing things, so we'll consider only those)..
How about X being a god? Well, we don't know if such things exist, but let's say they do. OK. So? Should I start prying to it? Or anything else?
So where is this going? You haven't made generic gods more likely, you haven't saved the Christian god - just some generic god or gods that can be anything except the one that the bible (Y) describes.
I still say that Yahweh is the married bachelor of gods. Can we agree that that one is out?
Why did you throw in a Hebrew word in the middle of adult English written post?

Yahweh is just the Hebrew word for God, like Dios is God in Spanish and Dieu in French.

To write "I still say that Yahweh is the married bachelor of gods" is just as silly as saying "I still say that Gott is the married bachelor of gods".

You're arbitrarily throwing in a foreign word. Why?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#194029 Dec 19, 2013
River Tam wrote:
<quoted text>

You're on an atheism thread, Einstein.
Call me Albert. Please.
Outrage

Texarkana, TX

#194030 Dec 19, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Do you think you have a good argument here?
You just finished calling atheists bigots for thinking Christianity and many Christians were homophobic, and now you call someone evil for suggesting that children are killed by militaries right after your charged description of feticide.
You lose credibility when you call fetuses children, and also when you gratuitously throw in "defenseless." We know what they are we know they are defenseless. So are shrimp in a net.for about the same reason.
Sorry, but you don't seem to be able to guilt us with this stuff the way the church (and don't ask me for an address) guilts you with it. You keep trying, but we remain pro-choice. Apparently, most people don't have a problem with the concept without the coaching you got.
You are one sick human being,I use that term lightly..Moron are subhuman,a fetus is a human being,unfortunately we have to live on the same planet as the likes of you,I have had with you and your kind always arguing if there is a God,if you don't believe there is a God then why do you keep talking about it...

Since: Sep 10

Santiago, Chile

#194031 Dec 19, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Catcher1 wrote:
Hey, bigot.
What's up?.
<quoted text>
That post from catcher was directed at me, he fancies me a bigot. I'm going to assume that this post of yours is subtly directed at me.
I'm going to repeat myself now, because it seems that the intellectuals here have year very short memories were very selective memories.
I don't want to restrict the rights of people to follow my way of life or my morals of my values. I am merely voicing my opinion about said way of life, morals and values.
You have admitted to racism.

That makes a bigot.

No way out.

Hi from Patagonia.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#194032 Dec 19, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
If we are free to vary Y's description without constraint, we can change it to the description of a horse, or a Buick, or a waterfall. They can all be X - anything that exists that Y misdescribed, which is anything that exists (or could exist, but we're limiting X to actually existing things, so we'll consider only those)..
How about X being a god? Well, we don't know if such things exist, but let's say they do. OK. So? Should I start prying to it? Or anything else?
So where is this going? You haven't made generic gods more likely, you haven't saved the Christian god - just some generic god or gods that can be anything except the one that the bible (Y) describes.
I still say that Yahweh is the married bachelor of gods. Can we agree that that one is out?
I think I know what you're looking for me to say.

I will say that I think no god exists with the exact attributes described in the Bible and believed to be true by the doctrines of Christianity.

Yahweh could be real, but just misunderstood.

I also think a real god would not want to be worshipped or humored and cajoled with prayers and rituals.

I'm with Jesus on this - don't look to the sky, look in yourself and around you.

(paraphrasing)

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#194033 Dec 19, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
You have admitted to racism.
That makes a bigot.
No way out.
Hi from Patagonia.
I have admitted that my racism pretty much ends at racist jokes.

A bigot that does not make.

Hi from Riverside.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#194034 Dec 19, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
Call me Albert. Please.
What's your number, Albert Please?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#194035 Dec 19, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>

Hi from Patagonia.
Always good to here from Patagonia.

Hey Cletch,

A + E called me. They want to do a new reality show starring me.

"BUCK DYNASTY"

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) 2 hr replaytime 58,100
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 3 hr replaytime 27,278
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... 10 hr Dogen 1,904
The Dumbest Thing Posted by a Godbot (Jun '10) 10 hr Eagle 12 5,962
News The war on Christmas (Dec '10) 11 hr Eagle 12 4,947
News Quotes from Famous Freethinkers (Aug '12) 12 hr Eagle 12 1,940
Atheist Humor (Aug '09) 15 hr Bob of Quantum-Faith 153
More from around the web