Online Now 3092

The Blue Board

We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.

On this Board 2084
Record: 7394 (2/14/2012)

Online now 3090
Record: 18710 (2/25/2012)

Boards ▾

The Blue Board

We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.

The Green Board

Where the madness isn't just in March.

Big Ten Board (Beta)

Reply

Official Atheist Community Support Thread

  • c_woodson said...

    Disco Inferno.

    Now I have that song stuck in my head. Thanks a lot.

    buttesnake

  • buttesnake said...

    Now I have that song stuck in my head. Thanks a lot.

    BURN BABY BURN

    EnterTheOcho

  • wild pony714 said...

    I support your right to speak up. Like any other topic, you must expect response.

    This country is in a lot of trouble but God isn't the reason. The man occupying the White House got most of his pre election negative attention for the time he spent at the pulpit of a whack job. God didn't do that. Man did.

    For those struggling for proof....how do you explain that little voice in your head that tells you the difference between right and wrong? How do you explain love? How do you know that the greatest gift would be that of your only child? Faith is easy. Denial is a whole lot harder.

    In the year 6250 BCE, the great wizard Marlacami cast a spell, giving all men from that point forward love. Where the difference between right and wrong came from is still unknown, but I am researching it. If you think anything else, you are 10010101010% wrong.

    signature image

    "As far as the downvotes. It's a gnat biting an lion" -- A member of tRCMB Justice League, taking the internet WAY WAY too seriously.

    Rocket_Play

  • OmegaBuckeye said...

    I make a thread and invite other athiests to join in mostly because I believe that there aren't many forums for us to come out and state what we believe without repercussions. It is important for people to realize how many of us there actually are so that maybe we can get some decent people into office to run this country.

    The country is in a lot of trouble. It seems to me that the entire panel of Republican candidates is made up of a bunch of Right Wing Nuts that want to bring the joys of a Theocracy to this country. They do not value the seperation of Church and state. Many of them are quoted as wanting to bring Christ to the country. Very scary stuff. It should scare you Christians too. After all, who is to say their version of Christianity is what you had in mind.

    Yeah, I get that you want attention for what you don't believe in. This is your second response to my one post.

    Most rational people tend to ignore what they don't believe in. Atheist, on the other hand, spend their entire lives attempting to discredit or remove the personal beliefs of others. A lot of people don't believe in ghosts. However, they generally don't make a big deal out of another persons right to do so nor do they start support groups or threads about it. You don't want the right to not believe....you already have that. No sir, what you want is the rights of others to openly practice their faith removed.

    Now, let's talk about "separation of church and state". First of all, learn to spell separation. Secondly, there is no mention of this in the United States Constitution. It was mentioned in Thomas Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptist Association. The quote that your entire argument is based on reads as follows.....

    "... I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church & State."

    His intent in making the statement was that he did not believe the government should interfere with religion.

    The First Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

    Like I said, dude........just don't believe and move on OR continue being an attention whore. It makes no difference to me either way.

    GeorgiaBoy

  • GeorgiaBoy said...

    Yeah, I get that you want attention for what you don't believe in. This is your second response to my one post.

    Most rational people tend to ignore what they don't believe in. Atheist, on the other hand, spend their entire lives attempting to discredit or remove the personal beliefs of others. A lot of people don't believe in ghosts. However, they generally don't make a big deal out of another persons right to do so nor do they start support groups or threads about it. You don't want the right to not believe....you already have that. No sir, what you want is the rights of others to openly practice their faith removed.

    Now, let's talk about "separation of church and state". First of all, learn to spell separation. Secondly, there is no mention of this in the United States Constitution. It was mentioned in Thomas Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptist Association. The quote that your entire argument is based on reads as follows.....

    "... I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church & State."

    His intent in making the statement was that he did not believe the government should interfere with religion.

    The First Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

    Like I said, dude........just don't believe and move on OR continue being an attention whore. It makes no difference to me either way.

    First of all, I understand where you're coming from. Honestly.

    However, I don't think any one of us in this thread is directly trying to proselytize or "remove the personal beliefs of others." The thread is called "Official Atheist Community Support Thread," so if I were never to have opened the thread, I would very much doubt there would be a religious person posting in it, purely based on the title and thus the intention of the thread. A few of us have posted why we believe what we believe (or don't believe, I suppose), and religious people generally take offense to this type of conversation, even when none of us are trying to change what you believe.

    As far as politics go, I don't usually like to get into arguments over them because I'm not terribly well-versed in that type of thing, but I do know that the founding fathers (including Thomas Jefferson, who you quoted) were all, in fact, secularists, who supported the government making decisions without the influence of their religion, or lack thereof.

    EnterTheOcho

  • EnterTheOcho said...

    First of all, I understand where you're coming from. Honestly.

    However, I don't think any one of us in this thread is directly trying to proselytize or "remove the personal beliefs of others." The thread is called "Official Atheist Community Support Thread," so if I were never to have opened the thread, I would very much doubt there would be a religious person posting in it, purely based on the title and thus the intention of the thread. A few of us have posted why we believe what we believe (or don't believe, I suppose), and religious people generally take offense to this type of conversation, even when none of us are trying to change what you believe.

    As far as politics go, I don't usually like to get into arguments over them because I'm not terribly well-versed in that type of thing, but I do know that the founding fathers (including Thomas Jefferson, who you quoted) were all, in fact, secularists, who supported the government making decisions without the influence of their religion, or lack thereof.

    I am not a religious person.

    Answer me one question. Who has persecuted atheist in this country?

    I'll hang up and listen.

    GeorgiaBoy

  • wild pony714 said...

    You would be wrong. Studies indicate that even babies have an ability to demonstrate a negative reaction to other babies crying. Everything we do is NOT learned.

    I didn't say true love. Just love. The ability and capacity to have it, give it, and receive it. Once you have a child, you have the capacity to love children who are not your own.

    Babies have the same reaction as adults (negative) to babies crying because it's an unpleasant situation. That's innate, sure, but it's because of tonal differences to what is pleasant. It's like a baby tasting something that they don't like. It's not controlled by some little voice, it's controlled by brain receptors, which itself is biological, and not necessarily metaphysical.

    signature image signature image signature image

    jlkfy3

  • wild pony714 said...

    You would be wrong. Studies indicate that even babies have an ability to demonstrate a negative reaction to other babies crying. Everything we do is NOT learned.

    I didn't say true love. Just love. The ability and capacity to have it, give it, and receive it. Once you have a child, you have the capacity to love children who are not your own.

    This is a pretty interesting read.

    "If human reproductive behavior is a complicated thing, part of the reason is that it's designed to serve two clashing purposes. On the one hand, we're driven to mate a lot. On the other hand, we want to mate well so that our offspring survive. If you're a female, you get only a few rolls of the reproductive dice in a lifetime. If you're a male, your freedom to conceive is limited only by the availability of willing partners, but the demands of providing for too big a brood are a powerful incentive to limit your pairings to the female who will give you just a few strong young. For that reason, no sooner do we reach sexual maturity than we learn to look for signals of good genes and reproductive fitness in potential partners and, importantly, to display them ourselves."

    "Every living human is a descendant of a long line of successful maters," says David Buss, an evolutionary psychologist at the University of Texas at Austin. "We've adapted to pick certain types of mates and to fulfill the desires of the opposite sex."

    The Science of Romance: Why We Love - TIME

    Breeding is easy, but survival requires romance too. How our brains, bodies and senses help us find it

    www.time.com
    signature image

    Players play, tough players win.

    Victory for MSU

  • jlkfy3 said...

    There is no evidence a unicorn or a leprechaun or anything else like that has existed. I get what you mean and the parallel you're trying to make, but like I said, life itself is the reason I can justify saying there is a higher power.

    Someone above said people don't believe matter came from nothing, but the fact is, there isn't a single physical entity that doesn't have an origin. Matter would seemingly have to be the same thing. Therefore, how does something come from nothing? Something higher, something beyond what we know. What you choose to name that can be whatever you want. It could be God, as religious people claim, or it could simply be something else that atheists can agree with. When you get down to fundamentals, there is not a huge difference between atheists and believers - it's just the extent to which they believe and how they attribute the origins of life. Again, that could be God or that could be science or something we can't explain.


    I agree with you, and I disagree with you. First, I don't know what caused the start of the universe, or without a doubt how life began.. nobody does. I don't know if it was a God or not that created the universe... nobody does. However man has been answering the unknown with "God" for as long as man can remember. Time and time again that answer turns out to be wrong, that we were just ignorant to how things actually were working. You likely couldn't even count the number of times that situation has occurred throughout our history.

    So, we still have unanswered questions, and I don't see a single reason why one would continue to make the same mistakes and answer those questions with a God. There is no evidence for a God in my opinion. I see no reason why one would look at Life as a justification of a God over say... a rock, or some metal. These are things that had to be created within this universe... the needed elements for life (as we know it) were not created until Stars exploded over a billion years after the creation of the Universe.

    The First Cause argument doesn't mean much to me either. Other than the issue of God needing a creator too (I do enjoy the "He's eternal" counter point though) Quantum Mechanics shows how the universe can come from nothing, and not violate any of our current laws in doing so. I never bring up something like QM to a believer though, I mean if they're not going to believe in Evolution with the overwhelming physical proof... they're not about to believe a QM when their is no physical proof yet.

    I agree with you that there isn't a huge difference between an Atheist and a Diest. (Non-Personal God who is responsible for the creation of the universe). However when you bring a Personal God into the equation... the fundamental differences between the two get rather large.

    signature image signature image signature image

    You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.

    theyellowdart

  • GeorgiaBoy said...

    I am not a religious person.

    Answer me one question. Who has persecuted atheist in this country?

    I'll hang up and listen.

    It without question happens, and when it does... it's usually the religious that do so (I mean, who else would?)

    I'm not trying to make the claim that Atheists have it bad... there are groups with it far far far far worse than we have it. But it certainly happens.

    I also stumbled upon a pretty interesting site that shows what many in the US think of Atheists, might help show just what we're actually going up against, and why having a "Support Thread" for other Atheists isn't too shabby of an idea.

    This post was edited by theyellowdart on 11/29/2011 at 12:06 PM

    10 Scariest States to Be An Atheist | Belief

    If you're finishing your degree in secular studies and are trying to decide where in the country you want to plant your godless stakes, here are some places to avoid.

    www.alternet.org

    Reflections from the Other Side: Who's Really Being Persecuted?

    http://othersidereflections.blogspot.com/2011/05/whos-really-being-persecuted.html

    othersidereflections.blogspot.com
    signature image signature image signature image

    You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.

    theyellowdart

  • GeorgiaBoy said...

    Yeah, I get that you want attention for what you don't believe in. This is your second response to my one post.

    Most rational people tend to ignore what they don't believe in. Atheist, on the other hand, spend their entire lives attempting to discredit or remove the personal beliefs of others. A lot of people don't believe in ghosts. However, they generally don't make a big deal out of another persons right to do so nor do they start support groups or threads about it. You don't want the right to not believe....you already have that. No sir, what you want is the rights of others to openly practice their faith removed.

    Now, let's talk about "separation of church and state". First of all, learn to spell separation. Secondly, there is no mention of this in the United States Constitution. It was mentioned in Thomas Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptist Association. The quote that your entire argument is based on reads as follows.....

    "... I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church & State."

    His intent in making the statement was that he did not believe the government should interfere with religion.

    The First Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

    Like I said, dude........just don't believe and move on OR continue being an attention whore. It makes no difference to me either way.

    I'm am no longer taking applications for the thread proof-reader position. Please be assured that I will keep your information on file, and if the position does ever need to be filled, you will be contacted as you have shown to be very thorough. Really though, pointing out spelling and grammar errors is a sure sign that you are arguing from a position of weakness.

    You have no idea some of the things people have to go through when they come out of the closet as being atheist. Yes, for some people, given the backgrounds they are from, it is a very similar to telling your family that you are gay. People are exiled from their families and communities. The name calling and attacks that you are launching my way clearly demonstrate the anger that is generated when anyone has a position that questions the beliefs that you hold on faith and without evidence.

    You mistakenly apply the separaration (there fixed it for you) of church and state to give it a one way meaning. In other words you, think it means that religion should be protected from government. At least I think that is how you are interpreting it. You are only half right. Religion should be protected from the government, and in large part it is as long as it does not violate any laws or the safety of fellow citizens. Religions are allowed to exist and persue their own ends. But, here is the rub, government also needs to be protected from religion. This means that government shouldn't endorse particular religions by passing laws that entitle certain religions to favored status. This includes prayer in school and the government paying money to religious institutions. Religious people should be able to understand this as they would not want any religions, other than their own, to be the one in the favored status.

    I can't ignore what I don't believe in when people of faith are waging a war against the separation (there fixed it for you again) of chruch and state. They have publicly stated they are waging this war.

    We are both atheists. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours

    OmegaBuckeye

  • OmegaBuckeye said...

    I'm am no longer taking applications for the thread proof-reader position. Please be assured that I will keep your information on file, and if the position does ever need to be filled, you will be contacted as you have shown to be very thorough. Really though, pointing out spelling and grammar errors is a sure sign that you are arguing from a position of weakness.

    You have no idea some of the things people have to go through when they come out of the closet as being atheist. Yes, for some people, given the backgrounds they are from, it is a very similar to telling your family that you are gay. People are exiled from their families and communities. The name calling and attacks that you are launching my way clearly demonstrate the anger that is generated when anyone has a position that questions the beliefs that you hold on faith and without evidence.

    You mistakenly apply the separaration (there fixed it for you) of church and state to give it a one way meaning. In other words you, think it means that religion should be protected from government. At least I think that is how you are interpreting it. You are only half right. Religion should be protected from the government, and in large part it is as long as it does not violate any laws or the safety of fellow citizens. Religions are allowed to exist and persue their own ends. But, here is the rub, government also needs to be protected from religion. This means that government shouldn't endorse particular religions by passing laws that entitle certain religions to favored status. This includes prayer in school and the government paying money to religious institutions. Religious people should be able to understand this as they would not want any religions, other than their own, to be the one in the favored status.

    I can't ignore what I don't believe in when people of faith are waging a war against the separation (there fixed it for you again) of chruch and state. They have publicly stated they are waging this war.

    So basically atheists, such as yourself, are really after protected status. Coming out of the closet? Really?

    wild pony714

  • theyellowdart said...

    It without question happens, and when it does... it's usually the religious that do so (I mean, who else would?)

    I'm not trying to make the claim that Atheists have it bad... there are groups with it far far far far worse than we have it. But it certainly happens.

    I also stumbled upon a pretty interesting site that shows what many in the US think of Atheists, might help show just what we're actually going up against, and why having a "Support Thread" for other Atheists isn't too shabby of an idea.

    Speaking only for myself, I could not care any less about what you don't believe in. That would be beyond ignorant.

    The fact is that one atheists changed the way America views atheism forever. Madelyn Murray O'Hair.

    As I have stated previously, if you choose not to believe that is your right. According to my research, atheists make up less than 2% of the American population. That makes them a minority in a majority rules system.

    Tell me, yellowdart, does prayer offend you? If so, how?

    How about a Christmas tree? A manger scene?

    GeorgiaBoy

  • OmegaBuckeye said...

    I'm am no longer taking applications for the thread proof-reader position. Please be assured that I will keep your information on file, and if the position does ever need to be filled, you will be contacted as you have shown to be very thorough. Really though, pointing out spelling and grammar errors is a sure sign that you are arguing from a position of weakness.

    You have no idea some of the things people have to go through when they come out of the closet as being atheist. Yes, for some people, given the backgrounds they are from, it is a very similar to telling your family that you are gay. People are exiled from their families and communities. The name calling and attacks that you are launching my way clearly demonstrate the anger that is generated when anyone has a position that questions the beliefs that you hold on faith and without evidence.

    You mistakenly apply the separaration (there fixed it for you) of church and state to give it a one way meaning. In other words you, think it means that religion should be protected from government. At least I think that is how you are interpreting it. You are only half right. Religion should be protected from the government, and in large part it is as long as it does not violate any laws or the safety of fellow citizens. Religions are allowed to exist and persue their own ends. But, here is the rub, government also needs to be protected from religion. This means that government shouldn't endorse particular religions by passing laws that entitle certain religions to favored status. This includes prayer in school and the government paying money to religious institutions. Religious people should be able to understand this as they would not want any religions, other than their own, to be the one in the favored status.

    I can't ignore what I don't believe in when people of faith are waging a war against the separation (there fixed it for you again) of chruch and state. They have publicly stated they are waging this war.

    To address your claim that I am attempting to be a proof reader.......whatever. If you were truly educated on the matter of the separation of church and state, I would not have to tell you the correct spelling of separation. Are you following me now?

    To address your claim of being persecuted for your beliefs.....sorry, I am not sympathetic to your plight. Like I said.....just don't believe and step down from your soapbox. It really is that simple.

    The rest of your post is a failed attempt to give your position weight. It is a position of non belief. There is no weight to be given. It is a simple matter. The only war being waged is by your side. Atheists wish to strip believers of their right to believe in public.

    GeorgiaBoy

  • wild pony714 said...

    So basically atheists, such as yourself, are really after protected status. Coming out of the closet? Really?

    I could care less for protected status. I don't want the separation of church and state to be breached. Neither should you as a person of faith. Do yourself a favor and read the articles that yellowdart put up. The analogy is completly valid.

    This post was edited by OmegaBuckeye on 11/29/2011 at 12:56 PM

    We are both atheists. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours

    OmegaBuckeye

  • GeorgiaBoy said...

    Speaking only for myself, I could not care any less about what you don't believe in. That would be beyond ignorant.

    The fact is that one atheists changed the way America views atheism forever. Madelyn Murray O'Hair.

    As I have stated previously, if you choose not to believe that is your right. According to my research, atheists make up less than 2% of the American population. That makes them a minority in a majority rules system.

    Tell me, yellowdart, does prayer offend you? If so, how?

    How about a Christmas tree? A manger scene?

    If you think this is strictly a majority rules country, then your social studies class in high school did you a great disservice. The government is set up as a democracy that protects the freedoms of the minority and majority alike.

    We are both atheists. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours

    OmegaBuckeye

  • OmegaBuckeye said...

    If you think this is strictly a majority rules country, then your social studies class in high school did you a great disservice. The government is set up as a democracy that protects the freedoms of the minority and majority alike.

    Be careful, Omega, your radical view of democracy is showing.

    As for my education, I attended one of the service academies. There is no more unbiased education system in this great country.

    And just so you know, Omega, social studies does not teach the workings of government. Social studies is an academic subject devoted to the study of society and including geography, economics, and history. Hence the word "social".

    GeorgiaBoy

  • OmegaBuckeye said...

    I could care less for protected status. I don't want the separation of church and state to be breached. Neither should you as a person of faith. Do yourself a favor and read the articles that yellowdart put up. The analogy is completly valid.

    If you could care less, then why don't you?

    That, my friend, is the real question. But to be honest, I couldn't care less about the answer. Feeling me?

    GeorgiaBoy

  • GeorgiaBoy said...

    Speaking only for myself, I could not care any less about what you don't believe in. That would be beyond ignorant.

    The fact is that one atheists changed the way America views atheism forever. Madelyn Murray O'Hair.

    As I have stated previously, if you choose not to believe that is your right. According to my research, atheists make up less than 2% of the American population. That makes them a minority in a majority rules system.

    Tell me, yellowdart, does prayer offend you? If so, how?

    How about a Christmas tree? A manger scene?

    Your own research seems to have a very different figure than pretty much any other piece of research i've seen. I've seen a lot of figures for the percentage of the Population that is Atheistic... i've never seen one as low as 2%. Care to source your research? I can link to many sound publications with higher figures if you'd like.

    Prayer doesn't offend me, nor does a christmas tree or a manger scene (Hell I have a christmas tree up in my house.). I actually don't personally know of a single Atheist that is offended by any of those things, I don't doubt some exist... but most Atheists typically take issue with where the praying is done or the location of the manger scene.

    This post was edited by theyellowdart on 11/29/2011 at 1:08 PM

    signature image signature image signature image

    You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.

    theyellowdart

  • GeorgiaBoy said...

    Be careful, Omega, your radical view of democracy is showing.

    As for my education, I attended one of the service academies. There is no more unbiased education system in this great country.

    And just so you know, Omega, social studies does not teach the workings of government. Social studies is an academic subject devoted to the study of society and including geography, economics, and history. Hence the word "social".

    It is a radical view to think that the minorities of this country are protected from the whims of the majority in our democracy? Really?!?!? You think that this is strictly a majority rules society? Do go on.

    By the way, I'm assuming that if you were in a service academy that you went on to serve the country in the military. Thank you for your service. I would however beg to differ with your opinion of the service academies being unbiased. There are several law suits regarding the pressure exerted to be religious at the different academies.

    We are both atheists. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours

    OmegaBuckeye

  • theyellowdart said...

    Your own research seems to have a very different figure than pretty much any other piece of research i've seen. I've seen a lot of figures for the percentage of the Population that is Atheistic... i've never seen one as low as 2%. Care to source your research? I can link to many sound publications with higher figures if you'd like.

    Prayer doesn't offend me, nor does a christmas tree or a manger scene (Hell I have a christmas tree up in my house.). I actually don't personally know of a single Atheist that is offended by any of those things, I don't doubt some exist... but most Atheists typically take issue with where the praying is done or the location of the manger scene.

    Maybe it does. Tell me, yellowdart, what is your guess on the % of atheist in America? Is it more than 10%? I saw your other sources.....one was a blog and the other was written by a devout atheist named Greta Christina. Not what I would call unbiased.

    Why would you take issue with someone praying before a town hall meeting offend you?

    Why would you take issue with a manger scene on the front lawn of the county courthouse?

    In what way do those things diminish or threaten your right to not believe?

    GeorgiaBoy

  • OmegaBuckeye said...

    It is a radical view to think that the minorities of this country are protected from the whims of the majority in our democracy? Really?!?!? You think that this is strictly a majority rules society? Do go on.

    By the way, I'm assuming that if you were in a service academy that you went on to serve the country in the military. Thank you for your service. I would however beg to differ with your opinion of the service academies being unbiased. There are several law suits regarding the pressure exerted to be religious at the different academies.

    Yes, it is radical to assume that minorities have preference over the majority.

    Yes, I did. No thanks are necessary. I did it for the money.

    Having actually attended a service academy, I disagree. No pressure was ever put on me at all. In fact, at that time, I was agnostic. However, you are free to believe whatever you choose. I have no problem with that.

    GeorgiaBoy

  • GeorgiaBoy said...

    Maybe it does. Tell me, yellowdart, what is your guess on the % of atheist in America? Is it more than 10%? I saw your other sources.....one was a blog and the other was written by a devout atheist named Greta Christina. Not what I would call unbiased.

    Why would you take issue with someone praying before a town hall meeting offend you?

    Why would you take issue with a manger scene on the front lawn of the county courthouse?

    In what way do those things diminish or threaten your right to not believe?


    My other sources simply linked to various articles. I don't disagree they aren't unbiased sites, but the information they are giving you is from various news sources across the country which is unbiased, they are just presenting it together. Do you take issue what what was posted on their sites? If so post what and why.

    However, looking into things it appears your 2% figure is more or less rather accurate, I was very incorrectly going off of Non-Religious figures rather than those that responded stating they were atheists. A huge huge error on my part, I apologize.

    Separation of Church and State is why I would take issues with those things (not the prayer personally, but I understand why some do). I feel allowing those acts threatens Separation of Church and State which is without question not something I want to see happen. If that falls, then many things become diminished and threatened.

    signature image signature image signature image

    You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.

    theyellowdart

  • Rocket_Play said...

    I'm a member of the "I may not be right but I'm certain you're wrong" religon.

    To b fair I am a believer. I think those of us who have personal beliefs should acknowledge specific religions require a degree of personal faith. It is difficult to logistically differenciate from Christian vs Muslim vs ... vs. Therefore I can understand those who are deists in one form or fashion or another. As I understand the definition this includes all who believe in a Suprem God but have not refined that belief sufficiently to associate themselves with a particular identity for that God. I think many who call themselves agnostic are more acurately a deists, believe either without doubt or at least as a proponderence of the evidence that a God likely exist but not convinced that any particular religion accuaratly defines "who" he or she or what that God is and thus doesn't accept a specific set of religiose rules as "gospel". Like one poster noted this word is not prominant in our lingo. It certainly includes those truly on the fence of his existance but also lumped are those who think he most likely exist but not absolutly certain and many of those who believe he exist but have not accepted any of the availible discriptions as absolutely accurate. because of this I believe the percent of aithiest and the truly agnostic is lower than some studies my demonstrate.

    I am one of those who from a logistic point can not understand athies. I have many reasons but when I pull away all that I believe and marvel at, it boils down to this.....To believe no power of any sort is responcible for creating the beginning points nor guided what has evolved into the existance as we know it is to accept that million upon millions of processes kicked off and continued by pure chance, that over and over and over the one circumstance out of zillions of possibilities that was required to "create" occured exactly when and how it must in order for the "bang" to occur. further this isn't a one time thing. these unlikely meetings occured over and over and over again creating a chain reaction over time against mathmatical odds that are nearly insurmontable.

    In our lingo it would be as if one person won every lotto in the world every day for decades on end. could it happen yes, is it more likely someone affected the lotto. i think yes. i am not an expert by any means and certainly don't have all the answers. for me, even once i set my personal beliefs aside it just seems more reasonable and logical that someone or something greater than chance plays a role.
    Godspeed, bill

    boness

  • boness said...

    To b fair I am a believer. I think those of us who have personal beliefs should acknowledge specific religions require a degree of personal faith. It is difficult to logistically differenciate from Christian vs Muslim vs ... vs. Therefore I can understand those who are deists in one form or fashion or another. As I understand the definition this includes all who believe in a Suprem God but have not refined that belief sufficiently to associate themselves with a particular identity for that God. I think many who call themselves agnostic are more acurately a deists, believe either without doubt or at least as a proponderence of the evidence that a God likely exist but not convinced that any particular religion accuaratly defines "who" he or she or what that God is and thus doesn't accept a specific set of religiose rules as "gospel". Like one poster noted this word is not prominant in our lingo. It certainly includes those truly on the fence of his existance but also lumped are those who think he most likely exist but not absolutly certain and many of those who believe he exist but have not accepted any of the availible discriptions as absolutely accurate. because of this I believe the percent of aithiest and the truly agnostic is lower than some studies my demonstrate.

    I am one of those who from a logistic point can not understand athies. I have many reasons but when I pull away all that I believe and marvel at, it boils down to this.....To believe no power of any sort is responcible for creating the beginning points nor guided what has evolved into the existance as we know it is to accept that million upon millions of processes kicked off and continued by pure chance, that over and over and over the one circumstance out of zillions of possibilities that was required to "create" occured exactly when and how it must in order for the "bang" to occur. further this isn't a one time thing. these unlikely meetings occured over and over and over again creating a chain reaction over time against mathmatical odds that are nearly insurmontable.

    In our lingo it would be as if one person won every lotto in the world every day for decades on end. could it happen yes, is it more likely someone affected the lotto. i think yes. i am not an expert by any means and certainly don't have all the answers. for me, even once i set my personal beliefs aside it just seems more reasonable and logical that someone or something greater than chance plays a role. Godspeed, bill

    A creator would be more complex than that which is created. What are the chances of a creator coming into being?

    We are both atheists. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours

    OmegaBuckeye

Football Recruiting
Basketball Recruiting
Features
Resources
Connect

247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports