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.
Did I call out anyone specifically and attack them in that post? Yes or NO. I was directly insulted in #14. Hey it's perfectly fine for you and your friends to do that, right?
I made a generalized statement about atheists and that's all.
I guess you are correct, you insulted every atheist and as you mentioned no one by name you cannot be held accountable by anyone. Under your logic you can insult all atheists but we either must attack all Christians or accept it. And if we were to attack all Christians then you take offense and then you accuse us of hating all Christians. Set the rules so that you cannot lose,
For myself I prefer to take responsibility for my own actions and words. You were called out because of what you posted not because all Christians made that statement. And you have directly insulted most if us on these forums so don't play the innocent.
Atheists see no valid reason to believe in any deities. They can believe or disbelieve in literally anything else and still be atheists. Atheism is a description of a very narrow belief position. Asking if atheists believe in anything other than one or more gods is like asking if people who don't play tennis believe in exercise. It's a non-sequitur.
If you're suggesting that theists are obliged to explain the origin of the universe or of life in order to justify their unbelief then you are making a number of presuppositions that aren't valid. Atheists tend to be empiricists and rationalists and do not feel uncomfortable sitting with uncertainty. Although there are hypothesis (even testable ones) about the origin of the universe and of life, we don't currently know the answers to those questions. What we DO know is that 100% of what we DO understand about reality has not required deities for an explanation and theology has not been demonstrated to have predictive power either. Instead we have come to understand that confirmation bias and agency inference are serious weaknesses of the human mind that have to be actively compensated for. Putting all this together, it seems unlikely that some sort of deity will be the explanation for the universe. Of course if evidence or logical argument arises to suggest otherwise we will adjust our thinking accordingly.
Positing a god as a creator or first mover solves nothing anyway. Which god would that be? Shiva? Zeus? Chthulu? Or a rather pointless god-concept such as the deists have? Absent or indifferent gods are for practical purposes no different than non-existent ones, unless you can propose a way to detect and prove their presence and interaction in the past or present. And then there is the infinite regress problem of who created god ... which isn't removed by special pleading arguments.
Without sentience would anything even realize existence existed? How did sentience arise? Existence itself is way more powerful than any God or Deity as you have described in your quote. Sentience is existence itself trying to understand what it is. We have no idea of what existence wants from us or why we exist. Humans for thousands of years have created religions and rituals to try to explain it. Now we use scientific methods to try to explain the same thing. We now understand more about the universe, but that does not make the stars or heavens any less great than they were to the ancients. We now realize that a star is way more powerful of a force than an imaginary god. Although a star does not have sentience. Thought is one of the most mysterious creations of all that existence has created. When the shark is dragging you under do you hope for some mystical force to save you, or are you just accepting that you are a piece of meat that will fill the sharks caloric intake for the next 2 days? Hindus would say your going to be reborn so it no big deal either way. Christians think you go to a better place. I am one that believes we are all just DNA codes that exist forever as some form of DNA, just repeating the code over and over and over and over in many forms that keep evolving. Never the less it still does not explain why sentience arose after 1.2 billions years of the DNA code replicating itself. Existence has been around in this universe for over 14 billions years, and who knows what other forms of sentience exist out there. Maybe we will meet one soon that can explain it all a little bit better to us all. Nothing wrong with faith though, as it is all we have had as humans for the bulk of our short existence on this little planet called Earth.
I guess you are correct, you insulted every atheist and as you mentioned no one by name you cannot be held accountable by anyone. Under your logic you can insult all atheists but we either must attack all Christians or accept it. And if we were to attack all Christians then you take offense and then you accuse us of hating all Christians. Set the rules so that you cannot lose,
You already do this anytime I constantly see remarks about "fundies". When every single atheist you encounter treats you like crap and shows clear signs of venomous hatred for the Bible and God's people then why would you expect me to see flowers and roses from your side of the fence? I don't. I see arrogance, hypocrisy and extreme judgmental behavior. I see an attitude that your side can never be wrong about anything. That's my opinion about atheists and if that insults you personally, that's your own problem. Calling me out by name and running down my personal character is a whole different ball of wax and you know it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by badlander
For myself I prefer to take responsibility for my own actions and words. You were called out because of what you posted not because all Christians made that statement. And you have directly insulted most if us on these forums so don't play the innocent.
You certainly didn't take responsibility for your promise to leave me alone.
This video has been making the rounds the past few days. If I was one of those kids of hers, I would want to crawl in the nearest dark hole or closet with embarrassment, but then, I think this is full out nut banger crazy.
The proper way to protest Target or not? Let's not forget, the disturbance she is causing is in private property, and as such, is her free speech can be curtailed.
1) someone had sex with that woman 12 times, which I think is the most convincing evidence I've ever seen that miracles are real
2) 12 children means a very real possibility of 12 people behaving just like this will enter the world; I desperately hope at least one of them can get out of that craziness
3) there are people concerned about the devil raping children (well, American ones...), and while concern for children is important, no state that has anti-transgendered discrimination bathroom policy has seen any increase in sexual assaults of any kind, and also, by choosing to attack Target, she also chose to do nothing about the millions of starving children in this country
4) it's fine to have disagreements about Target's bathroom policy, but this is no way to protest; who does she think will change their minds because she's shooting and marching with her excessive family? Holding a book, I'm guessing the Bible though I suppose it could just be anything, does not make an opinion more valid
5) while on the subject of disagreement, I'll add that having a dialogue on it should NEVER be discouraged; I've not been on this forum too long but I've noticed some posters do have a tendency to take "I don't agree with your opinion" to mean "you shouldn't be allowed to have an opinion" which is crazy! In regards to the video, disagreement and having a conversation is fine, but you need to be open to reason, and people who are open to reason are usually very reasonable (derp). In my life, I've yet to see many reasonable people march through a store with children going on about rape
To answer the question, nutjob. Maybe devout and faithful too. But still a nutjob. No reason you can't be both.
Not quite as bad as murdering babies, which I'm sure you're in favor of.
I suppose you will have to take that up with someone who favors murdering babies....such as the christian god.
It never crossed my mind but perhaps those kids would be better off having been aborted as an embryo vs. being raised by ignorant angry hateful trash such as their mother and father.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luke9686
BTW-I'm not a Christian or a republican so use a different attack if you respond to me.
Whats to attack other than you made an ignorant assumption.
1) someone had sex with that woman 12 times, which I think is the most convincing evidence I've ever seen that miracles are real.
.....
To answer the question, nutjob. Maybe devout and faithful too. But still a nutjob. No reason you can't be both.
I'd rep again you if I could, skepticratic (need to spread reps around etc). Good post!
P.S. Good to have you aboard!
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.
