“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#619306 Apr 24, 2013
OCB wrote:
<quoted text>Still waiting for quotes from Democrats seeking to justify, excuse and legitimize rape....
YOU go.
Whoopi Goldberg, in 2009 defended director Roman Polanski by claiming his rape of a 13-yr-old in 1977 “wasn’t rape-rape,” she said.” I think it was something else, but I don’t believe it was rape-rape.”

O_o

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#619307 Apr 24, 2013
Jorge W Arbusto wrote:
<quoted text>I didn't claim you had never read such a claim, did I? I wrote that I had never read such a claim. Why the need to obfuscate? Is your position that perilous that honesty eludes you?

Please illustrate one "grandiose" claim I have made. Please illustrate where I have been "pissy". Please prove a negative for me, while you are at it, and please answer this: What happened in your life that you feel the need to mischaracterize others and treat forums like a cudgel and not a place to exchange ideas?
Liars think everybody else are liars, too.

It's the curse of bring a liar.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#619308 Apr 24, 2013
Jorge W Arbusto wrote:
<quoted text>I didn't claim you had never read such a claim, did I? I wrote that I had never read such a claim. Why the need to obfuscate? Is your position that perilous that honesty eludes you?

Please illustrate one "grandiose" claim I have made. Please illustrate where I have been "pissy". Please prove a negative for me, while you are at it, and please answer this: What happened in your life that you feel the need to mischaracterize others and treat forums like a cudgel and not a place to exchange ideas?
*being*, not bring.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#619309 Apr 24, 2013
Jorge W Arbusto wrote:
<quoted text>I think the biggest hurdles are the potential loss of family, the loss of the social network (which is probably the only positive aspect of religion), and the unbridled fear of divine retribution drilled into the heads of people when that are mere children and powerless to ward off the evil immorality of such a concept.
I know it's been difficult for me, being from a very religious and large extended family.

I have to be careful what I say and what I post on Facebook.

I have a first cousin who I grew up with who disowned his daughter when she finally came out as a lesbian.

I have other cousins, who I'm close to, who always post religious crap on Facebook asking me to pray for this or that, or "like" something praising god for some obscure BS.

And god helped my sister find a snowblower once.

I really had to restrain myself on that one.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#619310 Apr 24, 2013
OCB wrote:
<quoted text>Come ON, RR- do you ever put your money where your mouth is???
Still waiting- quotes from Democrats seeking to justify, excuse and legitimize rape.
Go.
Akin’s “legitimate rape” is just as stupid as Whoopi Goldberg’s “rape-rape?”

As is the utter democratic defense of rapist Bill Clinton.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#619311 Apr 24, 2013
Jorge W Arbusto wrote:
<quoted text>Why must you continually state the position of others instead of asking for it. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, but, the claim is that your supernatural character has influence on the natural world. That would be unequivocally testable.
We can triple down on your pretzel logic:
Atheist: There is no evidence for a god or gods.
You: Prove it
Atheist: Prove that I can't prove there is no evidence for a god or gods.
Infinite regress rears its ugly head, again.
Claiming that the supernatural, by its nature, is unprovable renders it impotent. If it is untestable then it has no effect on the natural world and is therefore a useless concept. Yes, you can dismiss this with the old mysterious god meme, or that the divine master is unknowable, but, what is most curious about that is how knowable the divine master is to the billions of self-appointed spokesmodels around the world. People sure do claim to know a lot about the unknowable. You are compartmentalizing your beliefs which results in nothing more than special pleading. I trust you proffer a more jaundiced eye to the claims of car salesmen and TV pitchmen.
When there is not sufficient evidence to support a claim, the default position should be rational skepticism if the goal is to minimize the number of false beliefs and maximize the number of true beliefs one holds. A central problem of faith is that if it can form a reasonable basis for believing one proposition without evidence, why does it not also form a reasonable basis for believing a contrary proposition? By what means can faith be discerned to lead to true beliefs, when it can be used with equal effectiveness to support conflicting propositions? One cannot argue that faith claims can be rationally evaluated in any way whatsoever to demonstrate their truth, because once faith claims are rationally considered against alternative hypotheses, the claims are either no longer held in favor of an alternative claim or no longer based on faith. If I maintain that there is no strong evidence for the presence of a divine master, you probably counter that you have faith to replace evidence. Ironically, many theists have the confidence to deny the existence of fairy tale creatures from other mythologies and cultures, and deities of other religions, for which there is likewise no strong evidence. The only common thread is cultural conditioning.
Hey, I get it. No one wants to die. The dream of the ego living forever is intoxicating. What is most curious is that the dream is always culturally conditioned.
I love when William Lane Craig equates his god to a flea. That's awesome. You can see the elephant in the courtyard, but not the flea. That doesn't mean the flea doesn't exist. Haha.
The "supernatural" in and of itself is beyond the scope of nature and is therefore untestable and undetectable.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#619312 Apr 24, 2013
Jorge W Arbusto wrote:
<quoted text>Are you a self-defined spokesmodel for the divine master? I can offer you writings from other Christians who claim war and self-defense killing are both sins. What makes you right and them wrong?
So, isn't a person declaring war? Using your pretzel logic, corporations stealing is just fine.
You "can" offer but you didn't offer...

Huh.

What's sinful about war?

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#619313 Apr 24, 2013
Jorge W Arbusto wrote:
<quoted text>Funny, but I never made either of those claims. Why must you lie? An official atheist handbook does not exist. There is no canon blessed by Dawkins or Hitchens. I haven't been corrected because I did not make the claims you state I did. There is no OFFICIAL atheist handbook.
I can write and publish a book that is titled, Sin According to Christians Handbook". In that book, I can write that war is sin. You don't agree with that. Does the title make this book your official handbook on sin?
With each post you illustrate the need to obfuscate and prevaricate and prove the foundation for your "faith" is built on shifting, shifty sand.
"blessed by Dawkins or Hitchens"....

HA HA HA HA HA !!!!!

Of course not, they are just opinionated fools that think a banner in a bus is gonna make a difference.

But they're too scared to write what they really think, so they add it the "probably" to their opinion that there is no god.

And you believe them.

Don't ask Dick if he's wrong, he'll bitch at you, assume you're a Christian and completely avoid the question.

http://youtu.be/6mmskXXetcg

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#619314 Apr 24, 2013
Jorge W Arbusto wrote:
<quoted text>Good. Why was that poster making that claim? Was it utter fabrication or based on something you posted?
Because I agree with spanking kids as a form of discipline and he don't like that.

Plus he's retarded. Stick around, you'll see.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#619315 Apr 24, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>Oh no, no, no....

The atheist handbook is quite clear on this.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary explanations.

And "Omniscience, Omnipresence, Omnipotence, Omnibenevolence, Evil. These five conditions can not co-exist." Is pretty damned extraordinary.

What do they say? "The onus is on you"?

Ready?
Go.
The claim that those five things existing simultaneously in one being is the extraordinary claim.

Provide your extraordinary evidence.

Go.

OCB

“What a GLORIOUS day!!!”

Since: Apr 12

Orlando but NYC born & raised

#619316 Apr 24, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Akin’s “legitimate rape” is just as stupid as Whoopi Goldberg’s “rape-rape?”
As is the utter democratic defense of rapist Bill Clinton.
I said to "LEGITIMIZE" rape- learn the difference.

And Bill Clinton was NOT a rapist. Ms. Lewinsky participated with full consent.

What Whoopi may have meant is REAL rape as opposed to ROLE PLAYING between consenting adults.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#619317 Apr 24, 2013
Jorge W Arbusto wrote:
<quoted text>Strawman, but, please do.

"The only difference between the parties is with the velocity that their knees hit the ground when corporations knock on their door" - Ralph Nader

The Republican Jesus taunt escaped you, eh? No worries. It's not my fault that those quotes happened to come from Republicans. Don't let it swing your sack so much.

But, you illustrate another point. Those men are self-appointed spokesmodels for Jesus. It's an easy job. All you do is manufacture what you think your divine master would say in such a situation. It requires no evidence. It requires no justification. It's merely the parroted words of some mythical sky tyrant that has never been demonstrated to exist. It's so simple! So marvelous! So wonderful!

God said, "(Fill in the blank)"! Try it today, kids, for fun and profit!
And, conveniently, god always says exactly what the person spouting that filth wants him to say.

OCB

“What a GLORIOUS day!!!”

Since: Apr 12

Orlando but NYC born & raised

#619318 Apr 24, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Whoopi Goldberg, in 2009 defended director Roman Polanski by claiming his rape of a 13-yr-old in 1977 “wasn’t rape-rape,” she said.” I think it was something else, but I don’t believe it was rape-rape.”
O_o
Yes- having sex with a minor is known as STATUTORY rape which of course, is WRONG under ANY circumstances.

However, if Polanski did not use physical force or threaten the young girl's life in any way, then what Whoopi meant is that it was not rape in the sense of it being an act of violence perpetrated against an unwilling victim.

Of course, given the age of the girl, it is still rape because a 13 year old can't legally consent to sex.

I am in NO way excusing an ADULT having sex with a CHILD, but what Whoopi meant is clear to me even if it's not clear to you.

Added to that is I was not aware that Whoopi had entered the political arena.

We have quotes from Republican POLITICIANS who attempt to justify, excuse and legitimize rape- have you ANY quotes from Democratic POLITICIANS which do the same?

Of COURSE you don't- so you dredge up what an ENTERTAINER said and then you seek to take what she said out of context.

Pathetic.

OCB

“What a GLORIOUS day!!!”

Since: Apr 12

Orlando but NYC born & raised

#619319 Apr 24, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Because I agree with spanking kids as a form of discipline and he don't like that.
Plus he's retarded. Stick around, you'll see.
And spanking is hitting.

So much for your claim that you never "hit" your kids.

Spanking is hitting. Punching is hitting. Slapping is hitting.

They are ALL forms of HITTING.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#619320 Apr 24, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>I'm not sure if you know it, but you ask the impossible.

"Proven” does not equate with “supernatural”.

Supernatural would mean something that is outside the known natural processes of the universe and therefore is unable to be proven.

I think you've convinced yourself that if a thing cannot be proven, it does not exist. Is that correct?
It might as well not.

OCB

“What a GLORIOUS day!!!”

Since: Apr 12

Orlando but NYC born & raised

#619321 Apr 24, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Akin’s “legitimate rape” is just as stupid as Whoopi Goldberg’s “rape-rape?”
As is the utter democratic defense of rapist Bill Clinton.
From my first reply to this post of yours:

Cancel the following out- I didn't know what you were referring to when you mentioned Whoopi and I responded to your other post about what she said.

Given that information, that cancels this out- so don't jump my sh*t over it,'k?

CANCEL:

What Whoopi may have meant is REAL rape as opposed to ROLE PLAYING between consenting adults.

OCB

“What a GLORIOUS day!!!”

Since: Apr 12

Orlando but NYC born & raised

#619322 Apr 24, 2013
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
And, conveniently, god always says exactly what the person spouting that filth wants him to say.
Yep- just like a ventriloquist's dummy.

Just as a ventriloquist can give his dummy any personality he likes, so can those who claim to speak on behalf of a god.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#619323 Apr 24, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>There you go again. You've convinced yourself that Satan is demonstrably, obviously, false.
That's in your head, Jorge.

[QUOTE] The claims are made that such a character has influence in the natural world, ergo testable. "

Why? Do you love your mother? That is real, but it isn't testable...

[QUOTE] The same goes for whichever god or brand of the Christian god you profess to believe in. If it has influence, it is testable. Period. Emphatically. "

HA HA !!

God influences my life.

Explain WHY God is testable.

Go.
Your BELIEF in god influences your life.

And, apparently, not in a good way.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#619324 Apr 24, 2013
OCB wrote:
<quoted text>Sorry- it is your BELIEF in your god which influences your life. You have NO prove that it is any god who is influencing you.

And.....it is the BELIEF in Santa Claus which influences the actions and behavior of kids.

It is NOT Santa; it is the BELIEF in Santa.

There is NO difference between THAT belief and YOUR belief.

But do continue to natter on........
Dang!

You beat me to it.
youtube

AOL

#619326 Apr 24, 2013
.

100% PROOF Pope Francis is ANTICHRIST_______



.

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.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 12 min June VanDerMark 584,354
Poll If you're Christain what kind are you? (Oct '07) 50 min Good-Evil 3,547
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 57 min AntiqueAnnie 611,869
Why do so many blacks FORNICATE even though God... 1 hr andet1987 9
Why I'll Never Date a Filipina... 1 hr andet1987 10
Play "end of the word" (Jan '11) 1 hr andet1987 5,795
News Who is an atheist? (May '10) 1 hr FREEBIRD 9,332
Why I’m no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 3 hr ChristineM 442,876
Poll Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 7 hr Rosa_Winkel 98,992
More from around the web