Atheism

IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH
TheistTroll
IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH's picture
Posts: 66
Joined: 2008-06-23
User is offlineOffline
Atheism

 In my opinion, of all the numerous faiths, from Christianity to Buddhism to animism to atheism, the most basic and unlikely is Atheism. Religion, unlike science, is the attempt to answer the question why (science attempts to answer how). Animism a  slightly less ridiculous faith, answers the question why with the answer of "everything". Atheism denies the existence of the question, because it denies the existence of an answer. Without an answer there is no question. However, since I can ask the question it is obvious that it exists, so there must be an answer. 

 

Besides lets be totally honest and say that its really unlikely that thinking beings such as humans just popped into existence out of nowhere. 

We must learn to control our thoughts, or we will remain slaves to our feelings.
-SR


Rook_Hawkins
RRS CO-FOUNDER
Rook_Hawkins's picture
Posts: 1322
Joined: 2006-02-11
User is offlineOffline
Ladies and gentlemen...the

Ladies and gentlemen...the dumbest thing said on this message board today.


Wonko
Wonko's picture
Posts: 518
Joined: 2008-06-18
User is offlineOffline
I'll second that motion.

Rook_Hawkins wrote:

Ladies and gentlemen...the dumbest thing said on this message board today.

 

I'll second that motion.

 


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
I'll 3rd it.

I'll 3rd it.


Renee Obsidianwords
High Level DonorModeratorRRS local affiliateSilver Member
Renee Obsidianwords's picture
Posts: 1388
Joined: 2007-03-29
User is offlineOffline
Hooray for creativity!A

Hooray for creativity!

A trolls ability to recycle the same idea over and over and over again is utterly breathtaking. It is done in such a way that the reader is curious and hangs on to the end of the post to once again be disappointed that no new point was made. Nothing ventured AND nothing gained.

Thanks troll, you make me smile.

Slowly building a blog at ~

http://obsidianwords.wordpress.com/


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
By the way, as pointed out

By the way, as pointed out many, many times in the forums here, atheism is not a faith/religion - unless you consider "off" to be a TV channel or "bald" a hair color.

Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team


IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH
TheistTroll
IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH's picture
Posts: 66
Joined: 2008-06-23
User is offlineOffline
 So none of you are

 So none of you are actually gonna argue with it? Just attack it ad hominem?


IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH
TheistTroll
IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH's picture
Posts: 66
Joined: 2008-06-23
User is offlineOffline
 Any assumption made and

 Any assumption made and believed is a faith. 

 

Off is not a channel, but it is a state of being of the TV. 

We must learn to control our thoughts, or we will remain slaves to our feelings.
-SR


Renee Obsidianwords
High Level DonorModeratorRRS local affiliateSilver Member
Renee Obsidianwords's picture
Posts: 1388
Joined: 2007-03-29
User is offlineOffline
Go to the Google search this

Go to the Google search this site link on the left side of your screen. Place "atheism a religion" and see what you get.

It is an OLD OLD OLD tired argument .

Perhaps you will find the answer you seek by doing that search?

Good luck!

Slowly building a blog at ~

http://obsidianwords.wordpress.com/


IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH
TheistTroll
IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH's picture
Posts: 66
Joined: 2008-06-23
User is offlineOffline
 Faith is the belief in the

 

Faith is the belief in the trustworthiness of an idea that has not been proven yet or cannot be proven. 

 

Atheism falls under that, wether you like it or not. 

 

We must learn to control our thoughts, or we will remain slaves to our feelings.
-SR


Renee Obsidianwords
High Level DonorModeratorRRS local affiliateSilver Member
Renee Obsidianwords's picture
Posts: 1388
Joined: 2007-03-29
User is offlineOffline
IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH

IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH wrote:

 

Faith is the belief in the trustworthiness of an idea that has not been proven yet or cannot be proven. 

 

Atheism falls under that, wether you like it or not. 

 

Still, old and tired. Read this: Christian Pownage 101

PLace your argument in that thread.

Slowly building a blog at ~

http://obsidianwords.wordpress.com/


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline

Kevin R Brown
Superfan
Kevin R Brown's picture
Posts: 3142
Joined: 2007-06-24
User is offlineOffline
Quote: In my opinion, of

Quote:

 In my opinion, of all the numerous faiths, from Christianity to Buddhism to animism to atheism, the most basic and unlikely is Atheism.

This is rather curious. The atheistic position is simply that, in absense of evidence for a supernatural creator and in light of a naturalistic explanation for human origins, a deity is both unnecessary and unlikely. On what basis do you form your opinion that God is a more likely explanation for the origin of our species than naturalistic explanations?

Quote:
Religion, unlike science, is the attempt to answer the question why (science attempts to answer how).

This is a naked assertion. Science is interested in all of the prying Ws (Who, Where, What, Why, When) as well as How. Religion simply proposes to sing and scream assertions, in a bid to look like they know absolutely everything, without any actual merit in what they say.

Science has real, practical applications that emerge from it's practice (we call these 'technologies'), while religion, as best, serves as a source for false security and lazy comfort.

Quote:

Animism a  slightly less ridiculous faith, answers the question why with the answer of "everything". Atheism denies the existence of the question, because it denies the existence of an answer. Without an answer there is no question. However, since I can ask the question it is obvious that it exists, so there must be an answer.

This is convoluted and incorrect. Atheism does not outright 'deny' anything; it's an observation that there is not sufficient evidence to support the existence of a divine being, and so concluding that there is no compelling reason to believe that the divine being exists. This view can view very easily countermanded; all you have to do is provide compelling evidence of the divine.

Atheism does not deny the existence of the  question, 'Does god exist?' (what an add concept to assert... a group of individuals not believing that a sentence exists? Sticking out tongue ) - it simply answers that question with, 'No, not likely'.

Quote:

Besides lets be totally honest and say that its really unlikely that thinking beings such as humans just popped into existence out of nowhere.

Those scientists you derided earlier do not think that we just 'popped out of nowhere'. On the contrary - that's what creationists believe. Abiogenesis theories, while in their infancy, are shedding a great deal of light on how life began on Earth, while evolution and natural selection have conclusively shown how life evolved and became more complex / better adapted to it's environment over time. The process of evolution is ongoing, as well - in another few thousand years, we can expect to see life on Earth being far different than what's here today. It's an open-ended system.

 

Quote:
"Natasha has just come up to the window from the courtyard and opened it wider so that the air may enter more freely into my room. I can see the bright green strip of grass beneath the wall, and the clear blue sky above the wall, and sunlight everywhere. Life is beautiful. Let the future generations cleanse it of all evil, oppression and violence, and enjoy it to the full."

- Leon Trotsky, Last Will & Testament
February 27, 1940


geirj
geirj's picture
Posts: 719
Joined: 2007-06-19
User is offlineOffline
IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH

IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH wrote:

 In my opinion, of all the numerous faiths, from Christianity to Buddhism to animism to atheism, the most basic and unlikely is Atheism. Religion, unlike science, is the attempt to answer the question why (science attempts to answer how). Animism a  slightly less ridiculous faith, answers the question why with the answer of "everything". Atheism denies the existence of the question, because it denies the existence of an answer. Without an answer there is no question. However, since I can ask the question it is obvious that it exists, so there must be an answer. 

 

Besides lets be totally honest and say that its really unlikely that thinking beings such as humans just popped into existence out of nowhere. 

 

Nobody I know was brainwashed into being an atheist.

Why Believe?


IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH
TheistTroll
IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH's picture
Posts: 66
Joined: 2008-06-23
User is offlineOffline
 Wether science wants to

 Wether science wants to answer "why" or not, it can't. Why is a question of motive and reason, science is useless here. Science is good for how.

 

Atheists deny it. Agnostics say that they can't know so they won't say. 

 

If there is no answer to the question "Why" then there is no question.

 

 

Actually if you go back far enough, it either comes to: 

 

everything came from something that just happened to pop into existence

 

or

 

everything came from something that was created. 

 

Which is more reasonable?

We must learn to control our thoughts, or we will remain slaves to our feelings.
-SR


stuntgibbon
Moderator
stuntgibbon's picture
Posts: 699
Joined: 2007-05-17
User is offlineOffline
Do you wear your seatbelt? 

Do you wear your seatbelt?


 


geirj
geirj's picture
Posts: 719
Joined: 2007-06-19
User is offlineOffline
IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH

IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH wrote:

 

Actually if you go back far enough, it either comes to: 

 

everything came from something that just happened to pop into existence

 

or

 

everything came from something that was created. 

 

Which is more reasonable?

 

An excellent demonstration of fundamentally misunderstanding the origins of the universe. Troll with it, baby...

Nobody I know was brainwashed into being an atheist.

Why Believe?


Eight Foot Manchild
Eight Foot Manchild's picture
Posts: 144
Joined: 2007-05-12
User is offlineOffline
If atheism is a religion,

If atheism is a religion, you have two options

1) Give me my tax cut

2) Shut the fuck up


Zymotic
Superfan
Zymotic's picture
Posts: 171
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
I know he's a troll but I

I know he's a troll but I feel compelled to say these things:

 

IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH wrote:

 Religion, unlike science, is the attempt to answer the question why (science attempts to answer how).

 

THAT MAN YOU JUST MADE IS MADE OF STRAW.

 

Quote:
Animism a  slightly less ridiculous faith, answers the question why with the answer of "everything".
Red Herring. What does this have to do with anything?

 

Quote:
Atheism denies the existence of the question, because it denies the existence of an answer. Without an answer there is no question. However, since I can ask the question it is obvious that it exists, so there must be an answer.

If you can ask a question, there must be an answer? And its the vaguest fucking question on Earth and you haven't defined it or anything else? And you can't find an answer? Really?

 

Quote:

Besides lets be totally honest and say that its really unlikely that thinking beings such as humans just popped into existence out of nowhere. 

THE MAN YOU JUST MADE IS MADE OF STRAAAAAW.

 

 

 

My Brand New Blog - Jesu Ad Nauseum.
God of the Gaps: As knowledge approaches infinity, God approaches zero. It's introductory calculus.


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
Geezz , the OP is messing

Geezz , the OP is simply messing with definitions, as we all often do. The majority of theist god definitions, when investigated, end up being silly. The god of abe theology is primarily what is being attacked and denied by the atheists here.  Atheist simply don't agree with that theology, .... thank gawed.

    The word god is not so much on trial in the east, because god more commonly, simply means the unknowable everything.

   Asking "why" is much different than asking "how". I personally cannot accept a beginning, an ending, nor a why.

I must insist that people don't present their imaginations as truths and invent dogmas.

        Please understand you are talking to 100% god here ! What else could you and I and everything possibly be otherwise ???  

                                  

        God is atheistic, no idols, no master, all is connected, all is ONE .... as I and god are one. All other gods are bunk separatist ideas.  Dirt SIMPLE .... g-o-d .....


anonuhmas
Posts: 14
Joined: 2008-06-23
User is offlineOffline
Because why is a question of

Because why is a question of motive it's not a question of whether religion or science is in a better position to answer, it's a matter of whether it is an appropriate question. If motive is not applicable to the question it simply makes no sense to ask why.

As for the idea that human beings must have been created because they are intelligent, well what about God then? If God is the most intelligent then that logic should imply there was an even higher intelligence that created God, and so on and so forth - like one answer to the question "why" can always be questioned again.


 


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
Yeah anonuhmas     the

Yeah anonuhmas

     the theology "merry go round" , of lies and whys , must be stopped .... Go  communication evolution ....

     Caring self taught teacher George Carlin knew .... turn it up Atheists / Pantheists / progressive Buddhists / all free thinkers 

     


nigelTheBold
atheist
nigelTheBold's picture
Posts: 1868
Joined: 2008-01-25
User is offlineOffline
IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH

IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH wrote:

Actually if you go back far enough, it either comes to: 

everything came from something that just happened to pop into existence

or

everything came from something that was created. 

Which is more reasonable?

Well, if you take away the weighted words, you get:

 

Everything popped into existence from an as-yet unknown cause,

or

Everything came from something that just happened to pop into existence.

 

Really, Thomas Aquinas tried to push first cause back to God, but that still leaves the whole of the causal chain with an improbable beginning. Placing God at the beginning does nothing to fulfill the logical necessities of First Cause. Better to assume that First Cause is intrinsically illogical, as it leads to self-contradiction.

As for the question of "why?", that reminds me of a letter to the editor of a college newspaper concerning a Stephen King novel: "How could you do such a why?" Basically, it's semantic nonsense to discuss the "why" of the universe, or even the "why" of reality. Doing so inserts God into the equation where God wasn't before. The presumption of "why" is predicated upon a presupposition of prior will -- that is, God. By asking "why?" and answering "God," you are merely creating a self-contained circular argument, which is philosophically void. You are caught in a cul-de-sac of ignorance.

Finally, and most importantly, we know nothing about reality that reality has not told us. As much as our minds contemplate the possible, our only knowledge of the actual is that which we have pried from reality. The only meaningful and usefull way of doing so (as Kevin has pointed out) is the proper application of the scientific method. No other epistemology has yielded consistent, reproducible results. As a result, it is the only tool we have for reliably investigating the nature of reality.

Anything not supported by the knowledge gained from the scientific method is at best speculation, and at worst, making shit up. There are any number of ideas that have resulted from making shit up, and not believing them is perfectly rational. This includes the concept of "God," which is a result of making shit up. It doesn't even fall into the realm of speculation, as there is no basis for speculation, other than our fear of thunder, or our quest for a way to influence the growth of crops.

So, to sum up: Not believing in shit that has been made up is perfectly rational.

"Yes, I seriously believe that consciousness is a product of a natural process. I find that the neuroscientists, psychologists, and philosophers who proceed from that premise are the ones who are actually making useful contributions to our understanding of the mind." - PZ Myers


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7525
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH

IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH wrote:

 

Faith is the belief in the trustworthiness of an idea that has not been proven yet or cannot be proven. 

 

Atheism falls under that, wether you like it or not. 

 

Atheism doesn't necessitate belief.  Babies are born without belief in a god, they are atheists.  You were an atheist at birth, a baby, a state of being for the baby, yet no clue what god is.  Ironically you are the same now, you still have no clue... you just happen to have faith now, something you were absent of as an atheist baby with no belief in no diety.

 

a= without

theism= belief in god

Atheism says nothing of the persons belief.  It speaks to their state of nonbelief in something.  This is why atheists have used words like Bright and Humanist to describe themselves, they wanted a word that explains what they do believe... because being an atheist simply means you are without a belief in something. 

You should take your lame arguments back to the bullshit seminary you got them from and tell them they're defective.

 

 

 

 

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7525
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Eight Foot Manchild wrote:If

Eight Foot Manchild wrote:

If atheism is a religion, you have two options

1) Give me my tax cut

2) Shut the fuck up

 

also.... if atheism is a religion

1) bald is a hair color

2) not collecting stamps is a hobby

3) not playing football is a sport

4) off is a tv channel          (you asked for it)

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
For some reason I don't

For some reason I don't think he's coming back...


stuntgibbon
Moderator
stuntgibbon's picture
Posts: 699
Joined: 2007-05-17
User is offlineOffline
MattShizzle wrote:For some

MattShizzle wrote:

For some reason I don't think he's coming back...

 

I'm disappointed that no one takes the seatbelt bait. Sad     I've yet to find a theist so sure in prayer over science that they use it instead of their seatbelt.   (if science and therefore physics is BS, etc.)  


BMcD
Posts: 777
Joined: 2006-12-20
User is offlineOffline
IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH

IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH wrote:

 Wether science wants to answer "why" or not, it can't. Why is a question of motive and reason, science is useless here. Science is good for how.

 

Atheists deny it. Agnostics say that they can't know so they won't say. 

 

If there is no answer to the question "Why" then there is no question.

 

Your usage off 'Agnostic' is actually Agnostic Atheism, while your usage of 'Atheism' is actually 'Gnostic Atheism'.

My atheism doesn't deny the question. My atheism answers the question with: "Who cares?" I don't believe in God. I don't disbelieve. Reality is what it is, regardless. The existence or nonexistence of the divine can never be proved beyond speculation. No religion has evidence. No religion has anything beyond 'trust us, we're right'. So why should I, or anyone else, believe them? And without the concrete ability to disprove them, why should I disbelieve any of them?

There's as much reason for or against belief in YHVH/Jehovah/Allah as there is for or against belief in Odin: None, in either direction, on any axis. No answer for the question can ever be trusted. So why waste time and energy with it?

"You've got to remember that these are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know... morons." - The Waco Kid


IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH
TheistTroll
IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH's picture
Posts: 66
Joined: 2008-06-23
User is offlineOffline
 You dont know that there

 You dont know that there is no god. Without that knowledge, the assumption that a god does not exist is a belief.

 

You are all talking about proof like its something that you have for anything. There is no proof of anything. Go ahead and prove to me that this computer exists. Go ahead, and try. You won't be able to, but you will certainly be very pissed if I believe in a god that I have no way of proving to be real. 

 

Oh, by the way, I am not a christian except in the purest sense of the word and belong to no religion but my own. 

My definition for the question why is in the question itself. 

 

Why are we here? Why do we think? Why does this universe exist? Why do humans seem different than the animals and trees and other forms of life on this Earth? Why does my burrito get hot when I microwave it? 

Just because you can't use science to answer these questions (dont tell me because the microwaves within the microwave heat up the water, cause ill just hit you with another why and those kind of arguments get old really quick) does not mean that we should cease the asking of them. So please, tell me atheists, what point is there to living if all of this is nothing? 

 

We must learn to control our thoughts, or we will remain slaves to our feelings.
-SR


IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH
TheistTroll
IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH's picture
Posts: 66
Joined: 2008-06-23
User is offlineOffline
 oh by the way, that thread

 oh by the way, that thread Christian Pwnage was fucking stupid. The argument he made was juvenile at best and really did nothing besides say something we all know. faith proves nothing. Wow. Really dumbass?

We must learn to control our thoughts, or we will remain slaves to our feelings.
-SR


IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH
TheistTroll
IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH's picture
Posts: 66
Joined: 2008-06-23
User is offlineOffline
 How can we progress if we

 How can we progress if we ever cease asking questions? A reason to find the motive behind our existence is that it will only help us to better understand our purpose. If you say that we have no purpose then why do you still live? 

 

 

I cant find my other thread so ill post this question here:

 

Do any of you believe in right and wrong? What about the equality of man? Any of you believe in universal and apparent truths? Do you trust common sense or logic? Do you believe that humans are in any way special? 

 

All these beliefs require first the belief in a deity.

We must learn to control our thoughts, or we will remain slaves to our feelings.
-SR


Magus
High Level DonorModerator
Magus's picture
Posts: 592
Joined: 2007-04-11
User is offlineOffline
IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH wrote:Do

IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH wrote:

Do any of you believe in right and wrong?

I believe it is society and social creatures that developed thing they deem right and wrong to help promote the well being of the society and by doing so helps the individual survive.

IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH wrote:

What about the equality of man?

I don't think this is a fair question. We are all genetically different.  We should be treated as equals since it helps to promote society and thus helps the individual survive.

IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH wrote:

Any of you believe in universal and apparent truths?

Define these please.

IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH wrote:

Do you trust common sense or logic?

Logic above common sense.

IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH wrote:

Do you believe that humans are in any way special? 

 

No.

IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH wrote:

All these beliefs require first the belief in a deity.

No they do not.  Prove this statement or I have can only assume you are making it up.

Sounds made up...
Agnostic Atheist
No, I am not angry at your imaginary friends or enemies.


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
".... no religion but my

".... no religion but my own." ~ Jack ////

   Tell us more , all your own eh ? 


IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH
TheistTroll
IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH's picture
Posts: 66
Joined: 2008-06-23
User is offlineOffline
 Then right and wrong have

 Then right and wrong have no meaning to you because they are simply the opinion of the majority, changing easily with the shifting views and beliefs of society. Right and wrong have no validity unless something higher than man determines what is right and what is wrong. 

In what way does it promote society to do anything but kill the weak and stupid and only let the strong live? Without a soul or something like it, equality of man means nothing. 

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal..." You know shit like that. The apparent truth that we exist, the apparent truth that raping a child is wrong...

Logic is common sense. However, in a Universe without meaning, logic means nothing. The illogical is as likely as the logical if everything is pure chance. 

So you see no difference between a man and a duck (besides the obvious physical differences)?

 

Agnostic or atheist. Pick one. 

We must learn to control our thoughts, or we will remain slaves to our feelings.
-SR


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
 Thanks for being pissed

 Thanks for being pissed off Jack !  Now try this approach,

"Wisdom of the Buddha" 8 min,   
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTsb-woP3jI

Carl Sagan - Pale Blue Dot  , 3 min .....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p86BPM1GV8M

 [(   sorry RRS , for posting that so often , but heck ! .....  )]

            

       


Josiah
Posts: 7
Joined: 2008-06-24
User is offlineOffline
IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH

IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH wrote:

 Then right and wrong have no meaning to you because they are simply the opinion of the majority, changing easily with the shifting views and beliefs of society. Right and wrong have no validity unless something higher than man determines what is right and what is wrong. 

Look at your higher power's morals, they haven't exactly been the same over the last few thousand years, now have they? Certainly not a definitive moral authority for me.

Your argument is sort of the point. The only way to guarantee your own safety is to abide by a moral code that guarantees everyone else's safety equally, otherwise when the tides change you're on the bad end of a noose.


nigelTheBold
atheist
nigelTheBold's picture
Posts: 1868
Joined: 2008-01-25
User is offlineOffline
IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH

IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH wrote:

 Then right and wrong have no meaning to you because they are simply the opinion of the majority, changing easily with the shifting views and beliefs of society. Right and wrong have no validity unless something higher than man determines what is right and what is wrong. 

Not necessarily.

"Right" and "wrong" are certainly artefacts of society -- what is correct behavior in one society is not necessarily correct in another. However, using simple logic and basic game theory, one can derive a set of fundamental morals that, universally applied, would result in a peaceful, mostly-happy society.

For instance, a recent philosopher suggested that, when designing a society, you design it as if you do not know the role you will play in that society. This seems a simple way to work towards equality and fairness. Basically, it boils down to The Golden Rule, as my Dad used to say. If we were to treat everyone with the respect we ourselves believe we deserve, the world would be a better place.

And ultimately, that is how I have derived my morals.

I wish to live in a society that provides intelligent entertainment, encourages thoughtful debate and curiosity and imagination, works towards fairness and equality, and is pleasant without being stifling or intrusive. I wish this society, because it is the society in which I would like to live.

To work towards that society, I must encourage those traits in our current society. I essentially life as if that society already existed. I treat others with the respect and fairness deserving of the society, because I expect the same in return.

God (or a "higher power," or "ultimate purpose" ) is not required for morality. The only requirement is the desire to live in a fair and just society. The reason to wish to live in a fair and just society is because it's better than being a peasant in an unfair and unjust society.

Quote:

In what way does it promote society to do anything but kill the weak and stupid and only let the strong live? Without a soul or something like it, equality of man means nothing. 

Not killing them promotes fairness. Plus, what does killing the weak and stupid achieve? What is your goal in doing so? In general, it achieves nothing.

The whole "survival of the fittest" trope is incorrect, in general. If you simply allow evolution to select who breeds and who does not, you'll end up with "better" results, and with wider genetic variety (which is good, in general). There's no need to attempt eugenics.

And remember: we are designing society (in my proposed world) as if we don't know which role we will play. We certainly don't want to be selected for removal from society.

Quote:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal..." You know shit like that. The apparent truth that we exist, the apparent truth that raping a child is wrong...

Logic is common sense. However, in a Universe without meaning, logic means nothing. The illogical is as likely as the logical if everything is pure chance. 

As I said, the desire to live a good life isn't derived from a God, it's derived from the desire to live in a good society, because that is the most pleasant sort of life.

When the "all men are created equal" slogan was written, it mostly included land-owning men. It did not include women, vagabonds, or slaves. So the whole "self-evident" disclaimer was a bit disingenuous, a dodge. They certainly didn't mean all people.

Logic is not common sense. What often falls under the label of "common sense" is the antithesis of logic. It used to be "common sense" to leech an ill person. It used to be "common sense" that the world was flat, and you'd fall off the edge if you got too close. It has recently been "common sense" that it's good to wash with anti-bacterial soap. And so on.

On the other hand, logic indicates that it is unlikely that God exists. Yet it is accepted "common sense" that He does.

Quote:

So you see no difference between a man and a duck (besides the obvious physical differences)?

There is the quantitative difference in cognitive ability, if that's what you mean. Also, duck tastes really good. I don't know about human. And it's fun to shoot ducks. It might be fun to shoot humans, too, but since I don't want anyone shooting me, and I eat what I kill, I tend not to shoot other people. Plus, it'd be too easy. Ducks at least put on a good hunt, and there's the hours spent out in the wet, cold water, hiding behind a blind. People, on the other hand, are stupid, and don't know how to react when someone is shooting at them.

But the dogs love it.

Quote:

Agnostic or atheist. Pick one. 

That's a false dichotomy. Many atheists are also agnostic. Many theists are also agnostic. "Agnostic" is just an admittal that there's no way to have certain knowledge of the existence of God. "Atheist" or "theist" is the tag used to indicate whether or not you believe God doesn't or does exist.

Me, I'm certain God, as commonly defined, doesn't exist. He is philosophically and logically irrelevent. In fact, I believe He is a red herring, a distraction from honest thought and discourse. He's a cop-out.

Speaking of which, where do you stand on the issue of gay marraige?

"Yes, I seriously believe that consciousness is a product of a natural process. I find that the neuroscientists, psychologists, and philosophers who proceed from that premise are the ones who are actually making useful contributions to our understanding of the mind." - PZ Myers


nigelTheBold
atheist
nigelTheBold's picture
Posts: 1868
Joined: 2008-01-25
User is offlineOffline
IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH

IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH wrote:

 You dont know that there is no god. Without that knowledge, the assumption that a god does not exist is a belief.

That's true of all of the infinite number of things that don't exist. Prove to me the King of the Squirrels isn't in my back-yard, planning his cunning plan to take over the world. Prove to me that Gilda the Good Unicorn doesn't live in your rectum. Prove to me that we have a consciousness.

It's ridiculous to defend God by saying we can't prove he doesn't exist. Not only are you attempting to weasel out by shifting the burden of proof, but you are inviting the wrath of Gilda the Good Unicorn. Considering where she lives, I wouldn't piss her off.

Quote:

You are all talking about proof like its something that you have for anything. There is no proof of anything. Go ahead and prove to me that this computer exists. Go ahead, and try. You won't be able to, but you will certainly be very pissed if I believe in a god that I have no way of proving to be real. 

That computer doesn't exist. You are only an algorithm in a vast computer that is calculating the history of the universe. Gilda the Good Unicorn does this because she has a big fuck-off computer, and doesn't know what else to do with it, except play Metal Gear Solid IV. But that's why she created the history program, so it would re-create the PS3, as MGS4 is incompatible with the PS919934. She now has a PS3 in your rectum as well as a wide-screen TV.

She's up to the second act.

Quote:

Oh, by the way, I am not a christian except in the purest sense of the word and belong to no religion but my own.

This, to me, is more evidence that God doesn't exist, at least not in the traditional sense of the word.

If God truly existed, and He took any interest in His creation, and we mortal humans had a God-invenstment of immortal souls, it seems that He would certainly ensure we had a clear understanding of Him. Or, at least, every psuedo-philosopher stoner in the world wouldn't have their own "personal religion."

If every person has their own interpretation of God, it indicates that God is a figment of our imagination. If He was an objective truth, we would have a much more cohesive understanding of Him.

Quote:

My definition for the question why is in the question itself.

Why are we here?

Our parents had sex.

ugh. You made me think about it. That's sick.

Quote:

Why do we think?

Because we can.

Seriously.

We have the brainpower to think. So we use it. We've got two legs from our hips to the ground. So we move them and walk around. We have hair. So we style it.

How did we come by the brainpower to think? That's a different question, one which science can answer, and is in the process of answering.

Quote:

Why does this universe exist?

Because of Gilda and her MGS4 fixation. I already answered this one.

 

Quote:

Why do humans seem different than the animals and trees and other fodrms of life on this Earth?

In what way are we different?

We do have a quantitative advantage in the brains department, but that only makes us specialized at thinking, the same way a bee is specialized in collecting pollen. That doesn't mean other species don't collect pollen. It just means bees are particularly good at it.

Most species are "different" from other species. The cheetah runs really, really fast. Brown bears eat golden retreivers for a tasty snack. Eagles can fly, well, like an eagle. Into the future.

How does this make us special, except to ourselves?

Quote:

Why does my burrito get hot when I microwave it? 

Mmmm. Burrito.

Quote:

Just because you can't use science to answer these questions (dont tell me because the microwaves within the microwave heat up the water, cause ill just hit you with another why and those kind of arguments get old really quick) does not mean that we should cease the asking of them. So please, tell me atheists, what point is there to living if all of this is nothing? 

Who said it was nothing?

You seem to make the assumption that, because we don't believe in an "ultimate reason," that we have no purpose for living. This is ridiculous. Our reason for living is exactly the same as yours.

We like living. The experience of living is generally pleasant, and filled with happy moments, and joyous moments, and instances of great pain and sorrow, and even more moments of exhiliration.

That is, life is good. That is the point of living.

If you think you live for God, you are mistaken. If that were true, you would do nothing for yourself, and would simply praise your God all day. You would forego all comforts and entertainment and hanging out with friends, unless you were hanging out to praise God, and do things only for the greater glory of God.

The fact that you spend the majority of your time not praising God indicates that you indeed live for yourself, and not for your God.

If you do things for the simple pleasure of enjoying doing them, you are proving that life is about living. And that is exactly what most atheists (and most everybody else, as well) believe.

"Yes, I seriously believe that consciousness is a product of a natural process. I find that the neuroscientists, psychologists, and philosophers who proceed from that premise are the ones who are actually making useful contributions to our understanding of the mind." - PZ Myers


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH

IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH wrote:

 Then right and wrong have no meaning to you because they are simply the opinion of the majority, changing easily with the shifting views and beliefs of society. Right and wrong have no validity unless something higher than man determines what is right and what is wrong. 

In what way does it promote society to do anything but kill the weak and stupid and only let the strong live? Without a soul or something like it, equality of man means nothing. 

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal..." You know shit like that. The apparent truth that we exist, the apparent truth that raping a child is wrong...

Logic is common sense. However, in a Universe without meaning, logic means nothing. The illogical is as likely as the logical if everything is pure chance. 

So you see no difference between a man and a duck (besides the obvious physical differences)?

 

Agnostic or atheist. Pick one. 

 

 There is a presumed link between religion  and morality. One that in my view is not rationally defensible. But you are attacking other peoples conception of morality (even though you don't know what it is) based solely on the premise that moral statements can not be objective unless they are somehow based in the supernatural (which you have no evidence even exists by the way) which is wrong  and reveals that like most religious people you don't know anything about ethics, at least not comparatively.

Moral codes can be based on reason. The categorical imperative is an example of a moral theory that is objective and atheistic, and unlike religious moral theories it can be defended with reason and doesn't rely on concepts as flimsy and dubious as faith or immateriality.

Everyone has heard the expression "people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones". You're not in a position to question another person's conception of morality when yours rests on such a shaky foundation. No moral theory is perfect but religious ones are among the worst and the most untenable . Take the simple moral theory that "morally right" is a matter of being commanded by god and "morally wrong" is a matter of being forbidden by god. It's a seductive idea because it seems to offer simple answers to  difficult questions like why bother with ethics at all, why not just do what you want. If you accept this view there's a simple answer, if you ignore ethics god will punish you.

But there are so many problems with this conception of morality that one must accept it uncritically because it can't be defended. To start with it's nebulous. How does god make something moral just by commanding it? It defies reason and in my view is demonstrably  false, if god said that murder, rape and stealing were moral it wouldn't make those things moral. You might say that god wouldn't command you to do those things but why not? If gods command is what makes something moral or immoral then he wouldn't be telling you to do something wrong. Consequently that would also mean god's commands are arbitrary since there's no preceding reason for god to decide that something is right or wrong. There is also the implication that if god didn't exist then murder, rape and theft would not be immoral because there would be no god to make them immoral. But there are plenty of reason to think that you shouldn't do those things outside of where gods opinion lies on the subject. You might say that god doesn't actually make things moral he just tells you what is moral and it's moral for another reason (which is the only other option that exists) but by doing that you've abandoned a religious conception of morality altogether in favor of another one that has no explanatory power anyway, because you would be saying that morals don't come from god, and you don't know where they come from or why something is moral, all you know is what god said.

This may not be your conception of morality but I doubt that your conception or morality could be much better. So why should anyone here really give a shit about your objections to their meta-ethical justification of morality?

There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft


shikko
Posts: 448
Joined: 2007-05-23
User is offlineOffline
IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH

IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH wrote:

 You dont know that there is no god. Without that knowledge, the assumption that a god does not exist is a belief.

Don't pin your insecurities on us.  Just because you're hoping you haven't wasted your effort in something no one in the history of everyone has ever proven to exist doesn't mean it exists.  When asked if we believe the claim of existence for any god, we say "no".  That's not a belief itself.

If I make a claim, I have to prove it.  You are claiming a god exists.  Prove it or sit down.

Quote:

You are all talking about proof like its something that you have for anything. There is no proof of anything.

Premise: 0.999... equals 1.

Let x = 0.999...

By rules of multiplication, 10x = 9.999...

By rules of arithmetic, 9x = 9.

By rules of division, x = 1.  QED.

Now, are you still going to yammer about proof being impossible?

Quote:

Oh, by the way, I am not a christian except in the purest sense of the word and belong to no religion but my own. 

Does this mean anything other than not having the courage of your convictions?

Quote:

Why are we here? Why do we think? Why does this universe exist? Why do humans seem different than the animals and trees and other forms of life on this Earth? Why does my burrito get hot when I microwave it? 

Just because you can't use science to answer these questions (dont tell me because the microwaves within the microwave heat up the water, cause ill just hit you with another why and those kind of arguments get old really quick) does not mean that we should cease the asking of them. So please, tell me atheists, what point is there to living if all of this is nothing? 

Do you set up all your arguments in such a way as to be purposefully obtuse?  Why ask a question to which you admit you don't want the answer?

What scares you so badly about your life that you need Higher Purpose?  Did mommy and daddy tell you that you were their special little snowflake so often that you believed it?

We're ever so sorry you aren't strong enough to come to grips with the pitiless indifference of the natural universe, but please stop assuming your coping mechanisms are anything but that.

--
maybe if this sig is witty, someone will love me.


shikko
Posts: 448
Joined: 2007-05-23
User is offlineOffline
IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH

IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH wrote:

 How can we progress if we ever cease asking questions? A reason to find the motive behind our existence is that it will only help us to better understand our purpose. If you say that we have no purpose then why do you still live? 

 

I was with you until that last question.  Yes, ask questions: how do you know the god you believe in isn't lying to you?  How do you know you're not a "brain in a vat"?  What if you're wrong, and the Jains are right?

My life does have a purpose, and I have the responsibility of defining it, living up to it and fulfilling it; I don't get to pass that buck to anyone.  I'm here, and it's my job to make my life what I want it to be.

One more question: why does your belief in god change what you think is a good way to treat people?

Quote:

Do any of you believe in right and wrong? What about the equality of man? Any of you believe in universal and apparent truths? Do you trust common sense or logic? Do you believe that humans are in any way special? 

Yes, yes, yes, logic and no, respectively.

Quote:

All these beliefs require first the belief in a deity.

Please clothe your assertions before leaving the house with them.

I.e., prove that your positions require belief in a god (any god, not specifically the one in which you were taught to believe).

 

--
maybe if this sig is witty, someone will love me.


stuntgibbon
Moderator
stuntgibbon's picture
Posts: 699
Joined: 2007-05-17
User is offlineOffline
IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH

IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH wrote:

the apparent truth that raping a child is wrong...

Which commandment stakes that claim, btw?


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7525
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH

IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH wrote:

 oh by the way, that thread Christian Pwnage was fucking stupid. The argument he made was juvenile at best and really did nothing besides say something we all know. faith proves nothing. Wow. Really dumbass?

 

Ironic you should say that because the stupid juvenile argument was that of Rich Rodriguez.  Rich just received his PhD and found a job at a major university, he will be teaching their first ever course on atheism as a part of their philosophy department.  What an idiot he must be.

 

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7525
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH

IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH wrote:

 You dont know that there is no god. Without that knowledge, the assumption that a god does not exist is a belief.

 

 You dont know that there is a god. Without that knowledge, the assumption that a god does exist is an irrational belief.

 

Since we know that your belief is irrational, one must abstain from holding that belief, which is what we do.  We don't believe what you do, but just because we don't believe what you do doesn't mean we must believe the opposite of what you do.  We don't for the most part believe with certainty that a god couldn't or doesn't exist, no matter how many times your brainwashed hands put it on our site.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Kevin R Brown
Superfan
Kevin R Brown's picture
Posts: 3142
Joined: 2007-06-24
User is offlineOffline
Quote:You are all talking

Quote:
You are all talking about proof like its something that you have for anything. There is no proof of anything. Go ahead and prove to me that this computer exists. Go ahead, and try. You won't be able to, but you will certainly be very pissed if I believe in a god that I have no way of proving to be real.

'Proof' is a strcitly mathematical term; I don't think anyone here used it (and if they did, it was a slip of the tongue. Let's not start arguing semantics). So, no - there is no 'proof' my computer exists; just a conclusion that it exists based on evidence. I can operate it, I can examine it, I take take it apart and examine the components, I can get really technical and examine the materials that it's made out of, we have solid documentation on how computers work, who manufactures computers, who invented the first (modern) computers, who made the first operating systems, etc.

Which of the above evidences (a mere fraction of the evidences we have the computers exist) apply to God? Can we examine God? Can we find-out what God is made of? Do we know where God came from? Do we know who conceptualized God/Gods? Do we know the details of how God-like creation works?

Of course not.

So why would God be just as real to you as your computer, when he lacks any and all of the same evidences you use to deduce the fact that your computer exists.

Quote:
"Natasha has just come up to the window from the courtyard and opened it wider so that the air may enter more freely into my room. I can see the bright green strip of grass beneath the wall, and the clear blue sky above the wall, and sunlight everywhere. Life is beautiful. Let the future generations cleanse it of all evil, oppression and violence, and enjoy it to the full."

- Leon Trotsky, Last Will & Testament
February 27, 1940


Magus
High Level DonorModerator
Magus's picture
Posts: 592
Joined: 2007-04-11
User is offlineOffline
IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH

IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH wrote:

 Then right and wrong have no meaning to you because they are simply the opinion of the majority, changing easily with the shifting views and beliefs of society.

I happen with most of the rules of society, so they do have meaning to me.  People still kill in our society, those are the ones that the rules have no meaning too.   I think beliefs should change when new evidence comes into play, that would be called learning and growing society.

IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH wrote:

Right and wrong have no validity unless something higher than man determines what is right and what is wrong.

This is just stupid.  How does something higher validate it?  I think this is special pleading.  Right and wrong have no validity unless something higher than god determines what is right and wrong.  Anyway society is higher than man. 

IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH wrote:

In what way does it promote society to do anything but kill the weak and stupid and only let the strong live? Without a soul or something like it, equality of man means nothing. 

So you want to kill weak and stupid people if your sky daddy isn't around.  Sounds like a personal problem.

You see thats where numbers come into play.  5 weaks > 1 strong.  I don't want to work at Wendy's but I do want to have a number 9 on the menu, that weak stupid guy can get that for me sweet.  Thus the stupid weak guy now is important. 

There are also other reason.  Society is kind of like an evolving thing.  When I society adapts a new behavior that hinders the survival of the society, it fails and thus the new behavior is discarder ( or it destroys the society ).  However if society adapts a new behavior that increases the survival of the society the behavior continues.  Hitler seems to think that killing the off those who were not the "superior race" was good,  but as you can see his society failed.

 

IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH wrote:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal..." You know shit like that. The apparent truth that we exist, the apparent truth that raping a child is wrong...

We know that raping  is wrong because of its affect on society and the individuals involved.  If it is so apparent then why are there still people that do it?  It must be obvious to the right, yet they still do it. 

IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH wrote:

Logic is common sense. However, in a Universe without meaning, logic means nothing. The illogical is as likely as the logical if everything is pure chance. 

Not all logic is common sense.  Who said anything about pure chance sounds like you are trying to build a strawman.  A video game has no meaning outside of a video game, yet people still play them as if they did.  The characters in a movies have no meaning outside the movie, but people still get emotionally attached to them.  Meaning is temporary and can be created by the individual.

IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH wrote:

So you see no difference between a man and a duck (besides the obvious physical differences)?

Don't forget the mental differences.  Also the impact on my survival.

IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH wrote:

Agnostic or atheist. Pick one. 

No they answer too different questions.  I am an agnostic Atheist.   I have no knowledge of a deity (agnostic), so I do not have a belief in one (atheist).

 

Sounds made up...
Agnostic Atheist
No, I am not angry at your imaginary friends or enemies.


IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH
TheistTroll
IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH's picture
Posts: 66
Joined: 2008-06-23
User is offlineOffline
So your right and wrong are

So your right and wrong are based on your opinion of what is societally acceptable? What if my opinion of right and wrong differs from yours? Who is right and what determines that? 

What is fair? What is just? These things have no meaning if there is no soul. There is no fairness or justice in a pack of wolves. You base morality on the flawed judgement of humanity and it means nothing. 

How do you think evolution selects those who breed and those who don't?

If we killed every person with a genetic disease, than the disease could be eradicated. How would that be bad for society? Or we could enslave 10% of the population so the other 90% would se a greater standard of living. If there is no common thread between man that separates him from other life, something special, like a soul, then none of that would be wrong. 

Do you believe that all men women and children are equal. Cause we are in no way genetically equal.\

How does logic indicate that a god does not exist?

So its not wrong to kill humans, its just scary? What if I don't care about being shot at, does that make it okay for me to murder you then? And easy? Try hunting me and see if I'm easier prey than a duck. 

So you do accept that atheism is the belief that god does not exist?

Agnostic: believes they do not and cannot know wether God or gods exist or not.

Atheist: denies the existence of God or gods. 

Do you honestly not see the difference? 

God is in no way a cop-out for me. I don't pray for rain or sunshine or any of that bullshit. My god created me and now its my choices what to do, and if I fail or choose wrong, then its my consequences. 

 

not that it has anything to do with the discussion but I really don't give a shit about gay marraige, legal illegal, Im not gay so I don't care. 

 

We must learn to control our thoughts, or we will remain slaves to our feelings.
-SR


IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH
TheistTroll
IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH's picture
Posts: 66
Joined: 2008-06-23
User is offlineOffline
 Wrong. Morality requires a

 Wrong. Morality requires a god. If there is no higher power with the authority to determine the morality of something than it is simply a human opinion. So flawed and cheap that it is nothing. Without a moral authority, then my morals are just as valid and right as yours. So if it is moral for me to marry a five year old and kill you because I don't like you, than that is not wrong, it may be societally unacceptable, but it is in no way wrong. One of your incorrect assumptions is that I believe in the commonly accepted definition of a christian god. I believe murder is wrong because it is infringing on someone else's property, their life. The reason they have the right to this property is because they have a soul, and are special. Not because god doesn't like violence, not because it is societally unacceptable.

 

Where is there reason and justice in a gazelle being hunted down and eaten? If we are no better than animals, than one man killing another is not wrong or right, it just is. 

We must learn to control our thoughts, or we will remain slaves to our feelings.
-SR


IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH
TheistTroll
IAMJACKSBROKENFAITH's picture
Posts: 66
Joined: 2008-06-23
User is offlineOffline
 So you don't believe in

 So you don't believe in right or wrong? Its all based on whats right for you and whats right for me? 

Something higher and perfect would validate morality. Without it, there is no morality. Do you really not see how morality requires something more than man?

It is apparently right. Do you honestly believe that those who rape are normal happy individuals who just dont see rape as wrong? No they know its wrong, and that is probably why they do it. 

What logic is not common sense? And if not pure chance than what? Design? What else is there?

What mental difference? Like the fact that man, unlike any other animal can reason, and feel and have the desire to change their enviroment to better their situation instead of just adapting to it? Thats a pretty large difference. Ad kind of a jump to assume that it is only a higher complexity of the brain. 

 

We must learn to control our thoughts, or we will remain slaves to our feelings.
-SR


Visual_Paradox
atheistRational VIP!Special Agent
Visual_Paradox's picture
Posts: 481
Joined: 2007-04-07
User is offlineOffline
Quote:So your right and

Quote:
So your right and wrong are based on your opinion of what is societally acceptable? What if my opinion of right and wrong differs from yours? Who is right and what determines that?


If I disagree with God, who is right and what determines that?

Quote:
What is fair? What is just? These things have no meaning if there is no soul. There is no fairness or justice in a pack of wolves.


Care to elaborate how fairness and justice can be derived from the existence of ghosts in machines?

Quote:
You base morality on the flawed judgement of humanity and it means nothing.


You base your morality on the flawed judgment of humanity and it means nothing.

Quote:
How do you think evolution selects those who breed and those who don't?


Your question is incoherent.

Quote:
If we killed every person with a genetic disease, than the disease could be eradicated. How would that be bad for society? Or we could enslave 10% of the population so the other 90% would se a greater standard of living. If there is no common thread between man that separates him from other life, something special, like a soul, then none of that would be wrong.


Explain how fairness and justice can be derived from the existence of ghosts in machines. Also, if God killed every person with a genetic disease, or demanded the enslavement of one-tenths of the population, how would that be bad? If you think it's bad but God doesn't, who is right and what determines it?

Quote:
Do you believe that all men women and children are equal. Cause we are in no way genetically equal.


Do you believe you are equal to Hitler?

Quote:
How does logic indicate that a god does not exist?


I've already explained the error of this question to you. Learn what the word atheist means.

Quote:
So its not wrong to kill humans, its just scary? What if I don't care about being shot at, does that make it okay for me to murder you then? And easy? Try hunting me and see if I'm easier prey than a duck.


So murder isn't wrong, God's just scary?

Quote:
So you do accept that atheism is the belief that god does not exist?


No.

Quote:
Atheist: denies the existence of God or gods.


Bzzz, wrong answer. I want you to look for a book that has "Dictionary" on the cover. I want you to find the entry for "atheism." Read that definition. Notice that it says disbelieves OR denies. Obviously, disbelief is not the same as deny. So, I want you to find the entry for "disbelief." Read that definition. Then, ponder on how stupid you make yourself look.

Quote:
Do you honestly not see the difference?


Are you honestly illiterate? People are not saying atheism and agnosticism are one and the same, they are saying the positions are compatible. How are they compatible? Again, find "disbelief" in a dictionary and ponder on whether an agnostic can disbelieve, then ponder on how stupid you make yourself look.

Quote:
God is in no way a cop-out for me. I don't pray for rain or sunshine or any of that bullshit. My god created me and now its my choices what to do, and if I fail or choose wrong, then its my consequences.


Congratulations.

Quote:
not that it has anything to do with the discussion but I really don't give a shit about gay marraige, legal illegal, Im not gay so I don't care.


After all that talk about morality, you end your post like this? Hypocrite.
 

 

Stultior stulto fuisti, qui tabellis crederes!


stuntgibbon
Moderator
stuntgibbon's picture
Posts: 699
Joined: 2007-05-17
User is offlineOffline
Someone wasn't paying

Someone wasn't paying attention when Hamby went over this on the show.