Prove there's a god.

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#763546 Jul 29, 2014
Joyful8118 wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, cause she should have the right to teach her children what she wants and sees fit, but not me or you. Yep, that is her idea of freedom. She should choose for others what they teach their children, but we should not be able to choose for her and her children/Atheist and their children. Each parent chooses what to teach their children and at what time in life. But, she's all for freedom of choice. Women should be able to do what they want with their own bodies, but not in parents teaching their children anything than what she believes they should know.
the indoctrination of a minor child into a hate cult needs be sanctioned by Law

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#763547 Jul 29, 2014
Hidingfromyou wrote:
Social Darwinism:
- equates wealth (and lack of wealth) to biological attributes
- assumes typologies (races, subspecies)
- misattributes intelligence, morality and social awareness to biological attributes
- basically argues that might makes right.
I guess that I had a different idea of what the phrase "social Darwinism" referred to. I thought that it referred to survival of the fittest ideas and methods as occurs when social constructs like businesses and ideas/ideologies compete for scarce resources to persist. Right now, humanism and Christianity are competing for minds. The fittest one will survive.

In other words, survival of the fittest memes.

And yes, the ones who accumulate the most wealth are most successful at money making in the social/economic environment they find themselves in. We consider it an injustice and a threat to the health of the culture when wealth concentration becomes excessive, and intervene just as we do to mitigate biological selection factors like poor vision and diabetes. But if dollars are conceived of as scarce resources that people compete for, then something analogous to biological evolution is occurring culturally.

Also, the socialistic meme advocating income redistribution that antagonizes the accumulation of unlimited fortunes is a meme competing with the Victorian capitalism meme of extreme wealth and extreme poverty a la Oliver Twist and David Copperfield.

Is all of that not also what is meant by "social Darwinism"? Memes are the cultural analog of biological genes, and memes do what genes do: "try" to get themselves copied in the greatest number of receptacles, which are minds rather than genomes.

What do you think?

“Is that all you've got?”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#763549 Jul 29, 2014
karl44 wrote:
<quoted text>
the indoctrination of a minor child into a hate cult needs be sanctioned by Law
The same goes for your hate cult. Hypocrite.

“Is that all you've got?”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#763550 Jul 29, 2014
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow, the emission.
A million degrees hotter than tepid.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#763551 Jul 29, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
We believe nothing more than the evidence justifies. Some people use the word "faith" to mean evidence supported belief. I don't. I use the word faith exclusively to refer to belief in such things as gods, angels, devils, heaven, hell, and sin
Stilgar Fifrawi wrote:
Why limit yourself to such a narrow use if the word? And why attempt to limit others to do the same?
To facilitate accurate communication.

Every distinct idea needs its own unique name or phrase in order to avoid unnecessary ambiguity. Religious faith is radically different from trust supported by evidence. Using the same word(s) to describe both conflates them, and facilitates equivocation fallacies. Using different words distinguishes them and facilitates clarity of thought.

Whenever you have two ideas and two words, give one to each. It is clearer than using both words to mean both ideas. Consider these twodistinct ideas: not believing because you haven't been convinced, and not believing because of a disproof or concentration of counter-evidence. Different ideas, right? Not believing and believing not - not accepting an idea for lack of supporting evidence, and rejecting an idea because it can be shown likely to be wrong - are distinct ideas.

Now consider the words "unbelief" and "disbelief," which are generally treated as synonyms. Why use both words to mean both ideas? I propose that we use the word "unbelief" to indicate the first,and "disbelief the second" The reverse would work just as well as long as there was consensus regarding what each word meant.

It serves the interests of the religious that we confuse the ideas "certainty based on a guess and refractory to evidence" with "tentative belief commensurate with the quality and quantity of evidence, and amenable to revision pending new evidence." They want to call them both faith.

I prefer clarity, accuracy, and honesty.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#763552 Jul 29, 2014
Stilgar Fifrawi wrote:
I asked your version of worship and you added in "of a deity".
There's many other ways to worship other than worshipping a deity. Expand your mind.
Thanks. I depend on you for good ideas.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#763553 Jul 29, 2014
Stilgar Fifrawi wrote:
You showed a few pics of Hitler standing beside Catholics and expected an "OMG shocking!" factor. Why?
No, I expected you to recognize the German clergy kowtowing to the Nazis
Stilgar Fifrawi wrote:
What's the context of the pic? Is it real or fake? Where are they? Why are they there? Etc, etc. You understand, I know you do. Whether it not you'll cop to it is another story.
What I understand is how your standards for evidence vary according to what the evidence suggests. That is the confirmation bias typical of faith based thought.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#763554 Jul 29, 2014
Joyful8118 wrote:
There is much more to religion than just God. It helps in every area and aspect of life, learning, and the world. All jobs are aided by it. Math. Science, English/Language, and Social Studies are also just as important.
LOL. Look at how it as helped you.

Religion is worse than sterile. It impedes growth and progress wherever it has influence..

“Is that all you've got?”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#763555 Jul 29, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL. Look at how it as helped you.
Religion is worse than sterile. It impedes growth and progress wherever it has influence..
Says the overbearing boor.

I hear your mom calling.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#763556 Jul 29, 2014
Hidingfromyou wrote:
Someone asked me about my relationship to Christianity via private PM. This is what I wrote:
"I've lived in Canada and the US, did most of my education in English and am quite familiar with Christianity. All my life, Christians have lied to me about mythology, claiming it's real, and lying to try to get me into their churches. At uni, it was always "would you mind taking a census?" and in Japan "we'll teach you English if you come with us" or "I have tickets to a rock concert, want to come?" (from a friend).
Near my dorm in the US, Christians invited me to their Thanksgiving dinner at Church - free for everyone. I said "no, no, sorry, I'm an atheist and I just don't mix well with religious people." They said "no one will bother you! Please come." So, I went and they cornered me and argued with me for 2 hours. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed crushing their faith, but they lied.
Christianity is a deeply dishonest religion. Just look at what they claim on our forum - total lies about science and history. It's incredible. I've never seen a religion so obsessed with spreading it's own belief system that it simply has to deceive others constantly."
For Christians: that your religion is so deeply dishonest should trouble you to no end. It utterly undermines your claim to a benevolent, omnipotent and omniscient deity. You basically act as if you're worshiping Satan, the "deceiver" in your religion.
Certainly all religions have to engage in fiction to some end - they all make up their own mythologies and creation stories, but I've never seen one so blatantly dishonest in its attacks on science, history and scholarship. Probably only Christianity and Muslim religions do so - but I'm ignorant on this point. Perhaps some Hindu or Buddhist cults do, too.
Ironically, Christianity has done so throughout its history. It attacked every new science that emerged from the trash mythology Christianity has laden its believers with for centuries. You have a long, embarrassing history of being science deniers. Only now we won't accept being burned alive or house arrest. We study you. You inform us of the serious cognitive damage religion has insulted you with.
I hope, I hope there' s a cure for you damaged people.
Brilliantly articulated.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#763557 Jul 29, 2014
nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>And you refuse to address the pre-existing prejudice in your "story". Also, you didn't "show" any article existing in the journal you cited, or even the journal itself. That someone even decided to try and prove, to even imagine there was this difference between groups of children showed a propensity towards bigotry against one group and not the other. People lie, in "studies" and in polls, in an effort to manipulate society "towards" a preferred goal. I've seen it done in college myself. IOWs, nobody truly skeptical would believe a word you say. You've made up shyt before, and when I called you on it, you ran. What's up, did IANS lend you his extra pair of bronzed balls? Burned is more likely.
Denies being a Christian, but is functionally indistinguishable from those who don't.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#763558 Jul 29, 2014
nanoanomaly wrote:
Then stfu and go away.
More Christrash.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#763559 Jul 29, 2014
Hidingfromyou wrote:
IANS: 2
Nano: 0
You have no choice but to worship IANS by reading his posts, even if they're not addressed to you.
I apparently own the Scrunt. That was unexpected and unwelcome.

Craigslist: "Scrunt for sale. As is. No refunds. No offer refused."

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#763560 Jul 29, 2014
Hidingfromyou wrote:
You guys might like this: http://thesatanictemple.com/campaigns/medical... Interestingly, they write this: "In the coming months, we will be initiating a number of other campaigns to assert our religious protection for women with health needs that are being complicated by unreasonable laws.In order to spread the word about this campaign to those affected, and to help support our legal challenges to laws that interfere with our religious practices, we are asking for donations. Please note that The Satanic Temple believes that religious organizations should not be tax exempt and for that reason contributions are not tax deductible." Based on all the dishonesty from Christians here, I'm kinda wondering if Christians got their deities mixed up and worship the wrong one.
Very interesting. Thanks.

The Satanists seem to be interested in contributing to our collective well-being a hell of a lot more than the church. I don't have much use for Satan, but I appreciate these people's interest in the well-being of women.

The church is the opposite.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#763561 Jul 29, 2014
nanoanomaly wrote:
I know you are a liar and that you have feared mine previously.
Nobody here fears your intellect. How bizarre that you would think otherwise. Link me to something you've posted worth reading, Aristotle

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#763562 Jul 29, 2014
lightbeamrider wrote:
Care to elaborate on why you think it is stupid?
I already have.
lightbeamrider wrote:
I provided the syllabus for the course. There were 8 points as i recall. I got one lame response. http://www.topix.com/forum/topstories/TOCO8TE... So which part of these 8 points do you not agree with and why? Which part of these 8 points causes females to engage in pre marital sex?
None.

Which prevents it? It's not about promoting the urge to procreate. That's already present. It's about how we can intervene in natures instruction to procreate at 14. That program is worthless, and your argument is repulsively insincere.
lightbeamrider wrote:
Should we abolish laws against murder because they are ineffective? How bout rape? http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/topics-issue...
Same as above: that's a repulsively insincere argument.

Did you manage to get through a post to me without belly flopping in your gutter of verbal abuse? Why this once? I'm sure that you haven't become a better man, so what's your game?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#763563 Jul 29, 2014
Hidingfromyou wrote:
Given that I've now linked you [the Scrunt] to 2 newspaper articles and the original article (twice; once to the journal that you seemed to deny, despite that you actually answered that post, and now), I will await your sincerest apologies for your attacks on my person.
LOL. Nicely played. The Scrunt has no concept of what happened tsly await the pages o her here.

@ Scrunt - how are you doing in your commitment to ignore my posts? Have you been ignoring them, or are you dancing on strings like a marionette? I anxiously await the pages ahead to see. My guess is that you have no say in it.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#763564 Jul 29, 2014
"LOL. Nicely played. The Scrunt has no concept of what happened tsly await the pages o her here."

Sorry about that.

Should read "LOL. Nicely played. The Scrunt has no concept of what happened to her here."

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#763565 Jul 29, 2014
nanoanomaly wrote:
What we know is that you [Hiding] are obsessed with brainwashing those around you.
You know nothing. What do you consider yourself authoritative about? How about competent?
nanoanomaly wrote:
Any college professing neutrality of ideology should be ashamed to have you in its classroom as a professor.
What would you know about college?
nanoanomaly wrote:
It's obvious that you would find it impossible to resist the compulsion to disparage Christianity in any class you might teach. "That" makes you a bigot with the urge to commit hate crimes.
No, that makes here knowledgeable about Christianity. If she disparages Christianity, it will be helpful.That religion is a blight on humanity, and people need to hear about it. Whatever the reason you refuse to see that is of little import. People that support your religion need to be contradicted.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#763566 Jul 29, 2014
Hidingfromyou wrote:
"The mission of The Satanic Temple is to encourage benevolence and empathy among all people. In addition, we embrace practical common sense and justice.
LOL.The Satanists seem more intelligent, more moral, and more useful than the Christian church. How funny and sad at once.

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 Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing 3 min ImPeach 26,099
David Duke: "We're going to take our country ba... 6 min UMORONRACEMAKEWOR... 53
to Maria Chapelle-Nadal: it's time to ROLL, sista' 14 min Doctor REALITY 1
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 15 min Gods r Delusion x... 685,740
I hate Haiti (Jan '10) 1 hr Anne Nonymiss 109
"BIGGEST SCAM in WORLD HISTORY...." 2 hr YTube 1st 1
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 2 hr Here For Now 619,748
More from around the web