Athiests - Who cares

Piliger wrote: »

A completely different thing than you originally tried to say.

Your reading comprehension could possibly use a little polish.

Piliger wrote: »

How is saying you are dreaming and should be in politics an 'ad hominem' exactly ?

Piliger wrote: »

More like your writing ability.

Pilliger I think this may be of some help to you in understanding logical fallacies and rational argument -


http://www.relativelyinteresting.com/10-commandments-rational-debate-logical-fallacies-explained/


You're tying yourself up there in all sorts of contradictory cognitive knots and, well, you're not even wrong.

OP, millions of people in the world suffer daily - are shot, hanged, decapitated, stoned, lashed, tortured, publicly, ridiculed and ostracised - because of religious beliefs and religious governments for just saying their opinion and daring to do things differently. Things like girls going to school or gays not pretending they are straight.

But one of your biggest concerns in a country where women still can't get an abortion even when their life is in danger because of religious beliefs is that some atheists tell you they don't believe in gods after a few drinks?

One eyed Jack wrote: »

(Nah it's grand, I'm only messing, but I find it interesting that some people believe extraterrestrial life forms exist or have existed, yet when someone claims to have been abducted to spend a weekend being probed, they're nuts! )

There is good reason for that of course. There are good reasons to EXPECT there to be life elsewhere in this universe. The sheer size of it coupled with the fact that if you list in order the elements that make us up, they are 1:1 the elements that make up the universe. We are not all that special.

There is however good reason to ALSO expect such life to be entirely unable to cross great distances at speeds that would allow them to find us, let alone visit us, let alone be interested in us enough after all that time and technology to be bothered abducting us on the sly and studying us. Again, we are not that special

So I do not find it as interesting I am afraid that this disparity exists in peoples thinking because I think both are quite rational positions to hold and no contradiction exists between them.

Certainly on the note of the other points being made however, it is wrong for anyone to suggest being atheist requires no thought, or that thinking nothing exists requires no thought, or that one would never consider these beliefs if one was not indoctrinated into them. The simple fact is we all exist in this universe and we have no explanation for this. And exploring those explanations mentally, requires deep thought, regardless of which conclusions you come to, and which ones you reject.

I was never "indoctrinated" into religious belief. Except for being in an "integrated school curriculum" I remained somewhat immune and was somewhere approaching 12 before I realised the god stuff being read at what I thought was "story time" was something people ACTUALLY believed.

But when the question of our existence here came to me, the god hypothesis is just as valid as any other one I have heard. So I explored it with just as much intellectual rigor and deep thought. And after 20 years of that I have come to the conclusion that the claim our universe is explained by the actions or existence of a non-human intelligent and intentional agent......is a claim that is not just slightly, but ENTIRELY devoid of even a modicum of arguments, evidence, data or reasoning that validly supports it.

sup_dude wrote: »

Aw it's the most hateful thing to read. Full of narrowminded, badly written articles. Not going to lie, I spent most of the classes just picking an article and arguing with the religion teacher about it every week. Used to drive the teacher mad. I found it quite insightful into the thought process of someone who's as extreme as her.

It used to be delivered to a house i lived in. One issue had Cameron Diaz on the cover. The article was about a lack of sexual morals. they said she had so many past boyfriends that she had become the parcel in a game of pass the parcel.
it really is hate filled drivel.

We already have ethical systems that make no reference to religion. Medical ethics, for example, or engineering ethics*. They weren't "handed down" (literally or metaphorically), but arose in a "bottom up" fashion when groups of people agreed on how things should be done. That's all it takes.

* example: Canadian engineering graduates can optionally undertake the Ritual of the Calling of an Engineer, which was written by Rudyard Kipling, after which they may wear an iron ring to remind them of their obligations.

I'm one of the people who went back so I've seen it from both sides, I myself was a full on atheist in college. (very much involved in societies etc) The big thing I got from it was that I was free and I could do and say whatever I liked without some Christian square judging me. We we're going to stick it to the the cnuts. That all changed a couple of years ago for me.

However back on topic you'll find big angry assholes in every section of humanity, religious atheist or whatever, thankfully the majoritory in this country are fairly moderate. There is an evangelical presence here spreading their literature and the odd extreme atheist type cutting down crosses on mountain tops but for the most part I think both sides interact quite well together.

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Oh you have more information on this then and have identified who did this? Have you given your evidence and information to the guards? Enlighten us on who exactly has done this and how you found out.

It's well known who did it but I'm not a rat or a stool pigeon.

Paco Rodriguez wrote: »

I respect their non - belief and that but they are so obsessed with religion. It's like someone saying they have no interest in football but then they never shut up about football.

Except no one dies because of the style of football of this country. No one can reject a child a place in a school based on the team their parents support. Etc.

So not at all like your analogy really.

Aongus Von Bismarck wrote: »

Someone whinging about the angelus being on the telly will be remembered in the same vein as Rosa Parks, Gandhi, Mandela and M.L. King.

Who is talking about the Angelus?
What about children being discriminated against being enabled by the state. Which is in breach on the UN's stance on freedom of religion.