In America, atheists are still in the...

In America, atheists are still in the closet

There are 51437 comments on the Spiked story from Apr 11, 2012, titled In America, atheists are still in the closet. In it, Spiked reports that:

So do many other interest and identity groups. Complaint is our political lingua franca: it's what Occupiers, Tea Partiers, Wall Street titans, religious and irreligious people share.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Spiked.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#36739 Aug 23, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>

"Over the next 10 years, total tax-cut costs will equal $3.9 trillion"
Tax cuts do not cost anything.

And they are no longer "tax cuts". They are the Internal Revenue Code.

To allow their expiration is a "tax increase".

Supporting the former tax cuts is not proposing cutting taxes.

Tax cuts are free. Not spending money you never had doesn't cost anything.

Even if it did, your analysis you cited would still be wrong. It assumes static scoring of taxes. It assumes people keeping more of the money they earn has no effect on economic activity. In reality, that money has a multiplier effect as it is active in the economy. This economic activity generates tax revenue. To assume a decrease in tax rates amounts to the corresponding decrease in revenue is provably false.

When Kennedy cut tax rates and Reagan cut tax rates, revenue to the federal treasury increased.
ARGUING with IDIOTS

United States

#36740 Aug 23, 2012
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>We've been carrying out secret atheist rituals nonstop. Fasting to attain a higher spiritual plane, invoking Darwin to drive out the evil ID people, sacrificing first born lambs to bring the avatar of Gould upon us.

Otherwise, I'm just really busy and kind of don't feel like arguing with science deniers - they will seriously take any position to support their belief system, ignore history and all evidence and throw logic to the wind.

I means, seriously, why should I bother? Not my problem if some Creationist wants to remain stupidly and firmly committed to a faithless image of their deity.

:)

I hope you are well, though!
Some one hurt you hard! Gotta let it go...

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#36741 Aug 23, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Why tell me?
<quoted text>
I don't hate white guys. All of my family is white.
<quoted text>
You don't know much about young Mexicans. They're dropping Jesus as fast as Americans. From "Mexico still Catholic, but number of atheists on the rise" at http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/mexico... :
"Mexico’s National Institute of Statistics, Geography and Information Technology said this week that while most Mexicans remain Catholic, the fastest growing group in the country is atheists. In a recent report, the Institute said the number of atheists grows annually by 5.2%, while the number of Catholics grows by 1.7%."
If Catholics grow by 1.7%, and atheists by 5.2%, this means far more people are converting to catholicism than to atheism.
wolverine

Greeley, CO

#36742 Aug 23, 2012
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
We've been carrying out secret atheist rituals nonstop. Fasting to attain a higher spiritual plane, invoking Darwin to drive out the evil ID people, sacrificing first born lambs to bring the avatar of Gould upon us.
Otherwise, I'm just really busy and kind of don't feel like arguing with science deniers - they will seriously take any position to support their belief system, ignore history and all evidence and throw logic to the wind.
I means, seriously, why should I bother? Not my problem if some Creationist wants to remain stupidly and firmly committed to a faithless image of their deity.
:)
I hope you are well, though!
LOL...I Knew I Saw You At The Druid Convention...LOL
Admit It...You Miss Me
All Science And No Play Makes An Amy Farafowler Out Of You.
Ok...Close Your Eyes, Pretend Your Not So Indoctrinated That Your About To Split, Then, Take A Deep Breath, Entertain The Idea That Your SPECIAL, And Theres A Devine Plan For Even You.
Ask To Be Shown The Possibilty.....And Welcome To The Club.
I Put A Good Word In For You...The Answer Was... "I Forgive Them, They Know Not What They Do."
Keep Your Head Up....It Will All Work Out Fine.
Thanks For Coming Out To Play....I Missed You.

Since: Mar 11

Ft Mitchell, KY

#36743 Aug 23, 2012
What thing is that? Oh the end of the world you mean? LMFAO Loon!
94% black voters? Sheesh can you please pull Rush Limbaugh's D1ck out of your mouth for a few minutes?
wolverine wrote:
Doc...You Are Quite Insane.
Atheist Will Never Be The Majority....This Thing Will Be Over LOng BEfore That.
And 94 % Blacks Voting For Obama After The Disasterous Last 4 Years...Is VERY Racist

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#36744 Aug 23, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
You are for stereotyping them.
They vote democrat at 94%,...

...and HE is stereotyping them??

If you are one of the other 6%, you may complain.

Since: Mar 11

Ft Mitchell, KY

#36745 Aug 23, 2012
English as a second language much?

Yikes! Face palm
ARGUING with IDIOTS wrote:
<quoted text>
Some one hurt you hard! Gotta let it go...

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#36746 Aug 23, 2012
Hidingfromyou wrote:
...
I hope you are well, though!
I am, I am...but I'm writing a really depressing song write now and need to get into it.

Isn't life hard? And it sucks and I feel all trapped and stuff. Yes. And it's pointless. Yes. Pointless and cruel.
wolverine

Greeley, CO

#36747 Aug 23, 2012
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
If Catholics grow by 1.7%, and atheists by 5.2%, this means far more people are converting to catholicism than to atheism.
Shhhh....We Dont Wanna Disturb The Delusion That The Doc IS Undergoing....I Heard If You Wake Them With Facts...They Grow Six Toes.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#36748 Aug 23, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Um, actually no, the US was doing good until we allowed religious people too much control, really.
They never "removed" prayer from schools, or stopped allowing people to read from your book of mythology. Not to mention, in spite of the problems being caused by the religious fundies, we are still at the most peaceful time in all of history, and have the lowest crime rate ever. Explain how secularism is hurting us again?
Lowest crime rate ever?

...OK.
wolverine

Greeley, CO

#36749 Aug 23, 2012
Givemeliberty wrote:
What thing is that? Oh the end of the world you mean? LMFAO Loon!
94% black voters? Sheesh can you please pull Rush Limbaugh's D1ck out of your mouth for a few minutes?
<quoted text>
You would Have to Release it From Your Azz For That To Happen....Cant See You Doing That Anytime Soon....Nice Bitch Avatar...Tough Guy

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#36750 Aug 23, 2012
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
We're making it harder and harder for churches to make money.
...and harder for anyone to make money.

But easier to get food stamps and government checks.

Highest level of both in history.

Obama advertising food stamps in Mexico, while extending amnesty.

Welfare agencies sending out voter registration cards with checks.

What could possibly go wrong?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#36751 Aug 23, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
I know, it's a bad habit of mine, I just can't resist those facts.:p
Right. Like the lowest crime rate ever.
wolverine

Greeley, CO

#36752 Aug 23, 2012
Politics
NBC/WSJ Poll Shows Romney Support Among Blacks at Zero Percent — Should it Be Taken Seriously?
Posted on August 21, 2012 at 11:15pm by Jason Howerton

Mitt Romney (AP Photo/Mary Schwalm)

A whopping 0 percent of black voters support Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney, if you trust the accuracy of a new NBC/WSJ poll.

While it isn’t surprising that President Obama leads Romney among black and other minority voters, the assertion that the GOP candidate has no support in the black community is hard to swallow.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#36753 Aug 23, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Theists did that, just as they made abortion legal - nine theists on the Supreme Court.
Thanks for not claiming the Constitution did it.

It was Supreme Court justices who "made it legal". But it wasn't 9 of them. It was 7 to 2.

Such a right is nowhere to be found in the Constitution.

Your statement is correct.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#36754 Aug 23, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
We know what their intentions are. They have been very clear. They have an agenda to unseat one of the fundamental concepts in science, one that distinguishes it from all of the pseudosciences, and one which made its stunning successes possible.
They want to defeat scientific materialism when there is no other reason to except to defeat science. They can pursue their supernaturalism. In their Wedge Document, under twenty year goals was,
"To see intelligent design theory as the dominant perspective in science." - Wedge Document
Why? They don't merely intend to supplement the "materialist" program with a new way of knowing. They want to eliminate it.
Buck. These people have a mission to replace science with pseudoscience, and the willingness to use any method possible to do so. Lying and secrecy is not an ethical barrier.
Their method has been to fund think tanks, fund interested scientists and philosophers who write books and try to get material into the peer reviewed literature, and who inculcate the faithful with a repertoire of specious arguments familiar to us all by now - information can't be created, there is irreducible complexity in biological structures, and more, including your defense of ID and criticisms of Judge Jones. It's all boilerplate.
They have an agenda. I have an agenda. You have an agenda. Barbara Forest has an agenda. The National Academy of Science has an agenda. Ken Miller has an agenda. The ACLU has an agenda. Judge Jones has an agenda. Kettlewell had an agenda. Craig Venter has an agenda. Haeckel had an agenda.

The ID people are doing science. They can't substitute an agenda for it, just like Ken Miller can't - which is how he got proven wrong, and ID scientists proven right.

But the ID science has a tremendous alignment of obstacles to overcome that don't exist for people like Miller and Forest. They have to be much smarter and better. Fortunately, they are.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#36755 Aug 23, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
From Wiki:
"Drafted in 1998 by Discovery Institute staff, the Wedge Document first appeared publicly after it was posted to the World Wide Web on February 5, 1999 by Tim Rhodes, having been shared with him in late January 1999 by Matt Duss, a part-time employee of a Seattle-based international human-resources firm. There Duss had been given a document to copy titled The Wedge and marked "Top Secret" and "Not For Distribution."
"Discovery Institute co-founder and CSC Vice President Stephen C. Meyer eventually acknowledged the Institute is the source of the document. The Institute still seeks to downplay its significance, saying "Conspiracy theorists in the media continue to recycle the urban legend of the 'Wedge' document". The Institute also portrays the scientific community's reaction to the Wedge document as driven by "Darwinist Paranoia.""
That sounds just like you, Buck, as did that ID friendly document I linked you to with the criticisms of Judge Jones after Kitzmiller http://snipurl.com/24oovxb . You're a footsoldier in the movement, bringing it to the streets, so to speak.
It was a fundraising letter.

It was claimed to be a leaked secret memo.

It was neither "leaked" nor "secret".

I don't need your links to criticism of Judge Jones. I know the case well, and know his ruling well.

It is crap. That's the best legal term for it. "Crap".

Jones' ruling could not withstand the logical scrutiny of a second semester law student at the worst law school in the nation.

"Crap". That's the legal description.

(Kitzmiller transcript)

Dr. Scott Minnich: "Am I boring you, Judge?"
ARGUING with IDIOTS

United States

#36756 Aug 23, 2012
Givemeliberty wrote:
<quoted text>English as a second language much?

Yikes! Face palm
Oh no you didn't (hand on hip, moving head side to side)

Go cook me a pot pie beeatch!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#36757 Aug 23, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, that is what they claim, as you reported to us from "The “Wedge Document”: How Darwinist Paranoia Fueled an Urban Legend" at http://snipurl.com/24qjz0b
But clearly, they are lying. I asked you in one these posts to tell me why you believe that they aren't, or why I should. Perhaps you haven't seen that post yet. As you just read again, what Duss and Rhodes leaked was not a fundraising letter. It was an internal memo containing the words "TOP SECRET and "NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION," and it opened not with a salutation, such as "Dear Friends of the DI," but the word "INTRODUCTION." It was a mission statement, a statement of values, and once leaked, the manifesto for the Intelligent Design movement.
<quoted text>
I have no idea what Barbara Forrest has to do with the leaking of the Wedge Document. She found "cdesign proponentsists" in the boxes of subpoenaed drafts.
<quoted text>
Buck. Don't take these rebuttals personally, and don't make it personal. There is no need for either.
Barbara Forest wrote numerous articles and carried the ball on alleging the sinister plot of the Wedge Document.

Duss and Rhodes did not work at the Discovery Institute. They were mail sorters at a clearing house. They "found" it, and "posted" it - not "leaked" it. A "leak" is something that comes from someone inside an organization.

Phillip Johnson had the whole text practically verbatim in his book he published around the world 2 years before the alleged "leak". It was also discussed openly - by name - in mutliple public forums before 1998 by Johnson and others.

Barbara Forest: "...it was a fundraising tool."

Come up with a case. The ID attacks boil down to nonsense.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#36758 Aug 23, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Pigeon chess? You're relapsing.
For starters, a fundraising tool is not a fundraising letter.
Second, if Professor Forrest thought that the Wedge Document was a fundraising letter, she was mistaken. She said that in February of 2005, ten months before Judge Jones' ruling on Kitzmiller. Perhaps she was unfamiliar with the Discovery Institute and its ethics, and just took them at their word. I'll bet that she doesn't consider the Wedge Document a fundraising tool any more.
You do this to yourself, Buck. You make rebuttals to your claims a personal affront, begin flinging invective, and then comes the chest thumping. You do yourself a disservice arguing like that. You can't prevail in these discussions, because you've championed a hopeless cause. The smoking gun evidence of your error is plain to see, but apparently not to you. So, you you sacrifice your credibility and respectability for them. And you're shit-canning the rapprochement that we recently achieved. I hate to see it. Really.
Barbara Forest was more familiar with the Wedge Document than any other attackers, as shown by her multiple interviews used to publicize it and try to make it a scandal.

A "fundraising tool" is a "fundraising letter" if it is put in an envelope, stamped, and mailed.

You are grasping at straws.

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.

US Politics Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 1 min Dr Guru 222,767
News Isakson fends off Trumpa s racial a dog whistle... 1 min Mullahing It Over 1
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 3 min HILLARY 2016 239,928
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 3 min Eagle 12 21,227
News Trump Isn't Bluffing, He'll Deport 11 Million P... 4 min taletha 16 7,993
News The President has failed us (Jun '12) 4 min Agents of Corruption 393,393
News EU-US trade deal talks have stalled, says Germa... 9 min Ivyawe 5
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 10 min Incognito4Ever 1,420,176
News Who is the real 'racist,' Clinton or Trump? Thi... 18 min too much 135
More from around the web