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.
Which are...? Please don't reference the instigators of devastating or genocidal policies of the various Marxist dictators who were pursuing a policy of unquestionable Dogma rather than atheism.
You will have to clarify what you were 'implying', though I can guess what you have in mind. I repeat - that was Marxist dogma which happened to have irreligion as part of the dogma, but the irreligion did not - so far as I know - lead to any of the atrocities; the ruthless application of Marxist policy (e.g, collectivisation) did. You can't lay the blame for that on atheism.
yup. then your personal opinion and my personal are just different.
so I look to evidence to see which one might be more valid.
I look at societies where
anti-religion socialism is at play,
socialist with capitalist limits and freedom of religion,
capitalism, with socialist limits and freedom of religion,
and I look at theist countries.
I don't know, but if they do, that is kind of scary, isn't it?
mocking the message doesn't change the validity of the claim.
If you think its scary that two people don't see that religion is the root of all evil and that religion is a tool that is both dangerous and helpful that is not the rational person's problem.
If you think its scary that two people use the accepted personalities traits of people that research and work in the field to claim that atheism and theism have them in their ranks, I am left to wonder why?
In fact, I am left to wonder what type of person would actually go to any length to smother that claim(s)?
Not at all. I said you suggested they go do something else, which you did, even though they weren't saying all discussion (or even all criticism) was what bored them.
No one (including the Christians or their bible) ever claimed that we would have a perfect moral sense. And of course, we are in position to know whether god could have a morally sufficient reason for allowing evil. That's just assumed by the problem of evil argument; it's never established, as I said.
Call them what you like; what matters to me is that they're true. You're attacking the Christians' adoption of this truth, but surely that can't be your rebuttal because you know what that would mean...
Which means it's rhetorically effective, not that it's a good logical argument...
Another straw man. I never said atheists/atheism has this burden of proof. But for those atheists/forms of atheism that claim there is no god, yes. Especially anti-theism, since it opposes a worldview. It needs to justify that opposition.
No one's saying he couldn't. My point is that no one's showing that he should.
Eh. I've seen apathy from "our side" as well, and theists rallying for these other virtues and ideals you mention. I know you very much want to paint this as a good guys vs. bad guys situation, but it just doesn't work on thinking people.
Now, are you talking about anti-theists here, or atheists? Because you've conflated them before, and I wanted to make sure you weren't trying to pidgeonhole me into your network of crazy rantings
i am not sure why people are fighting you so hard on this.
I mean look at your rhetorically line. Yes, rhetoric is effect even though it may not be the most valid claim? its propaganda that theist use and so do some atheist.
why in the heck are we fighting you so hard on those statements?
mocking the message doesn't change the validity of the claim.
If you think its scary that two people don't see that religion is the root of all evil and that religion is a tool that is both dangerous and helpful that is not the rational person's problem.
If you think its scary that two people use the accepted personalities traits of people that research and work in the field to claim that atheism and theism have them in their ranks, I am left to wonder why?
In fact, I am left to wonder what type of person would actually go to any length to smother that claim(s)?
You missed the message entirely. The "scary" part (said obviously in jest) is that the two people in this thread that nobody can understand seem to understand each other. The rest of your post is meaningless.
You missed the message entirely. The "scary" part (said obviously in jest) is that the two people in this thread that nobody can understand seem to understand each other. The rest of your post is meaningless.
thank you again. the rationality of post is meaningless to you.
ozzy and I agree on the claims I posted and I am still left wondering what type of person would go to such lengths to shun it?
we both stated that there are similar personality types in atheism and theism. we used accepted statements on personality types by people in the field to make that claim.
yup. then your personal opinion and my personal are just different.
so I look to evidence to see which one might be more valid.
I look at societies where
anti-religion socialism is at play,
socialist with capitalist limits and freedom of religion,
capitalism, with socialist limits and freedom of religion,
and I look at theist countries.
Last vid. I watched on the subject, the socialist non - theist countries came out streets ahead.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arach Angle
i am not sure why people are fighting you so hard on this.
I mean look at your rhetorically line. Yes, rhetoric is effect even though it may not be the most valid claim? its propaganda that theist use and so do some atheist.
why in the heck are we fighting you so hard on those statements?
Because he is assuming that the deconvert was talked out of it by an atheist, but these deconverts talked themselves out of it.
In O W he was making invalid assumptions in in order to validate a prejudice. How could i not put him right on that? And doesn't it bother you that you are fighting 'us' on this, when 'we ' are right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arach Angle
thank you again. the rationality of post is meaningless to you.
ozzy and I agree on the claims I posted and I am still left wondering what type of person would go to such lengths to shun it?
we both stated that there are similar personality types in atheism and theism. we used accepted statements on personality types by people in the field to make that claim.
and it is meaningless to you. nice work
I doubt that you and Ozzy really comprehend each others' posts. But you do know that you are both anti - the atheist rant - pack here; and that's all you need to know.
I've seen really bad arguments from both sides, and if you spent considerable time online really thinking about them critically you'd see the same. For example, the problem of evil argument is probably the anti-theist's most common approach. And yet it's simply an argument with an unsupported key premise (that god couldn't have morally sufficient reasons for allowing suffering/evil). I for one do get tired of and bored with it.
It is your initial position, that the argument is illogical that relies on the unsupported premise, that their COULD BE morally sufficient reasons for allowing evil.
And you refuse to demonstrate there COULD BE morally sufficient reasons for allowing evil because you say you are not making a claim. Which is just empty rhetoric, because saying there COULD BE morally sufficient reasons for allowing evil IS a claim. So it is up to you to demonstrate this, not the atheists to demonstrate something that may not exist. How would you even show there are NO morally sufficient reasons for allowing evil?
So once again, what morally sufficient reason could there be for the holocaust? Do not deflect again by pretending I am using some cheap debating tactic, because that is just empty rhetoric.
No they were not harmless. we are saying that we address the people involved and don't lump it all under "religions fault". its people's fault and religion was the tool.
No, it's people's fault and religion was the inspiration and the tool.
Does anybody have an Arach to English translator? None of this post makes any sense.
Here is all you need to know about Arach's posts:
He has no overarching theme...no ongoing position or message. He enjoys picking apart virtually every post that comes along.
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.
nice work
