U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Atheism and Agnosticism
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 05-11-2011, 09:12 AM
 
Location: El Paso, TX
3,310 posts, read 3,878,060 times
Reputation: 2556

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by axemanjoe View Post
Well, after all, this is an atheism forum, if people are going to put up posts that delcare their beliefs to be religious based doesn't that seem like poking that metaphorical rattlesnake.
You used what I think is the right word, "seem". Seem does not mean fact. Why not ask then or probe to see if that is the case?
I have seen some forums that are religious and someone brings up an offensive or sarcastic remark about Santa, the Easter Bunny, delusions, etc. on religious threads, pocking at them. Both sides have those types of people. I address both sides doing the same, take care.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-11-2011, 09:17 AM
 
705 posts, read 943,421 times
Reputation: 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by elamigo View Post
You used what I think is the right word, "seem". Seem does not mean fact. Why not ask then or probe to see if that is the case?
I have seen some forums that are religious and someone brings up an offensive or sarcastic remark about Santa, the Easter Bunny, delusions, etc. on religious threads, pocking at them. Both sides have those types of people. I address both sides doing the same, take care.
Seems like=appears as if. Perception is reality to most folks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2011, 09:22 AM
 
Location: El Paso, TX
3,310 posts, read 3,878,060 times
Reputation: 2556
Quote:
Originally Posted by axemanjoe View Post
Seems like=appears as if. Perception is reality to most folks.
I agree. But then it is good to take the time if the reality is the real reality, not jump into conclusions or actions we may later see as the wrong ones.

What I use as a rule of thumb is that if something does not seem right, bothers me, etc. I work on that perception and see if my gut feeling is right or wrong, not let that percetion get the best of me as I see people in this and other forums, take care.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2011, 09:59 AM
 
7,802 posts, read 5,278,109 times
Reputation: 2973
Quote:
Originally Posted by elamigo View Post
If the real motive to do so if because they have seen many Bible/God believers push for laws that impose our rights, SAY SO!!
As I pointed out here they do say so. Also go to the websites of any official atheist or secular organisation and read their mission statements. It is pretty clear what their motivations are... they are not hiding them. I am a founding member of Atheist Ireland for example and the mission statement, written for all to read on all webpages on the site is:

"building a rational, ethical and secular society free from superstition and supernaturalism".

I hardly think that could be clearer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by elamigo View Post
So why not stop going around the bush and say "I do not like it when people try impose laws that interfere with my right"?
They do, but showing that belief in god is entirely unsubstantiated is also a legitimate tactic. You make it sound sort of like you think doing one precludes one from doing the other. One can do both.

If there are a lot of laws and policy and education changes being proposed all on the basis that there is a god.... then going straight for that basis is a legitimate way to deal with all the other issues. Take out the foundation and everything else built on it falls too.

So when theocratic laws, policy or education is suggested, it is legitimate to attack those policies directly, while simultaneously showing that they are all based on delusion and unsubstantiated claims.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2011, 10:07 AM
 
7,802 posts, read 5,278,109 times
Reputation: 2973
Quote:
Originally Posted by elamigo View Post
Now it seems the real motive surfaces again.
I am starting to think you say this more as a catchphrase, than because it actually makes sense.... or applies..... in any way. Generally when you say it it is either about something that is not true.... or about things you think are surfacing but in fact are things people generally wear on their sleeves all the time and have never been hiding.

Quote:
Originally Posted by elamigo View Post
It seems you are having a hard time with an individual.
Does it? I am aware of no such thing, or individual. I certainly never said anything of the sort.

Quote:
Originally Posted by elamigo View Post
OK, I got it and I understand if you do not feel respect for that person.
I never said this either.... so it is comical in the rest of the post you accuse me of putting words in peoples mouths, when it seems this is what you are doing with some gusto.

No... I said they pay a PRICE in respect. Paying a price does not mean you have paid out EVERYTHING. When I buy a coke, I pay a price. That does not mean I have no money left at the end. Just LESS money. Similarly if they pay a price in respect, this does not mean I feel no respect for them. Just less than I did before. If you read into that anywhere that I said I "do not feel respect for that person" then you are no longer reading anything I have written but have decided to engage in pure fantasy instead.

Quote:
Originally Posted by elamigo View Post
If I call you stupid because I think some view you have is stupid, would you not feel offended?
Not in the slightest because I learned a very important rule very early in life. "insults demean only the insulter, NEVER the insulted. Ever". So if you want to go around calling me named, the only person who should feel offended is you yourself... because the only person let down when you reduce yourself to school yard rhetoric like that IS yourself. Anyone from age 5 up can go around calling insults at people, so it is hardly impressive to go around doing so.

However one important point you almost touched on is that in our species there are all too many people who think if you call an idea stupid... you are calling the person who HOLDS that idea stupid. People seem generally unable to seperate themselves from their ideas.... despite the fact that some of the most intelligent examples of our species held some seriously stupid ideas. Isaac Newton being a prime example. He was clearly massively intelligent, yet some of the ideas he had or believed were seriously insane, ludicrous and... yes... stupid.

Further to all this however I would have to know a person before they were even capable of offending me.... or if I do not know them then I would have had to otherwise have formed a level of respect of a high enough threshold that their words were important enough to be capable of offending me. Suffice to say I do not know you at all, nor has what I have read from you led you in the direction of attaining such a threshold of respect. Anything you say is therefore literally incapable of causing me offence on any level.

Quote:
Originally Posted by elamigo View Post
I would expect you ask me to respect you.
Then as I said above, you expect wrong. Reduce yourself to name calling and the only person I point out that you should be respecting... is you yourself. Name calling really is the lowest form of discourse and those that engage in it let themselves down, only themselves, and no one else but themselves.

Last edited by Nozzferrahhtoo; 05-11-2011 at 10:19 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2011, 10:11 AM
 
Location: El Paso, TX
3,310 posts, read 3,878,060 times
Reputation: 2556
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nozzferrahhtoo View Post
As I pointed out here they do say so. Also go to the websites of any official atheist or secular organisation and read their mission statements. It is pretty clear what their motivations are... they are not hiding them. I am a founding member of Atheist Ireland for example and the mission statement, written for all to read on all webpages on the site is:

"building a rational, ethical and secular society free from superstition and supernaturalism".

I hardly think that could be clearer.



They do, but showing that belief in god is entirely unsubstantiated is also a legitimate tactic. You make it sound sort of like you think doing one precludes one from doing the other. One can do both.

If there are a lot of laws and policy and education changes being proposed all on the basis that there is a god.... then going straight for that basis is a legitimate way to deal with all the other issues. Take out the foundation and everything else built on it falls too.

So when theocratic laws, policy or education is suggested, it is legitimate to attack those policies directly, while simultaneously showing that they are all based on delusion and unsubstantiated claims.
The bottom line on all these is what the OP and has developed into this exchange. Maybe you agree we are now going to go on a circle. You made your point and I made mine, take care.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2011, 10:13 AM
 
Location: El Paso, TX
3,310 posts, read 3,878,060 times
Reputation: 2556
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nozzferrahhtoo View Post
I am starting to think you say this more as a catchphrase, than because it actually makes sense.... or applies..... in any way. Generally when you say it it is either about something that is not true.... or about things you think are surfacing but in fact are things people generally wear on their sleeves all the time and have never been hiding.



Does it? I am aware of no such thing, or individual. I certainly never said anything of the sort.



I never said this either.... so it is comical in the rest of the post you accuse me of putting words in peoples mouths, when it seems this is what you are doing with some gusto.

No... I said they pay a PRICE in respect. Paying a price does not mean you have paid out EVERYTHING. When I buy a coke, I pay a price. That does not mean I have no money left at the end. Just LESS money. Similarly if they pay a price in respect, this does not mean I feel no respect for them. Just less than I did before. If you read into that anywhere that I said I "do not feel respect for that person" then you are no longer reading anything I have written but have decided to engage in pure fantasy instead.



Not in the slightest because I learned a very important rule very early in life. "insults demean only the insulter, NEVER the insulted. Ever". So if you want to go around calling me named, the only person who should feel offended is you yourself... because the only person let down when you reduce yourself to school yard rhetoric like that IS yourself.

However one important point you almost touched on is that in our species there are all too many people who think if you call an idea stupid... you are calling the person who HOLDS that idea stupid. People seem generally unable to seperate themselves from their ideas.... despite the fact that some of the most intelligent examples of our species held some seriously stupid ideas. Isaac Newton being a prime example. He was clearly massively intelligent, yet some of the ideas he had or believed were seriously insane, ludicrous and... yes... stupid.

Further to all this however I would have to know a person before they were even capable of offending me.... or if I do not know them then I would have had to otherwise have formed a level of respect of a high enough threshold that their words were important enough to be capable of offending me. Suffice to say I do not know you at all, nor has what I have read from you led you in the direction of attaining such a threshold of respect. Anything you say is therefore literally incapable of causing me offence on any level.



Then as I said above, you expect wrong. Reduce yourself to name calling and the only person I point out that you should be respecting... is you yourself. Name calling really is the lowest form of discourse and those that engage in it let themselves down, only themselves, and no one else but themselves.
The same it just seems to me people read too much into what was said. I can't go any further because looks you expressed your points and I mine and we can end up in circles again, thanks for the replies, take care.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2011, 10:20 AM
 
7,802 posts, read 5,278,109 times
Reputation: 2973
As you wish. I shall continue to reply to posts on the thread if and when I see fit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2011, 10:29 AM
 
40,039 posts, read 26,720,362 times
Reputation: 6047
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nozzferrahhtoo View Post
They do, but showing that belief in god is entirely unsubstantiated is also a legitimate tactic. You make it sound sort of like you think doing one precludes one from doing the other. One can do both.
That is not true. You cannot claim lack of substantiation simply because you assign all the existing evidence to "we don't know what" and call that the default without a scientific basis for doing so. Consciousness and intelligence exists as part of our reality. There is NO LOGICAL syllogism you could EVER create that begins with a premise of non-consciousness and non-intelligence and produces a predicate of consciousness and intelligence. The primacy of consciousness as the basis for all your logic and reason is absolute.

As for the ban on theocratic laws and religion in science curricula . . . we have no argument.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2011, 10:31 AM
 
Location: El Paso, TX
3,310 posts, read 3,878,060 times
Reputation: 2556
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nozzferrahhtoo View Post
As you wish. I shall continue to reply to posts on the thread if and when I see fit.
Great, please do so. I support that wholeheartedly, the same from here. take care.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Atheism and Agnosticism
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top