Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 258476 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.

Catcher1

Since: Sep 10

Santiago, Chile

#193481 Dec 17, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't understand what you mean.
Of course not, dumbass.

I'm not here.
blacklagoon

Boston, MA

#193482 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.
Oh, so you're more in favor of the traditional marriage, one man, one women. Apparently this is NOT what your bible endorses, so when you say it is a tradition that has been in place since the beginning of mankind, you're wrong.

Nowhere in the bible does it endorse marriage between one man and one women for the purpose of procreation, NOWHERE. Laws attributed to Moses assume that Israelites will marry as many wives as they can support. Even Jesus was against married family life as a distraction and waste of time. Paul continued this teachings encouraging celibacy as the best choice for Jesus followers.

Maybe you mean a more traditional marriage like Jacobs, who had 4 wives and many lady lovers.

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#193483 Dec 17, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
Coward RR smacks them both.
Don't be such a wiseass.
Just checking in.
I'm not really here.
RR doesn't smack women.

Go away.

Take your hatred and bigotry with you.
blacklagoon

Boston, MA

#193484 Dec 17, 2013
Eagle 12 wrote:
<quoted text>
The Anti-Christ that will come out of Europe will be Gay.
That should make you happy because if you are alive when he makes his grand appearance. You’ll get the chance to worship him.
Anti-christ, is that anything like anti-matter? I heard the anti-christ will come out of Elizabeth New Jersey, he'll own a pizza shop and rather than being gay, he'll be into bestiality. See how wrong you were!!! And my information is valid, is yours? And were did you get your information from?

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#193486 Dec 17, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>"Sweetie, there is not an experiment you can do to "prove" E=MC^2."

You can't do one, either.

You have to take the word of others it is so. And they can't prove it exists on a universal scale by any experiment. Just seemingly so here.

As it was, it wasn't exact, was it? Just good enough for them. Apply that margin of error universally. You could drive a few galaxies through it.

Like I said, no citing scientific scriptures.

You are a sucker for high sounding words you don't understand. They like that.
I guess we just have to decide who we're going to believe.

In my case it ain't you.

Sweety.
blacklagoon

Boston, MA

#193487 Dec 17, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Say it all you want, you're still wrong.
Science uses DNA from organisms millions of years old to conduct various studies.
DNA existed before it was discovered.
Since the scientific method relies on *scientist* for verification, and since prior to 1800 there was no verification that DNA existed, AS FAR AS SCIENCE WAS CONCERNED DNA was non-existent.

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#193488 Dec 17, 2013
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
One can argue that the purpose of denying same sex marriages and unions is the oppression of one minority demographic by a bigoted majority demographic.
<quoted text>
Marriage law was not equal because the law was not blind to race, an ascribed status. Marriage law is currently not equal because it is not blind to gender, another ascribed status.
Your convoluted arguments tell me where your priorities lie, which is with the bigots.
Same-sex marriage can be and is opposed on grounds other than bigotry.

You can find "Gays Against Gay Marriage" on several sites, including Facebook.

"One can argue" that the purpose is oppression, only in the sense that one can argue anything.

Current marriage law IS equal and blind to gender. It treats both genders equally. Gender comes into play in the definition of what marriage is, not in the law pertaining to the definition.

Your arguments are inferior, as usual.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#193489 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.
From wiki:
The first historical mention of the performance of same-sex marriages occurred during the early Roman Empire.[45] These were usually reported in a critical or satirical manner.[46] Emperor Elagabalus referred to his chariot driver, a blond slave from Caria named Hierocles, as his husband.[47] He also married an athlete named Zoticus in a lavish public ceremony in Rome amidst the rejoicings of the citizens.[48][49]

The first Roman emperor to have married a man was Nero, who is reported to have married two other men on different occasions. His first marriage was with one of his freedmen, Pythagoras, to whom Nero took the role of the bride. Later, as a groom, Nero married Sporus, a young boy who resembled one of Nero's concubines,[50] in a very public ceremony with all the solemnities of matrimony, after which Sporus lived with Nero as his spouse. A friend gave the "bride" away as required by law. The marriage was celebrated separately in both Greece and Rome in extravagant public ceremonies.[51]

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#193490 Dec 17, 2013
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
It's only equality for those that want what the majority wants.
That isn't equality, it's discrimination.
There's no reason for it outside of bigotry.
Pure nonsense.

It is equality for everyone. What the minority wants is not equal rights, but special rights, tailored just for themselves.

You are the bigot. You apply your blanket stereotype to opponents of same-sex marriage as people of ill intent wanting to discriminate and oppress. That's bigotry.

Take a bow, bigot.

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#193491 Dec 17, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
You changed your story.
You said Christians first brought slaves over here.
You're wrong, it was the Portuguese.
Sorry to have sent you to the googlers for nothing.
Being deliberately obtuse again? Fair enough, everyone is entitled to their moods, too bad it's not the same with rights anymore.

Enjoy your word salad, go easy on the dressing, it can stink.

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#193492 Dec 17, 2013
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
You can marry someone from the gender of your preference, she can't.
That is not equal.
Framing it differently does not make that false.
Their is no right of preference.

The law is full of obstacles to preference.

The law does not contemplate discerning and evaluating preference.

It operates in the realm of objective attributes and interactions.

If it applies its obstacles equally to all, then it achieves equality.

That is the case with prohibition of same-sex marriage.

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#193493 Dec 17, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Pure nonsense.
I agree. That is the perfect way to describe your posts.

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#193494 Dec 17, 2013
Thinking wrote:
A measurable demonstration of E=mc^2 is Mercury's precession.
How did you propose to explain Mercury's precession without the resulting time dilation effect of E=mc^2?
<quoted text>
Mercury is in recession?

Shit. Democrats must be in power there too.

“"None shall pass"”

Since: Jul 11

There

#193495 Dec 17, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
RR doesn't smack women.
....
You already admitted you do.

Either that was a lie or this is. Either way you are a proven liar.

Just another one of your many of lies.

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#193496 Dec 17, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
RR doesn't smack women.
Go away.
Take your hatred and bigotry with you.
Except for that one time, when you did. Smack a woman. On the top of her head. Because she bit you.

“"None shall pass"”

Since: Jul 11

There

#193497 Dec 17, 2013
RR also admitted to hitting an infant for crying in public and embarrassing him.

He sure is like the deity he worships, eh ?

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#193498 Dec 17, 2013
blacklagoon wrote:
<quoted text>Since the scientific method relies on *scientist* for verification, and since prior to 1800 there was no verification that DNA existed, AS FAR AS SCIENCE WAS CONCERNED DNA was non-existent.
No, it was not.

Scientists made no determination of DNA's nonexistence, nor did they hold an opinion that it was nonexistent.

It was simply undiscovered, or unknown.

The way this whole argument started was you resisting the assertion that there can be many things science does not know about, and many things about which they are currently wrong.

You stupidly resisted by claiming DNA was nonexistent at the time.

Reluctant to admit you are stupid, you then dug in your heels.
blacklagoon

Boston, MA

#193499 Dec 17, 2013
Eagle 12 wrote:
Christmas gift for atheists -- five reasons why God exists
By William Lane Craig
Published December 13, 2013
FoxNews.com
1. God provides the best explanation of the origin of the universe. Given the scientific evidence we have about our universe and its origins, and bolstered by arguments presented by philosophers for centuries, it is highly probable that the universe had an absolute beginning. Since the universe, like everything else, could not have merely popped into being without a cause, there must exist a transcendent reality beyond time and space that brought the universe into existence. This entity must therefore be enormously powerful. Only a transcendent, unembodied mind suitably fits that description.
2. God provides the best explanation for the fine-tuning of the universe. Contemporary physics has established that the universe is fine-tuned for the existence of intelligent, interactive life. That is to say, in order for intelligent, interactive life to exist, the fundamental constants and quantities of nature must fall into an incomprehensibly narrow life-permitting range. There are three competing explanations of this remarkable fine-tuning: physical necessity, chance, or design. The first two are highly implausible, given the independence of the fundamental constants and quantities from nature's laws and the desperate maneuvers needed to save the hypothesis of chance. That leaves design as the best explanation.
William Lane Craig is an idiot, this is what happens when apologists don't understand science and begin every debate with a preconceived notion. Here one by one I'll demonstrate what an assclown this guy is

1.) He makes a comedy of errors, we have no scientific evidence for the origins of the universe-----Something is *highly probable* because philosophers say so? Who ever said that the universe had a cause? We can know absolutely nothing about anything that is "beyond space and time"

2) The universe is NOT fine tuned for life, except for this tiny planet the universe is extremely hostile for human life, as are all of the known planet in our solar system, and even here on Earth we live on a climatic knife edge where much of the Earth is either to cold or hot for us to survive without protection, very stupid premiss. Highly implausible does not mean impossible, his play on words is childish at best.

3.) Morals are derived from societal groups not God or you highly immoral bible. Somehow I as an Atheist who completely rejects any idea of God knows that raping my next door neighbors daughter is morally wrong. God serves as the paradigm of goodness? Really, he murders little babies, has killed over 1 million human beings, endorses slavery and rape, and involves himself in blood sacrifice, you call this *goodness*? You have a very sick standard of goodness.

4.) There are NO contemporary accounts of Jesus outside of the bible. There are many biblical scholars who seriously doubt his very existence. Stories passed down through centuries does NOT constitute as any kind of reliable evidence.

5.) People imagine all sorts of things, whatever the mind can conjure up can be believed as real, this however, does NOT make it part of reality.

Atheists do NOT *need* to believe in anything, I don't believe in anything, nothing. I have trust in things that can be demonstrated or that manifest themselves in reality.

Craig is a fuckinloser, I've seen both Hitchens and Sam Harris tear him a new asshole, this is what happens when you begin with a preconceived idea, an idea with evidence or support.

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#193500 Dec 17, 2013
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
From wiki:
The first historical mention of the performance of same-sex marriages occurred during the early Roman Empire.[45] These were usually reported in a critical or satirical manner.[46] Emperor Elagabalus referred to his chariot driver, a blond slave from Caria named Hierocles, as his husband.[47] He also married an athlete named Zoticus in a lavish public ceremony in Rome amidst the rejoicings of the citizens.[48][49]
The first Roman emperor to have married a man was Nero, who is reported to have married two other men on different occasions. His first marriage was with one of his freedmen, Pythagoras, to whom Nero took the role of the bride. Later, as a groom, Nero married Sporus, a young boy who resembled one of Nero's concubines,[50] in a very public ceremony with all the solemnities of matrimony, after which Sporus lived with Nero as his spouse. A friend gave the "bride" away as required by law. The marriage was celebrated separately in both Greece and Rome in extravagant public ceremonies.[51]
Thanks, but no thanks.

Patterning our society after Nero does not seem like a great idea.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#193501 Dec 17, 2013
Eagle 12 wrote:
Christmas gift for atheists -- five reasons why God exists
By William Lane Craig
Published December 13, 2013
FoxNews.com

1. God provides the best explanation of the origin of the universe. Given the scientific evidence we have about our universe and its origins, and bolstered by arguments presented by philosophers for centuries, it is highly probable that the universe had an absolute beginning. Since the universe, like everything else, could not have merely popped into being without a cause, there must exist a transcendent reality beyond time and space that brought the universe into existence. This entity must therefore be enormously powerful. Only a transcendent, unembodied mind suitably fits that description.

2. God provides the best explanation for the fine-tuning of the universe. Contemporary physics has established that the universe is fine-tuned for the existence of intelligent, interactive life. That is to say, in order for intelligent, interactive life to exist, the fundamental constants and quantities of nature must fall into an incomprehensibly narrow life-permitting range. There are three competing explanations of this remarkable fine-tuning: physical necessity, chance, or design. The first two are highly implausible, given the independence of the fundamental constants and quantities from nature's laws and the desperate maneuvers needed to save the hypothesis of chance. That leaves design as the best explanation.
Replace "best" with "easiest."

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
Where Does It Say In The Bible...? 8 min River Tam2 3
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing (Mar '17) 15 min River Tam2 60,556
I just caught my mom masturbating 43 min Mama01 1
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 1 hr Rosesz 695,806
News Trump: Dem Memo a 'Bust,' Confirms Actions That... 2 hr davy 7
Dem Libtard Keeps Screaming 3 hr Yes we can 1
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 4 hr River Tam2 993,861
wierd situation with my mom. (Jul '14) Feb 19 Pimpy 23
More from around the web