Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-03-2011, 01:46 PM
 
Location: Washingtonville
2,505 posts, read 2,321,083 times
Reputation: 441

Advertisements

If any of you were paying attention, you would see that I have infact provided the title of the movies. If most of you actually read the posts and not only what you want to you would've seen this.

Here they are again, please take note:
THE NEW ATHEISM (Atheist)
THE NEW ATHEISM - TAKING IT SERIOUSLY (Christian)

Also note that I do not agree with either side.
I don't really agree with religious organizations period. I don't need a church to find spirituality. I don't believe in any form of God that is in the mix right now. Not sure if anyone else does.

Upon watching the movies again, I noticed they are not professionally done. They look like they are done with a video camera by a college student. Not surprisingly it seems the Christian group produced both movie. Christian propaganda movies. Almost had me sold on it too until I dug deeper. I apologize. This really irritates me, and is exactly why I am not a Christian.

And Christianity was not the only religion. It was the main religion and political party of the time. Most other religions had to be kept secret. Philosophy had to be done in secret too. The reason I said it brought us out of the dark ages is because they forced science to develop in secret, but eventually it burst out on the scene and couldn't be stopped. In a way it united other people to question the church. Atheism arose in the same way, without theism, there would be no atheism. This is why I avoid modern religious organizations and support individual spirituality. However, I still support major religions. Until we set aside our differences, greed, hate, and social norms we will need religions to help some cope. Since mankind cannot seem to let go of differences, it will most likely always rain over as the norm and sadly set the social norms.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-03-2011, 01:57 PM
 
2,319 posts, read 4,791,102 times
Reputation: 2109
Quote:
Originally Posted by raison_d'etre View Post
If any of you were paying attention, you would see that I have infact provided the title of the movies. If most of you actually read the posts and not only what you want to you would've seen this.

Here they are again, please take note:
THE NEW ATHEISM (Atheist)
THE NEW ATHEISM - TAKING IT SERIOUSLY (Christian)

Also note that I do not agree with either side.
I don't really agree with religious organizations period. I don't need a church to find spirituality. I don't believe in any form of God that is in the mix right now. Not sure if anyone else does.

Upon watching the movies again, I noticed they are not professionally done. They look like they are done with a video camera by a college student. Not surprisingly it seems the Christian group produced both movie. Christian propaganda movies. Almost had me sold on it too until I dug deeper. I apologize. This really irritates me, and is exactly why I am not a Christian.

And Christianity was not the only religion. It was the main religion and political party of the time. Most other religions had to be kept secret. Philosophy had to be done in secret too. The reason I said it brought us out of the dark ages is because they forced science to develop in secret, but eventually it burst out on the scene and couldn't be stopped. In a way it united other people to question the church. Atheism arose in the same way, without theism, there would be no atheism. This is why I avoid modern religious organizations and support individual spirituality. However, I still support major religions. Until we set aside our differences, greed, hate, and social norms we will need religions to help some cope. Since mankind cannot seem to let go of differences, it will most likely always rain over as the norm and sadly set the social norms.
I appreciate your post. Thanks. I'm not surprised that the films were less-than-straightforward. Kudos for admitting you leaped too soon. Most people won't admit it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-03-2011, 03:09 PM
 
Location: S. Wales.
50,083 posts, read 20,582,163 times
Reputation: 5927
Quote:
Originally Posted by raison_d'etre View Post
I attempted to find such evidence, if you could provide it for me that would be great.
Monsignor Georges Henri Joseph Édouard Lemaître (About this sound lemaitre.ogg (help·info) 17 July 1894 – 20 June 1966) was a Belgian priest, astronomer and professor of physics at the Catholic University of Louvain. He sometimes used the title Abbé or Monseigneur.

Lemaître proposed what became known as the Big Bang theory of the origin of the Universe, which he called his 'hypothesis of the primeval atom'.[Wiki]

Georges Lemaître - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Thanks to Thom R for drawing this to my attention)

Quote:
You are choosing to read into this what you want. First, I am not Christian and do not subscribe to any faith. I am not trying to demonize atheists.
It certainly looked like it.

"These guys obviously don't support the 1st amendment. They obviously want to banish religion from this world. They want to steal the imagination on the world and replace it with cold, hard, depressing facts. If this movement is allowed to complete what it has set out to do, they will steal the stories and fairytale from our youth along with the religions of the world.

Does your kid dream of far off lands, fighting dragons, saving princesses, and dueling with wizards? Bash those dreams, kill their imagination, don't allow creativity and imagination run wild in your children. They wish to replace emotions with so called logic. They believe in common sense as long as it matches their point of view."

This is demonization. It is untrue and misrepresenting what atheism new or old (in general) wants to do.

Quote:
Their finding it slow going because they are going about it all wrong. When you come off and make it a point to tell all theists that you believe atheists are smarter, you come off as arrogant. When you tell these people they need to admit their belief is a fairy tail, this is also arrogant.
I don't believe that atheists are smarter. They just don't use false reasoning and faith so much. I do take the point that more reasoning and less aggressiveness might be better - though I think that would slow progress down. A good burst of raucous mockery hits home harder than a page of reasoned argument.

Quote:
A religious/spiritual belief is not something most people take lightly, they hold them dear and aren't going to be swayed by your arrogant remarks.
That's what it comes down to - an unwillingness to give up faith no matter what argument is made and calling atheists 'arrogant' is just part of the the demonizing process you said you didn't do.

[quote]You can't possibly remove it from history, it is a massive part of history.[/I agree. That's what I said. It would help if you read posts.

Quote:
I have suggested religion be taught in a religion class several times. Each time an atheist chimes in and says who is going to pay for this class? Who is going to teach this class? Schools are already hard up on money, yada, yada, yada... But, since you suggested it, they probably wont. They will say great idea, and they can support that.
Do they? I can only say that I have never seen an atheist expressing concern about what's taught in religion class, except that not only one religion should be represented. Isn't that fair?

Quote:
To a point. I don't think they should be teaching anything in science class that hasn't been proven.
To a reasonable degree of proven I don't believe they do. They should certainly not be teaching anything that hasn't. Like Goddunnit.

I tried to get a look at the film. It doesn't seem to have been enthusiastically endorsed by 'New atheists' (eg iron Chariots site) who simply say that is it is anything new it is being more vocal.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-03-2011, 05:28 PM
 
Location: Washingtonville
2,505 posts, read 2,321,083 times
Reputation: 441
Yes more vocal. In other words it it doing the same thing they claim to dislike in major religions. Don't get me wrong, I love seeing atheist groups at events alongside churches, both spreading their message to people freely. It's when either side begins bashing.

I am not trying to demonize anyone. Fyi, atheist demonize religion and spirituality too. No point in denying that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2011, 06:05 AM
 
5,458 posts, read 6,703,039 times
Reputation: 1814
Quote:
Originally Posted by raison_d'etre View Post
I attempted to find such evidence, if you could provide it for me that would be great.
The first hit on a google search for "evidence for the big bang" returns this : Big Bang - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. How hard did you really look? There seems to be a pattern in your various threads of you going off half-cocked using limited or wrong information only to have to retract most of what you've said after you think about it for a few days. Perhaps some introspection on why you do this would be useful to you and your credibility.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2011, 10:20 AM
 
Location: Washingtonville
2,505 posts, read 2,321,083 times
Reputation: 441
Quote:
Originally Posted by KCfromNC View Post
The first hit on a google search for "evidence for the big bang" returns this : Big Bang - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. How hard did you really look? There seems to be a pattern in your various threads of you going off half-cocked using limited or wrong information only to have to retract most of what you've said after you think about it for a few days. Perhaps some introspection on why you do this would be useful to you and your credibility.
First off, I don't think anyone finds wikipedia a reliable source for accurate info. Second, I have read several papers on it and what they claim as evidence is questionable at best. I don't doubt the big bang theory, just find it funny how it has questionable evidence, not even empirical and yet you all accept it as the truth. Explain to me how a big bang occurred from nothing? And don't give me that theory on Gravity crap either. Nothing comes from nothing. I need something.

And the whole big bang leading to a random anomaly that spawned life. Give me a break.
Science can't even find their missing link they have been looking for since Darwin. I'm not denying evolution, just some of their theories on it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2011, 11:03 AM
 
Location: Valencia, Spain
16,155 posts, read 12,821,127 times
Reputation: 2879
Quote:
Originally Posted by raison_d'etre View Post
First off, I don't think anyone finds wikipedia a reliable source for accurate info.
Why not?? Look at the bottom of the Wiki page that was linked. There is a massive list of academic works that can be referenced relating to the claims made in the article. Same on just about every Wiki page. Nothing wrong with Wiki.

Quote:
Second, I have read several papers on it and what they claim as evidence is questionable at best.
What 'papers' would they be? References/links to the papers that you claim to have read please.

Quote:
Explain to me how a big bang occurred from nothing?
It didn't nor does science say it did. Can you produce any academic work that claims that BB occurred from "nothing"?


Quote:
And don't give me that theory on Gravity crap either. Nothing comes from nothing.
Not even your god? If nothing comes from nothing, what was it that your god created his universe from?

Quote:
And the whole big bang leading to a random anomaly that spawned life. Give me a break.
Yet you need no 'break' to believe that animals talk and millions of animals fitted onto a small boat??

Quote:
Science can't even find their missing link they have been looking for since Darwin.
That's because there is no such thing as a 'missing link' Your scientific ignorance is showing. Tuck it in please.

Quote:
I'm not denying evolution, just some of their theories on it.
Well Rifleman has asked you and people like you on many occasions to take three aspects of the ToE that you disagree with and explain...in your own words... what is wrong with those aspects and why.

Whilst your at it, excluding ToE and BB Theories, what other scientific Theories do you think are wrong or is it just those two?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2011, 11:46 AM
 
Location: Vermont
11,754 posts, read 14,611,102 times
Reputation: 18503
Quote:
Originally Posted by raison_d'etre View Post
This whole blame them theists stuff is getting old. You act as if only theists do this. Atheists do this all the time, they also ignore whole points and pretend it didn't happen, when they are wrong.
What is this nonsense even supposed to mean?

I'll remind you of your original post:

Quote:
Ok, come on... lets get real here. These guys obviously don't support the 1st amendment. They obviously want to banish religion from this world. They want to steal the imagination on the world and replace it with cold, hard, depressing facts. If this movement is allowed to complete what it has set out to do, they will steal the stories and fairytale from our youth along with the religions of the world.

Does your kid dream of far off lands, fighting dragons, saving princesses, and dueling with wizards? Bash those dreams, kill their imagination, don't allow creativity and imagination run wild in your children. They wish to replace emotions with so called logic. They believe in common sense as long as it matches their point of view.

This is the message these people are spreading. I will not allow this to happen. They want to bash and ridicule religion, spirituality, and even imagination. I will ridicule their so called reason and lack of proof as proof.

I only have one thing to say to those that are apart of this dream killing, imagination bashing, creativity killing group...

Bring It!
Many posters here have challenged you to point to some atheists who are opposed to the First Amendment, who "wish to replace emotions with so called logic", or who want to kill children's imaginations and dreams.

So far you have presented exactly zero evidence to support any of the ludicrous claims you have made.

Among other things, it makes me wonder what the hell you were talking about when you said "Bring it".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2011, 12:00 PM
 
Location: S. Wales.
50,083 posts, read 20,582,163 times
Reputation: 5927
Quote:
Originally Posted by raison_d'etre View Post
Yes more vocal. In other words it it doing the same thing they claim to dislike in major religions. Don't get me wrong, I love seeing atheist groups at events alongside churches, both spreading their message to people freely. It's when either side begins bashing.

I am not trying to demonize anyone. Fyi, atheist demonize religion and spirituality too. No point in denying that.
I take that point on board. Nevertheless the difference between hard but just criticism and demonization is (I argue) whether it is true or not.

Now when accusations are levelled against atheists and we show them to be absurdly untrue that should be the end of the matter, but we get the same accusation again and again. We got them from you and, instead of taking the point on board, you argue and start a 'you too' counter attack.

You may not be trying to demonize but that is (perhaps inadvertently) what you do. Tuo Quoque does not meant that you don't. It only means that we should be careful about what we accuse religion of.

What we generally accuse religion of is being nonsense, Faith based and illogical. So far our arguments to support that stance have stood up pretty well.

Call a spade a spade and a demon a demon, eh?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2011, 02:34 PM
 
Location: Washingtonville
2,505 posts, read 2,321,083 times
Reputation: 441
Quote:
Originally Posted by AREQUIPA View Post
I take that point on board. Nevertheless the difference between hard but just criticism and demonization is (I argue) whether it is true or not.

Now when accusations are levelled against atheists and we show them to be absurdly untrue that should be the end of the matter, but we get the same accusation again and again. We got them from you and, instead of taking the point on board, you argue and start a 'you too' counter attack.

You may not be trying to demonize but that is (perhaps inadvertently) what you do. Tuo Quoque does not meant that you don't. It only means that we should be careful about what we accuse religion of.

What we generally accuse religion of is being nonsense, Faith based and illogical. So far our arguments to support that stance have stood up pretty well.

Call a spade a spade and a demon a demon, eh?
I apologize if I seemed to demonize all atheists. I didn't mean to. When you say that religion is nonsense, I would like to give you an example of how it isnt nonsense.

Think of religion as a coping mechanism. This world we live in is a rough place. We are told what to do and how to live all the time. We are constantly singled out and told we are doing it wrong. Religion unites some people into a group that allows them to feel as if they belong. Religion also brings comfort to people. It is no different than someone who gets a cat or hides in books.

Whether or not the God(s) they worship are real does not matter. You shouldn't care if what they believe is real or not.

You say it matters because they attempt to impose laws that enforce their belief. However, all you need to do is point out that it benefits an individual faith and sometimes church. It does not benefit the collective of all people in the state(s). If you could somehow manage to get a law into effect that wouldn't allow religious organizations to form laws.

I am strongly against religious lobbying and "donations" to make laws that benefit a single group of people.
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
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:56 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top