ACTING IN GOOD FAITH

You might want to explain what "how o spell" is supposed to mean. I've never claimed perfection, so this is just more strawman idiocy.

It has been asserted time and again in many threads at this site that religious belief should be exempted from critical comment, scorn or ridicule. This has been characterized by me and by others who disagree as special pleading. As this is a site at which people debate topics of interest to them, it is inevitable that such disagreements will arise. In matters of political ideology and in a great many areas of scientific research, the religious show up to make a claim of special moral superiority or a claim of revealed scriptural truth which is claimed to refute the assertions of those with whom they disagree. Yet many of those same members claim that their beliefs and their diety--if they profess the belief in a deity--ought never to be criticized.

Apart from that being a ludicrous special plea to immunity in debate, it is rejected by many here who asser that religious faith is indistinguishable from any other form of superstition, and therefore not only should enjoy no such exemption, but is a special target for criticism. When the "holier than thou" crowd show up and begin pontificating, their beliefs are justifiably subjected to ridicule.

Therefore, a debate on whether or not religious faith is indistinguishable from superstition is a germane topic of debate in the larger context of the contests between those of religous conviction and those with whom they disagree.

It would be interesting to see the subject debated. So far, among the religious, the only members who have shown up here to debate without hurling insults at those with whom they disagree have been Neo and Miss Eppie. I haven't laid into Neo's theses yet, but his time will come. I believe it fair to say that Miss Eppie and i have exhausted the subject between us, and agreed to disagree--with neither of us ceding our points of view. Both of those members have behaved in a civil manner--and to them i will continue to respond in like kind, with the reservation that Neo and i often throw things at one another, and aren't likely to stop.

I am not believing you are serious with that Schopenhauer quote.

But, don't be concerned about my humility. I do speak boldly; but, I know I am faulted, and wrong at times.

You seem to be unaware that you possess the same shortcomings--or you wouldn't insult others' intelligence. Fight their points, not their character, and avoid damaging your own.

Don't worry, you'll get yours, Bubba . . .

o = missed t, sometimes s, could be n.

See if you can divine it with that great flapping brain.

I don't think religious people should be exempt from personal attack. I think ALL people should be exempt from personal attack.

You spend an inordinate amount of time scraping flesh off the poster, rather than taking issue with the post.

Don't be a hater.

LOL

Don't ya just love pet names?

Shhh. They're going to kiss.

Mirror mirror on the wall....

<best laugh tonight>

This, i take it, is an example of your belief that all people should be exempt from personal attack.



Criticizing someone's belief system and any silly deity in which they choose to believe does not constitute a personal attack, for however unpleasant it may be to the perfervid believer.



Apart from being a blatant lie . . . pot, meet kettle . . .



You hugely overrate your significance if you think you are hated by me.

Deadly
Here's an original for you
modesty is the worst policy

Well, I am sure a lot of the things you see as 'faults', I do not as I don't subscribe to the 'everyones a sinner' stuff. Since I am not constantly measuring myself against an invisible omnipotent ubermenche, I do not as often fall short.
I never claimed to be 'perfect', but then I find the whole concept of perfection to be erroneous without something to measure it by, of which I see no evidence.




But anyhow...
Where were we.
The pro faith crowd position
Faith=unsubstantiated belief based on 'hope' or 'love'
Superstition=unsubstantiated belief based in fear
Correct?
Problem number one is superstition does not HAVE to be based in fear, they are not mutually exclusive.
Anyone?

Actually, I thought you were hating other people. I didn't get in this Peace Program for myself. I am a well-meaning, yet detached bystander.

And, you must have noted, I have amended my rather visceral argumentation for a kinder, gentler path. I am no longer the pot, Mr Kettle, leaving you singularly black.

Again--this isn't about religion at all. It's about people.

I don't think "great flapping brain" would be considered an attack, by someone who prides himself in the size of his....well...great flapping brain.

I have no great flapping brain, and this is as typical an example of your "blackness" in addressing others as one could hope for.

This thread is about nothing other than religion--specifically it is posited that religious faith is indistinguishable from superstition.

Care to address the topic, instead of looking for opportunities to heap scorn on other members?

Ok, I am giving warning again!

Brilliant contribution.

Here's two bits, call some idiot who cares what you have to warn about.

Care to address the topic?

That is a disturbing emoticon, Momma.


Re: Care to address the topic, instead of looking for opportunities to heap scorn on other members?
________________
I will if you will.

What is your phone number, Set?

Intrep--

<you bumped the previous best laugh of the night>

LOL!!!!

Does anyone, other than Miss Eppie, Neo and Doktor S care to address the topic?

It doesn't appear that they do, either.