Ionus
 
  0  
Thu 11 Nov, 2010 06:31 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
We don't need to see definitions for those words; we are all familiar with them.
Why do you use we when clearly you are not a queen....oops... maybe you(pl) are....
Quote:
and all I have asked for is you to show us who they are......All you need to do is identify who they are
WE dont want no lynchings. If you havent been following, you(pl) will have to catch up.
Quote:
Do you ever answer direct questions?
Yes.
Quote:
are they too difficult for you?
No.
Quote:
post from their blog that proves they are "clowns who worship science." Simple.
Right after you prove :
Quote:
We don't need to see definitions for those words

Why are so many of your posts, in this and other threads, about you asking to have everything explained ? It is not our fault if you(pl) are forgetful.
Ionus
 
  1  
Thu 11 Nov, 2010 06:35 pm
If anyone wanted to address the real issue of the authority of Christian religion they should improve their knowledge of the origins of the Bible.

If anyone wanted to address the real issue of the authority of science they should improve their knowledge of the big bang (the creation of the universe) and rubbish ideas like parrallel universes.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  -1  
Thu 11 Nov, 2010 06:43 pm
@Ionus,

ci wrote:
Quote:
and all I have asked for is you to show us who they are......All you need to do is identify who they are


Anus wrote:
Quote:
WE dont want no lynchings. If you havent been following, you(pl) will have to catch up.


ci wrote:
Quote:
Catch up with what? Your non-answers?
Ionus
 
  1  
Thu 11 Nov, 2010 06:53 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Sillyold Imposter wrote :
Quote:
Catch up with what? Your non-answers?
You mean like the other thread where you dont know that psychologists have studied religion ? I had to show you how to use google. At some stage you are going to have to admit seniltity has over taken you. Face facts, you are forgeting faster than you can relearn.

When it is shown, do you apologise for your stupidity, arrogance and inability to do research ? Of course not.....it is part of the demanding nature of old farts to think they have a right to being spoiled children.
0 Replies
 
hingehead
 
  1  
Thu 11 Nov, 2010 07:02 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Let it go CI, just press ignore anus so I stop smelling poo.
http://i775.photobucket.com/albums/yy32/Sonicbowling/TROLL.jpg
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Thu 11 Nov, 2010 07:03 pm
@hingehead,
Good advise; I'll do that.
Ionus
 
  1  
Thu 11 Nov, 2010 07:06 pm
@hingehead,
Thank you Unhinged head, I was tireing of the old fart.
0 Replies
 
Intrepid
 
  1  
Thu 11 Nov, 2010 07:23 pm
@ehBeth,
ehBeth wrote:

C'mon up - Intrepid and I will make dang sure that you get a few poutines to try.


You buy. I'll be putting my money in the offering box.

Wink Smile
Ionus
 
  1  
Thu 11 Nov, 2010 07:30 pm
@cicerone imposter,
You refuse to answer questions and say the question is silly and irrlevant. Then you think you are onto something when you harrass people for an answer to the most blatantly obvious. You are a hypocrit.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  2  
Thu 11 Nov, 2010 07:31 pm
@Intrepid,
Intrepid, sometimes there's only one side of a story sometimes there's 7 or 26 or 107. sometimes they're all wrong.
snood
 
  1  
Thu 11 Nov, 2010 07:33 pm
@Lash,
Lash wrote:

It would be awesome if rational people could discuss god vs no god dispassionately, but I was just mentally following an imagined discussion - and I think the problem centers on how we kindly tell someone that the most important thing in their life - the thing that many times is the founding principal of their existence - to the non-believer is like a fairy tale.

Then, the reasons most non-believers cite for belief are insulting, too.

I sat here staring at it on the screen, thinking I should just delete it, because as nicely as I wanted to frame a response to you - it sounds awful.

I think the sacred importance of the topic in the believer - and the true opinion about the topic in the non-believer very naturally set the two up for deeply felt disagreement. ..and for deep insult to be experienced by the believer.


So, if I understand you correctly, it is the intense level of the believer’s “beliefs” that would be the factor that naturally produced the result of hurt feelings, in the course of an impassioned discussion between two parties who disagreed on god vs no god. Do I have that right?

If I do, I disagree. I think the participants in that discussion, just as in any similar discussion dealing with strongly held feelings (certain political and relationship issues might do it) are in control of whether or not offense is given.

Put another way – people consciously choose how to phrase things. What’s the difference between “your god is a fairy tale” and “I just don’t believe your god exists”? Or, is there any difference, in your estimation?

By the by - any luck in the job hunt?
dyslexia
 
  2  
Thu 11 Nov, 2010 07:42 pm
@Lash,
Quote:
It would be awesome if rational people could discuss
0 Replies
 
Intrepid
 
  1  
Thu 11 Nov, 2010 07:42 pm
@dyslexia,
I am not struck so much by the diversity of testimony as by the many-sidedness of truth.
Stanley Baldwin
Ionus
 
  1  
Thu 11 Nov, 2010 07:46 pm
@hingehead,
Quote:
so I stop smelling poo
You need to do some sphincter tightening exercises. Going at it a bit hard lately have we ? Some also wear tampons. The police use it as a means of identifying arrested men as homosexuals.
0 Replies
 
failures art
 
  1  
Thu 11 Nov, 2010 07:50 pm
@Thomas,
Thomas wrote:

The American Humanist Association is starting a media campaign encouraging viewers to Consider Humanism. (For CNN's report about the campaign, click here; for a link to the campaign itself, click here.) The campaign contrasts quotes by humanists with quotes on the same issues from the Quran and the Bible. By doing so, the originators hope to persuade their viewers that humanist ideas are mainstream American ideas---and that ideas in Biblical scriptures frequently aren't.

I wonder what my fellow infidels think of this campaign?

I think the reply will label them as "militant" atheists or "in your face."

The message will be probably well received by people who feel this way. Perhaps they will be more open about their beliefs. I don't think however that Christians, Muslims, etc will see this and think more positively of atheists/humanists.

A
R
T
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Thu 11 Nov, 2010 07:50 pm
@Intrepid,
Intrepid wrote:

I am not struck so much by the diversity of testimony as by the many-sidedness of truth.
Stanley Baldwin
and that's what puts us in different rooms of the mansion.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Thu 11 Nov, 2010 07:59 pm
@snood,
Hey - yeah on the job hunt, but nothing to write home about. I went ahead and accepted a part time Instructional Assistant position, because I can't bear to wait at least another month on my credentialing. So, if money is my main concern, I'm screwed; but truthfully, I am happy that my foot is in a door (They told me they want to talk about teaching there once my credentialing comes through - but who knows when a slot will open...) Also, I'll have professional, local references and contacts in the school system (awesome!)...and probably, most important for me - I am in the classroom - teaching and learning without being completely responsible for four/five classes a day right out of the gate. THIS is what I'm so thankful for. OJT. Thanks for asking.

Re the other stuff: I would say that, just like a writer who wants to "show" rather than "tell" - who is striving for such a strong metaphor that his point is crystal clear - likening belief in God and belief in another figure society trains us to believe in, but we outgrow, is a very tempting device. Not meant to hurt, but to closely represent.

Anyway, I think you might have some agnostics here, who could entertain the subject as thoughtfully and sensitively as possible, but I think ultimately the believer would be insulted. I mean, I tripped all over myself just trying to hammer this little bit out, in deference to you...and then at the end of it, I feel I've backspaced and watered down so much that it doesn't even bear replying. Trying to "control offense," while a very worthy goal - sometimes means not honestly or effectively communicating.

Remember, I used to be a believer and I thought the heart of the agnostic argument insulted my intelligence - no matter how nicely it's wrapped.

Nice bumping into you. Hope you and yours are warm and happy.
failures art
 
  2  
Thu 11 Nov, 2010 08:06 pm
Snood - I think that it's hard for discussions on god v no god to be calm. From my vantage point and also from my earlier experience in life as a believer in a god, I must say that this belief (as opposd to say some political or philosophical belief) is sowed very deeply into a person's self value. Therefore it's hard to keep things calm when to many believers the real debate is god v no self value. Do you disagree? Is your belief in god not directly tied to how you feel about yourself and your won value?

Can you see why for atheists this is very challenging to address others? In my experience, people can become very defensive. On top of that, on matters of dictating the terms of discussion, it's not actually a discussion on god v no god, but one about divine versus natural mechanics. That is much more fundamental and incorporates a large variety of theistic possibilities that most believers shrug off because of personal preference. In other words, how can I have an honest theological discussion with say a Christian, when they somehow view their beliefs to be somehow factually elevated above the old mythologies of the Greek Pantheon, the Shinto shay men, or any tribal story of divine heritage?

Until religious people remove their cloak of entitlement, no real level and honest discussion can be had. I do admire your (and I'm not ignoring you Intrepid. You too) desire for this, but I wonder if you are willing to enter a discussion where your beliefs are truly vulnerable.

A
R
T
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Thu 11 Nov, 2010 08:14 pm
@failures art,
fa, I believe your statement
Quote:
sowed very deeply into a person's self value.
is the reason why emotion is always part and parcel of any discussion of god or no god.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Thu 11 Nov, 2010 08:20 pm
@failures art,
Quote:
divine versus natural mechanics
just another incarnation of the old bugaboo PLURALSM. sorry to say FA but you're about 50 years behind modern physics.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

The tolerant atheist - Discussion by Tuna
Another day when there is no God - Discussion by edgarblythe
church of atheism - Discussion by daredevil
Can An Atheist Have A Soul? - Discussion by spiritual anrkst
THE MAGIC BUS COMES TO CANADA - Discussion by Setanta
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Atheism
  3. » Page 125
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.14 seconds on 11/16/2024 at 10:40:37