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.
If you are talking about the U.S...most of the killings carried out, and laws passed, are not based upon Biblegod or Jesus. You didn't know that?
You can *try* to lay out that bogus line...but it won't cut it with anybody but the most ignorant.
If you think that putting up a thousand posts in 7 months, to a Web board read by a few dozen strangers is any kind of effective or efficient way to shield against the Religious Oppression you claim...you win the award for, "Person That Expended The Most Time And Effort To Accomplish The Least Of Their Goals".
The more I see this "Fighting Against Religious Oppression" pretext put forth ...the more I realize how either clueless or dishonest a claim it is.
You are either ignoring what I have said, or being obtuse on purpose. Where did I say anything of the sort? Just about every reason people kill is being fought against, just like religion. Gangs, drugs, mental illness, religion, guns, and whatever else. I'm sorry you can't grasp these simple things, but that is a YOU problem.
You ignored the part that mattered yet again though, and actually responded to my post responding to Jeff, which is no surprise. I will capitalize it all so you will be sure to see it this time.
IT IS ALSO ABOUT PEOPLE TRYING TO USE THIS FICTIONAL CHARACTER TO ENACT LAWS AND DENY RIGHTS.
I am not on here trying to "shield against the Religious Oppression you claim". I am on here to debate things and fill my down time at work. If even one person realizes how silly religious claims are due to my posts, it's a win, but that isn't why I am on this site. So keep on making baseless assumptions about me, it only proves my point about you.
Well, first off, reading something and researching something has nothing to do with someone being condescending. I posted reasons refuting your "why do we have different color hair and skin?" question, and you completely ignored it. You also ignored another poster who did the same. You don't have to take my word for it, you can look it up yourself.
I have said this before, and I'll say it again. Unless you are a Genesis literalist, nothing in evolution would dispute a creator. It doesn't prove there is either mind you, but the two things don't have to be at odds. If you are a literalist, then it is pointless to even have the conversation.
My whole point was for you to look up, not whether we came from primates or not, but why we have different colored skin, hair, eyes, and other traits. If you are unwilling to do that, then why are you even in this discussion? If you are unwilling to learn about what you are speaking about, then why are you here, right now, in this discussion?
I have never said anyone is hopelessly ignorant or stupid, and I have yet to meet anyone who thinks they are the supreme expert on all things, except for religious folks. You guys are the only ones who think you have all the answers.
Unfortuantely that is Jeff's standard MO, he makes claims and accusations mostly totally unfounded and will never back them up. If you post links or reasons why his claims are incorrect or even that he is mistaken he comes back with claiming that you insulted his intelligence and that you are claiming that you know everything about anything. The bolded text is the reason for much of the run ins that I had with Jeff. And Jeff I do mean only the bolded text not the rest of that sentence.
His objections to evolution were answered by yourself and me plus how evolution actually does work has been explained to him and others but they do not want to understand it. That goes against their religious beliefs. The biggest problem I see is that they want science to add that maybe God did it in many scientific disciplines and they fail to understand that adding that God might have been involved removes it from science into opinion.
You are either ignoring what I have said, or being obtuse on purpose. Where did I say anything of the sort? Just about every reason people kill is being fought against, just like religion. Gangs, drugs, mental illness, religion, guns, and whatever else. I'm sorry you can't grasp these simple things, but that is a YOU problem.
You ignored the part that mattered yet again though, and actually responded to my post responding to Jeff, which is no surprise. I will capitalize it all so you will be sure to see it this time.
IT IS ALSO ABOUT PEOPLE TRYING TO USE THIS FICTIONAL CHARACTER TO ENACT LAWS AND DENY RIGHTS.
I am not on here trying to "shield against the Religious Oppression you claim". I am on here to debate things and fill my down time at work. If even one person realizes how silly religious claims are due to my posts, it's a win, but that isn't why I am on this site. So keep on making baseless assumptions about me, it only proves my point about you.
Everybody would like to have things be the way they would prefer them to be...that's Human Nature.
Since the vast majority of the people in this world subscribe to some theology, and use that theology to help guide them...it would figure that it will have influence on those that create the laws, ordinances, and regulations.
That's just the way the world was, is now, and is gonna be. To think you will do anything to change it to any degree is the height of ignorance. You can't, and you won't. If that bothers you...you are just gonna have to learn to deal with it, or live in constant angst.
Unfortuantely that is Jeff's standard MO, he makes claims and accusations mostly totally unfounded and will never back them up. If you post links or reasons why his claims are incorrect or even that he is mistaken he comes back with claiming that you insulted his intelligence and that you are claiming that you know everything about anything. The bolded text is the reason for much of the run ins that I had with Jeff. And Jeff I do mean only the bolded text not the rest of that sentence.
His objections to evolution were answered by yourself and me plus how evolution actually does work has been explained to him and others but they do not want to understand it. That goes against their religious beliefs. The biggest problem I see is that they want science to add that maybe God did it in many scientific disciplines and they fail to understand that adding that God might have been involved removes it from science into opinion.
Please post your proof from the time machine to show as 100% fact that we evolved from primates. Oh wait, it's still just a theory in the REAL world.
Sure they do, but they usually don't vent rage and anger over non-existent thing or passionately dedicate hours of their life to try and convince believers that their "imaginary god" is sadistic. I don't believe in Buddha, but I never felt the need to go bash Buddhists. There is even an atheist version of the Bible where someone took the time to go verse by verse and trash and mock the Holy Bible. That kind of dedication speaks volumes of the deeply rooted venom that exists in them.
Take of your blinders.
Christians spit out hate all the time. So do Muslims. Yes, there are atheists who do it, but do you ever wonder why they focus on Christianity and Islam? Because they're the most aggressive ones (and there's just more of them in more places).
I'm more than willing to accept that some atheists are not good people. I don't personally identify as an atheist, but that is the group I fit into best rather or not I choose to. But are you seriously this strong willed to ignore reality? Why might some atheists take issue with religion? I'm not going to answer that for you, I'm actually asking you to think about it for a moment.
I'll help a bit, why are Buddhists so rarely the target? Thinking about that might help you reach an answer.
And here, in the name a fairness, I'll answer my own question against atheists. Of course some atheists are arrogant and rude. People like Bill Maher for example can't just pick out the bad aspects of religion, like how they treat gays or "deserters", but they have to go after the little stuff. Maher was recently on Colbert's show, and Colbert identifies as Catholic and Bill made a deal out of it. There's no real reason to though; Colbert would surely agree that there are negative aspects about religion, as any sensible person can, but Colbert isn't taking part in those things. It's a personal thing in his personal life, and I firmly believe that this isn't something that needs to be criticized without reason. And when atheists do that, I fully understand why some religious people have an unreasonable bias against atheists.
1) That is not necessary; we have the evidence we need here.
2) A 'theory' is not just a theory; it's the best working and most tested understanding of a given area. Evolution is the best working theory we have.
3) Do you have a time machine for your Bible?
And yet you are 100% convinced it is reality. Since science is always self correcting then it is a bit hypocritical to not allow for the possibility that you could be wrong and a future scientific find could erase all the educated evolutionary theory. It will always be a theory because you can't prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that we evolved from primates.
Why do I need a time machine for the Bible when I see clear evidence for God in the present? Once you have supernatural experiences, it's kinda hard to buy into the atheist version of reality.
And yet you are 100% convinced it is reality. Since science is always self correcting then it is a bit hypocritical to not allow for the possibility that you could be wrong and a future scientific find could erase all the educated evolutionary theory. It will always be a theory because you can't prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that we evolved from primates.
Why do I need a time machine for the Bible when I see clear evidence for God in the present? Once you have supernatural experiences, it's kinda hard to buy into the atheist version of reality.
I'm 100% convinced that evolution is the best working theory as of right now. At no point did I say nothing else could be right. The thing is, nothing has been presented to replace it, or should I say, nothing has discredited the evidence backing evolution and/or provided more compelling evidence of it's accuracy.
Remember, in science, an idea can only be three different things. A hypothesis, meaning it could be true but has yet to be tested, a theory, meaning it's been tested and consistent and reliable results have been achieved, or a law, meaning it's mathematically the only possible reality. Most things discussed in a science class rooms are theories. Gravity, evolution, atoms; they're all scientific theories, and that's a pretty big deal. They aren't just theories, they are theories. Scientifically literate people understand what that means. You can be one of them if you choose to be.
And I'll ask for the third time (maybe forth) what is that evidence for God?
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.
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.
