Another big difference is the levels of organization.Quote:
Originally Posted by iceman
Religions tend to be very organized, atheists squabble incessantly and recognize no imam or papal tree.
Organizations become corrupt, atheists have a harder time getting money from other non believers, including those who believe there is no god.
It's never really been their main line of business. They've generally been more on the receiving end.Quote:
Originally Posted by puregravity
Are you saying that only atheists get abortions? You funny mang.Quote:
How about we also just lump that (the last question still standing) with killing of children (already born ones). Then what?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buster Highmen
oh no doubt. bureaucracy is the main enemy.
Says who? Proof?Quote:
Originally Posted by iceman
Quote:
Originally Posted by iceman
NO. I'm saying that is not an abortion question, mang. I'm asking about killings of children (born ones period.).
I'll ask again:
Re: The difference being mainly in the killing of non-believers and raping children bits.
So atheiests don't do that, currently? historically speaking?
How about we also just lump that (the last question still standing) with killing of children (already born ones). Then what?
You know you can believe in nothing for free eh
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_29yvYpf4w
I need to prove history to you? Huh. Not sure where to begin.Quote:
Originally Posted by puregravity
Especially since I don't believe most of that either, cf. bureaucracy etc.
Start anywhere. You can do it. Dig deeeeep.Quote:
Originally Posted by iceman
Begin anywhere.
No need to prove - just demonstrate that you aren't full of shit.
Have to be careful here distinguishing between atheists and agnostics.Quote:
Originally Posted by puregravity
Agnostics believe that the nature of god, including the existence thereof, is unknowable.
The classical atheists do not believe in god, which sort of includes the agnostics. A more modern definitions of atheist is one who believes there is no god.
I'm not sure if there's a common belief for atheists regarding the manifestation of the physical world. One theory is the Big Bang. Another theory is that there was a Big Note that created harmonics that resulted in the vibrations, good and bad, which we interpret as matter. Credit the latter to FZ.
And again for the umpteenth time, atheists never claimed to serve gods children and protect them while simultaneously configuring mechanisms that protected the molesters of children in systematic and deeply hypocritical ways. No one is claiming atheists are perfect or protectants like the Catholic church does.
Quote:
How? How does one have faith that there is no god(s)?
So, what do athiests think made the physical world?
re: The difference being mainly in the killing of non-believers and raping children bits.
So atheiests don't do that, currently? historically speaking?
How about we also just lump that (the last question still standing) with killing of children (already born ones). Then what?
The Aborigines probably have it more right than anyone else, anyways.
How about we turn it around and ask for one instance in history of a massacre that was done in the name of Atheism. You do that and I'll pretend to take your challenge slightly more seriously.Quote:
Originally Posted by puregravity
People will claim the Nazis or Stalin were atheistic, which sort of isn't true.Quote:
Originally Posted by iceman
Nazism and Stalinism were cults of personality and hence a religion in itself and just as conflicted and hypocritical.
Atheists are not an organization. Religions are organizations.
I've tried going to churches but it has always made me feel sick. The hypocrisy, the haughty exclusiveness, the lies and misinformation and leading the poor sheep down to the donation bowl.
I know you get this, but Atheists killing people is different than atheists killing people in the name of athieism.
bingoQuote:
Originally Posted by iceman
I'm not sure that is true. There are probably lots of pedo rings run by atheists.Quote:
Originally Posted by Buster Highmen
Probably well organized and funded and bureaucratic.
The counting of athiest child rapists, in the present moment,. probably exceeds the number of sum of all Catholic priests that were ordained in the last 2000 years and their victims.
Old news:
https://www.sootoday.com/local-news/...rrested-110389
More recent:
https://www.cp24.com/news/owners-of-...bust-1.4474497
I'm not saying that Religious Organizations (Catholics esp. with ban on priests engaging in normal sexual relations) isn't complicit,
I'm saying that it cannot be used as an excuse for hating on 'religion'.
This topic is depressing me.
Re: Agnostics believe that the nature of god, including the existence thereof, is unknowable.
How do they know that?
Right, that's why I tried to short circuit the usual claim about Nazis or Stalin.Quote:
Originally Posted by iceman
How did you choose your flavor of religious belief ice? What was the process of elimination of all the other flavors?Quote:
Originally Posted by iceman
It always seems silly to equate the belief in the unproven and unprovable with a lack of believe in the unproven and unprovable.
Especially since in the overwhelming majority of the religious it's based on some level of childhood indoctrination and cultural, societal acceptance.
None of those instances are explicitly atheist, so those are bullshit examples, likely populated by religious types.Quote:
Originally Posted by puregravity
You're confusing knowing with believing.Quote:
I'm saying that it cannot be used as an excuse for hating on 'religion'.
This topic is depressing me.
Re: Agnostics believe that the nature of god, including the existence thereof, is unknowable.
How do they know that?
@ PNWB: IN matters of faith and existence I only believe that we have no fucking idea what's going on. I do, however, believe that religiously.
I doubt that. With the decline of religious types, the evidence more likely points to them being Sentient Beings with no religious affiliation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Buster Highmen
In any case, your 'religious types' probably includes anyone that ever looked up and wondered about the universe.
Re: You're confusing knowing with believing.
No I'm not. Swap words and then come at it again.
Killing of children. Bury me at Wounded Knee. I don't know if they were Christian but it would be a good guess. . Pretty sure they weren't Jews. Atheists? Catholics? Maybe. Army was a job of last resort back then. My point is that the killing of children is a common human ability. Human Nature and it's ability to be inhumane is a bitch but it's better to acknowledge it. I am always surprised that people are surprised.
Go on...Quote:
Originally Posted by Buster Highmen
Makes my point.Quote:
Originally Posted by iceman
Now you're just making shit up to fit your narrative. Poor form.Quote:
Originally Posted by puregravity
No, I'm talking about clowns like you.Quote:
In any case, your 'religious types' probably includes anyone that ever looked up and wondered about the universe.
May I suggest some more epistemological exercises before you confuse believing with knowing.Quote:
Re: You're confusing knowing with believing.
No I'm not. Swap words and then come at it again.
Don't misquote me sonny or I'll tell everyone how you ditched the greatest skis evah made.Quote:
Originally Posted by frorider
I think we need to parse this into two categories:Quote:
Originally Posted by PNWbrit
(A) People that claim to have a belief and learned something to hang their hat on. I call them BELIEVERS of whatever (not religious exclusively but have some substance to their belief). So then, self-identified ATHIESTS and/or AGNOSTICS are in fact believers. That also doesn't place all belief on the same level - because belief can also be evaluated for rationality and evidence too.
(B) People that claim to have no belief but claim to be in the process of learning. These, politically, would be identified as 'undecided'.
I love exercises.Quote:
Originally Posted by Buster Highmen
What works for you?
:)
Quote:
Originally Posted by puregravity
No, atheists are non believers. Big difference. Think.
For example.Quote:
Originally Posted by puregravity
http://www.differencebetween.net/mis...and-believing/
https://philosophynow.org/issues/6/W...Become_Knowing
Exactly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Buster Highmen
And (usually) they've put more thought into their not believing.
I'm willing to go with Dr. Johnson and agree that if i kick a rock it will hurt.
In this model we seem to inhabit.
Touche.Quote:
Originally Posted by Buster Highmen
I got to go now.
Carry on.
Agnostics have. I don't know about atheists.Quote:
Originally Posted by PNWbrit
;-)
You can't think your way through faith. That's why it's called faith. Believing that there is no god is no more rational or subject to inquiry or proof or demonstration than believing that there is. But please think all you want, if you enjoy it.Quote:
Originally Posted by PNWbrit
What would convince you that there is more than the physical world?Quote:
Originally Posted by iceman
At this stage of life, I realize I'm not any good at thinking. But I still try.
exactly ^^ thats why i can't believe in god
but i can believe shit will go on sale
so always hold out for 40% off MRSP
Try telling that to someone who is religious.Quote:
Originally Posted by iceman
Proof?Quote:
Originally Posted by puregravity
What are you imagining you know convinces you?
I've been waiting for one of the Keebler elves to hop out of one of those boxes.
Until that happens, I'm a non believer. And an agnostic.