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.
Anyone that knows my ex knows he had NO open mind about anything!
God, politics, blue cheese...his opinions were written in stone and there is ''no God'.
But, damn, he was handsome.
"...in this study, the Christian samples may not have been fully representative of a highly religious population. These samples scored moderately on religiosity and were particularly "liberal" or "questers"..."
"...in this study, the Christian samples may not have been fully representative of a highly religious population. These samples scored moderately on religiosity and were particularly "liberal" or "questers"..."
There is a fundamental flaw in the reasoning here.
It is based on a failure to see the difference between factual true - or -not intrinsics and human conventions of negotiation.
Now, we have seen the eror before of 'let's compromise onn whether the sun rises in the east or the went and say it meets in the middle.
This is wrong. You don't compromise but find out which one is true. That's what we all do. And that is 'closed -minded intolerance' of atheism. Now, when you don't know, you say you don't know. You have a committee to thrash out an agreement they all agree on and say that must be the truth.
But this is what the Christians are doing in integrating the various perspectives. What they are actually doing is when faced with truths they can't deny without looking silly, ihey drop that claim or percedure or dogma so as to maintain credibility.
But this is just politics to avoid losing suppoert on the part of the churches and of course individual compromize with Truth they can no longer deny.
Yes - while science, skepticism and indeed atheism claims always to have an open mind, and Theist apologists make a big deal of this with 'science is always getting things wrong' while thy pride themselves on never changing their views and the XChurcjhes too pretending they are not changing anything, are always shifting their ground in order not to be left behind and on the sidelines by the truths or at least soundly argued views on ethics and humanist morality, and adapting their views to that.
This was a distressingly poorly thought out article or written by someone who didn't understand the subject and would rather rush into print than actually talk to an informed atheist. He could have done it in twenty minutes.
Of course, it might just be a journalist quoting or misquoting a study, or at least misunderstanding the facts behind it. It wouldn't be the first time the media has gone off half -cocked and half understanding what they were talking about.
Well, if you build your life around science and empiricism, you're going to be less open-minded to the opinions of people who base their lives and values on "belief" and "feeling" rather than evidence.
It's like when my mother called me "stupid" because I told her I was an atheist. I calmly listed out my reasoning and the evidence for what I had arrived at, while she just shrieked back hysterically "I know what I believe!" Hard to keep an "open mind" around behavior like that. The best part was when she told me she didn't need to read the bible because she knew what she believed.
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.
