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.
Personally, although I generally like and agree with his posts, I think that's in poor taste. But then again your occasional implied references about the ultimate future of atheists is in poorer taste (and even in your own religion, above you pay grade).
I have no idea what you are talking about. Are you confusing me with someone else?
I have no idea what you are talking about. Are you confusing me with someone else?
No, I'm not. You have made allusions to the future of non-believers a number of times over the months. And no, I'm not going to go back and look for them now. But I'll be happy to point them out in the future, just as I point out every post where you proclaim who is and isn't a real christian.
No, I'm not. You have made allusions to the future of non-believers a number of times over the months. And no, I'm not going to go back and look for them now. But I'll be happy to point them out in the future, just as I point out every post where you proclaim who is and isn't a real christian.
If I'm really the crazy nut that you seem to think I am, why would even care what I thought anyway?
Just be honest. All of you atheists and agnostics do care about what Christians think. Now ask yourself why that is.
Speaking for myself - that's a good question. My family are very religious and I do care what they think and it does bother me that they can be so misguided and brainwashed.
Atheism is simply a lack of belief in god(s), nothing more nothing less. It has no other inherent characteristics, like rationality, logic, or any other. It's just a privative. I'm not saying you can't build a philosophical platform on it but all those new distinctions would be auxiliary properties and not the immutable characteristic of atheism, of which there is only one - a lack of belief in god(s).
I agree. The Other Stuff (aside from correcting the misunderstandings of or misrepresentations about atheism that Theist apologetics does - which can often get very complicated) is all knock - on effects arising from atheism- which is is very simple in itself. Atheism does not exist in a vacuum (as our poster Julian hath said, as I recall) and non -belief in a god does pose questions about how we live and behave in a complex society. None of which is the disbelief in itself. You may call it 'building a philosophical platform on it'. I see it father as winning a milion dollars. You don't just sit there and think 'I have a million dollars'. Nor do you construct a philosophy of million -dollar wins. You have to think about 'so what do i do now'.That isn't philosophy, but getting on with a life as changed by losing the impositions of a god -plan as much as by willing a large sum of money.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe
The distinction between plausible hypotheses and not so plausible is in part what the scientific method attempts to ascertain. Obviously, any hypothesis can be promoted, but some are certainly more worthy than others. All depends on one's criteria for such evaluation and conclusion, and I simply know of no better approach than that of empirical science all considered. What's wonderful about the scientific method as well is that it doesn't rule out any possibilities out of hand. Each and every speculation about our universal truth can be fairly considered and evaluated.
All as I think has been going on for some time now, since the days we thought earthquakes, storms, droughts and disease were caused by the direct will of Gods...
That's sound thinking, I'd say.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe
You mean like the reverse cowgirl position?
Exactly, though I wouldn't dream of implying that "They were asking for it".
No one complains when Trans says "godsuckers". How do you feel about that.
I employ the term with the utmost respect, Ozzy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OzzyRules
Just be honest. All of you atheists and agnostics do care about what Christians think. Now ask yourself why that is.
We already know why. Christianity dominates in America in an unhealthy and even dangerous way. Other religions dominate elsewhere, but that's their problem. There is an ongoing campaign to erode that dominance from the US and push it out of politics, education, law and science. Caring about what people think is all part of this, and that's why we post here.
The question of whether it needs to be done is not one to ask; whether posting here is an effective use of our time is perhaps, a question to be asked. But we can't all run our own apologetics websites or make our own videos. We just have to do what we can do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe
Some comments are best left alone while others might be inclined to report such comments to moderators, because they are nothing but "drive-by" insults hardly worth the time pecking them out. I find getting moderators involved as if we need baby-sitters very childish (and mostly a waste of their time). I've also never once used the ignore feather. I don't need such a feature to ignore comments any more than I need blinders to keep from looking at something...
I don't see them as insults at all. They are in fact pertinent questions about the implications of irreligion as a dominant feature of a society. Atheism ignores these question at its' perils. The point has been made that the French revolution (once they'd eliminated rulership) tried to establish a democracy based on reason. In fact it turned into power-struggles and legalised assassinations, pretty much, with a witch hunt for enemies of the state and Communism often threw up the same kind of dictators who only survived by eliminating all rivals.
While it is obvious that these arguments are intended by theist apologists to try to make a case against atheism as being too risky to have as a dominant social position, whether it is true or not, I think that these arguments have to be considered, but the fact is that you can have an irreligious society without revolutions, terrors and dictatorships and in fact that is what Europe pretty much has.
While it is indeed tactical scaremongering by the religious apologists, ignoring history would risk us repeating it, if and when the atheist central committee and dogmatic orthodox enforcement office gets executive power.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 07-24-2019 at 11:34 PM..
Oh, I'm from across the pond. Trans' neighbour, in a slightly round about way.
And that explanation was excellent! I'm loving the "and frothy eloquence neither convinces nor satisfies me", describes me to a tee
Seems I'll be headed somewhat in your direction as I will be in Ireland and Scotland later this year. My wife and I honeymooned in England, London and the Cotswolds, then Paris (many moons and some 33 years ago). Now that we are retired, we're scheming on how to spend lots more time in Europe, because we just love it there.
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.
