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.
Again you respond to part of the position while NOT addressing the actual logic of my argument. Mere opinion, (as in only opinion) lacking credible evidence or rational argument for it (zb, most of your posts), add junk to the conversation.
If all one has is only opinion, then your opinion is as valid as the person who simply says the opposite (zb, most of your posts). That is why one requires more than just opinion for a rational, intellectual conversation.
All you are doing is repeating your mere opinion and assertion without addressing that actual point.
And this board is NOT just opinions, views, and beliefs, and libraries do not have just books full with opinions so once again your 'analogies' are not analogies.
Here is where you just repeat yourself without addressing the actual logic of my argument (which you will simply ignore).
From where I'm sitting and reading, and to get back to the topic of this thread, I'd say this comment is more about truth than lies, but too much about the personal rather than the broader more important subject at hand...
Just my opinion of course! No one need point that sort of thing out again! Not to me anyway...
A demand of evidence can be a conversation stopper. So I just give it. And that is where my belief that evidence is a gift comes from and the person can do what they want with it, like any other gift.
The rest of this post is not aimed at you, cb2008. In another thread, a person mentioned that the mere belief in a god is evidence that a god exists concretely and so faith is not without evidence. I found this intriguing because I do believe that faith cannot exist without evidence. My response to that is that the belief in God is evidence that humans are capable of abstract ideas. Our abstract thoughts are made visible through language and concrete structures. This is no different than my assertion that evidence is a gift. Just because I can view evidence as a gift, doesn't make it a literal gift. My thinking is just evidence that I can think abstractly about things.
Gee...
"Demand of evidence" or, a request to have an opinion or belief better justified is not necessarily a "conversation stopper" if all these threads going on forever tell us anything, and of course it all depends on who is involved in the conversation, but does the fact I totally agree with the rest of your comment mean that I too can think abstractly about things?
I would start labeling that viewpoint as a preference (based on something) and treat it according to my preference.
As many people do, yes, lots of labels when it comes to this sort of thing, but far as this person is concerned along with a good many other people I would say are on the side of right, that LGBT people don't deserve the same rights as the rest of us is a falsehood. Not truth. A falsehood I can largely credit to religious beliefs that I also think are falsehoods and in the wrong.
No doubt you'll do better at being less offensive to some people who think otherwise than I can be with the label you give my viewpoint. No doubt more your goal more than it is mine...
"Demand of evidence" or, a request to have an opinion or belief better justified is not necessarily a "conversation stopper" if all these threads going on forever tell us anything, and of course it all depends on who is involved in the conversation, but does the fact I totally agree with the rest of your comment mean that I too can think abstractly about things?
When I write, it is almost 100% focused for that person. I rarely think about those who might also be reading but I probably should. Some posters think that when an atheist asks for evidence, it is not just asking nicely for evidence, but that it is demanded and nothing can move further until the evidence is satisfactory. At least that is the tone I have picked up.
This is entirely reasonable and rational, Tzaph, but it bumps up against the belief by some atheists that they are able to discern what is absolute truth from what is not. Their belief is so certain that appears to be the primary reason they participate.
The big problem with your repetition along these lines Mr. Stir Stick is that you suggest only atheists are guilty of thinking they can discern what is absolute truth from what is not. Who here, including you, doesn't think they've got the better handle on our universal truth? No one!
More correctly to the point, the question is who among us can better discern the truth? How and why? That's the issue. Not that any of us are any different when it comes to our opinions along these lines. We've all got 'em.
We can't all be right of course, but it shouldn't be learning or another source of division for anyone that we all think we are...
As many people do, yes, lots of labels when it comes to this sort of thing, but far as this person is concerned along with a good many other people I would say are on the side of right, that LGBT people don't deserve the same rights as the rest of us is a falsehood. Not truth. A falsehood I can largely credit to religious beliefs that I also think are falsehoods and in the wrong.
No doubt you'll do better at being less offensive to some people who think otherwise than I can be with the label you give my viewpoint. No doubt more your goal more than it is mine...
Is there any evidence Atheists have no problem with the LGBT sexual preference without regard to religious dictate? Does being devoid of religious beliefs also mean one is the most progressive, open minded, liberal, peace for all, human rights for everyone kind of person?
That will be quite amazing.
Does one exception prove otherwise in both camps? If it is all relative then does it matter what the truthiness of truth truly is?
When I write, it is almost 100% focused for that person. I rarely think about those who might also be reading but I probably should. Some posters think that when an atheist asks for evidence, it is not just asking nicely for evidence, but that it is demanded and nothing can move further until the evidence is satisfactory. At least that is the tone I have picked up.
I've tried pretty please, even with sugar on top, but that doesn't seem to work either...
Mostly it always has to do with one's perspective and how receptive they are to having their opinions and beliefs questioned. Here too I am very different from lots of other people, because I have always enjoyed -- encouraged -- others to consider and critique my opinions and beliefs without concern. For the most part if done in an honest, reasonable, adult and civil manner, ask away far as I'm concerned, and all the better!
As many people do, yes, lots of labels when it comes to this sort of thing, but far as this person is concerned along with a good many other people I would say are on the side of right, that LGBT people don't deserve the same rights as the rest of us is a falsehood. Not truth. A falsehood I can largely credit to religious beliefs that I also think are falsehoods and in the wrong.
No doubt you'll do better at being less offensive to some people who think otherwise than I can be with the label you give my viewpoint. No doubt more your goal more than it is mine...
While it would be nice to appear less offensive, I am not naive enough to believe for one second that I can truly avoid offending anybody. While sometimes we may just be exchanging ideas, there is always an opportunity for somebody to make some point.
I've tried pretty please, even with sugar on top, but that doesn't seem to work either...
Mostly it always has to do with one's perspective and how receptive they are to having their opinions and beliefs questioned. Here too I am very different from lots of other people, because I have always enjoyed -- encouraged -- others to consider and critique my opinions and beliefs without concern. For the most part if done in an honest, reasonable, adult and civil manner, ask away far as I'm concerned, and all the better!
Sugar won't work if people perceive a different agenda.
This is entirely reasonable and rational, Tzaph, but it bumps up against the belief by some atheists that they are able to discern what is absolute truth from what is not. Their belief is so certain that appears to be the primary reason they participate.
So evaluating evidence using verified methods is no better than 'because Tzap says so'?
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.
