atheism

[a-guitarist]

Lemme just say, Mali was so tongue in cheek it almost became a porno.

a-g

[Pali]

Pali' date=' if I was gay, I could do better. [/quote']

Twin, if I were gay... you'd turn me straight.

[a-guitarist]

Twin' date=' if I were gay... you'd turn me straight.[/quote']

Straight to the language of love, baby!

a-g

[a-guitarist]

a-g

[Icor]

There are some atheists that don't like the way other atheists make atheists look. Same goes for Muslims, or Buddhists, or Christians.

I personally believe that the old King James version of the bible is factually accurate and a genuinely healthy thing to read. I don't do it to piss off atheists, I do it because I prefer to believe that humans are more than animals, need to take care of the earth, stay humble, and love and respect one another.

That documentary Ben Stine made had a couple good parts in it where some very smart people were discussing world views. Someone's world view defines everything about how they react to things or instigate ideas. I am a sure-fire thinker, and I love logic -- I understand the rationale of atheists completely, and I know that I can't prove there is a God. I don't care.

The world view part is what is important to me. If there is a big God out there, I can't get a big head, I won't normally be confrontational, I'll respect my environment, and I'll care about the people around me. That's what I get out of scripture, and it has worked out pretty well so far.

[Pali]

If you're referring to Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed... the people making it flat out lied to people to convince them to do interviews, lied about the circumstances surrounding the pro-ID people in it and what happened to them, and the movie lies about science. You could not find a bigger piece of garbage.

As for me, Icor, the consequences of something being true have nothing to do with whether I believe it to be true or not. Whether or not I like the universe being a cold, heartless mechanical thing has no bearing on whether or not it IS a cold, heartless mechanical thing. You say you love logic... well, you're committing the Appeal to Consequences Fallacy right there.

[Mudder]

I couldn't take the "Dry Eyes" guy seriously enough to ever watch a documentary he made.

I looked up his stuff once, I was very very surprised to know that he is an extremely conservative... How can I put it. Douchebag. He has done some weird things.

[Ali_gmud]

I love it how people think outside the box and like to believe in a higher power

just to feel the human race is some how more of a important being than say, a dog or a cat, to receive a afterlife, or a heavenly city or a grim underworld.

I LOVE games/books that revolve around religion, gods, heaven vs hell, demons, angels much like diablo, or god of war or something. But that's all, to me it's just another made up story, that creates more feel to this life we live.

Edit: my gf is morman, and I poke holes in her religions logic every day of the week, there has been countless times where she hasn't been able to explain something, or tries to cover up with another little story or belief that I find even funnier.

[Icor]

The film might have been garbage, but some of the things people said in the film had some value. I mean, if you over-generalize, you're not going to end up a very critical thinker. Just find the meaningful information in stuff and apply it.

For instance, I'm not going to burn every text book that says 2 + 2 = 5. One wrong thing in a book does not justify its destruction. I simply don't over-generalize -- I'd like to think that's a pragmatic, if not logical approach to learning.

I admit that for me to say that God exists is just stupid. I'm not going to bible-bash, or try to convince you I'm right, because frankly, it doesn't really matter. In my heart, I think that believing in God has made me and those around me better off; some others would disagree when they haven't even spoken to me in person... why? Because they over-generalize what "religion" means. It means different things for different people. As long as I don't bible-bash anyone, I think I'm in the clear.

There is always someone blowing holes in someone elses religion, or logic, or whatever. As far as I am concerned, the value of information does not rely on glamor to be worthy of applying. If what someone says has passion in a subject founded in testable evidence, they deserve to be listened to by open, constructive minds. Argument fades in the light of brainstorming.

[Ali_gmud]

If anyone has seen the south park episode "It's all about mormans" season 4-5 I think.

What Icor just said, is what the little morman kid at the end of the episode, and I totally agree. So long as you keep your opinions to yourself about what you believe in and don't go on about how I'm going to burn in hell because I was given the chance to learn of christ and didn't listen and disrepected it, then I am fine having gatherings of people, who live, love and learn with each other whom also share the same beliefs, by all means, I will not stick my head in. Believe what you want, if it makes you a better person, and makes you feel better about yourself, wicked but keep your opinions to yourself.

In conclusion I know what I know, and I know what I believe, the only way you'll create a problem is if you try and convince the non believers, to believe.

[Iusedtobesomebody]

Quit preachin' your un-belief at me!

[Mudder]

Edit: my gf is morman' date=' and I poke holes in her religions logic every day of the week, there has been countless times where she hasn't been able to explain something, or tries to cover up with another little story or belief that I find even funnier.[/quote']

The fact that your gf is even dating you means she is less crazy than the majority. In the U.S. very few mormons would ever consider dating a non-mormon, especially not an atheist. In fact, very few devoutly religious people will date atheists. At least that is what they say. ...All the ladies like a rebel.

...

I agree. Honestly I think the freedom of religion is extremely important. If religion enriches your life, by all means, continue. Very few atheists would truly be against that. It's not the idea of God that we dislike. As important as freedom of religion is, freedom from religion is just as important. One cannot exist without the other.

Separate religion from science. They do not belong together, they do not work together. They "can" co-exist but people must keep them separate in order to do that. Otherwise one WILL overtake the other and I pray to God that it isn't science that gets the short end of the stick(Lol).

I don't even know what I'm saying anymore this is just becoming a rant. I'll wrap it up then. No laws should ever be made to support religion. Do not take religion into the voting booth with you. Otherwise we won't have freedom of religion anymore. Instead, base your vote on your own views and what you believe people should or shouldn't be allowed to do as human beings. Or what aspect of your life you feel the government should control. If everyone did that, gay marriage would never even be a question. It would be a right(which it is, but far too many are deprived).

In the end, I am not really against religion. I am against anyone enforcing their own "faith" on others. You know... The same principals on which we founded the U.S.A.

EDIT: I find it very amusing that the forum spell check wanted me to change the spelling of mormon with a capital M or just change it to moron. Hrmm. (This is not meant to offend anyone, I just thought it was funny)

[Pali]

Do not take religion into the voting booth with you.

The problem is that this is just not possible.

[Mudder]

I think it is, the problem is they don't or don't want to. Many religious people do not agree with separation of church and state. That is extremely unpatriotic and anti-America.

There are some that do, but I feel they are outnumbered.

[Pali]

I'm not saying that it's not possible for religious people to support church-state separation... quite the opposite, many do.

I'm saying in many cases it is not possible to separate someone's religion from their political and moral views. If someone thinks because of their religion that all people are given souls at the moment of conception and therefore abortion is murder, how are they going to not take that into the voting booth with them? That I don't believe in souls certainly influences how I view the question of whether abortion should be acceptable or not, and I vote based on my judgment of that question, so how can I be surprised that a religious person's judgment is influenced by their beliefs? How can I expect any differently?

It's not like people have various portions of their thinking labeled "religious" and "political" and can turn one off at any given moment. People's beliefs (religious or not) will influence how they act and how they vote.

Luckily, that is why the Constitution doesn't allow the people, even a majority of the people, to do whatever they please when it tramples the rights of the minorities... and this is why we have a (ideally) unbiased court system that is not allowed to give creed to religious notions when judging a law's applicability.

[Mudder]

I think the separation of beliefs is possible. But as I said, few even care or want to do it. I would say most don't want to. Though all it requires is a little deep thought but again, few care to do this.

There are different frames of mind, different lenses in which to view the world. To say you are confined to only one is just silly. It merely takes the effort.

Abortion was a bad example, because you can be against abortion and be an atheist. It is less a religious stance but defended most by the religious.

I am pro-abortion(Notice I did not say pro-choice. I think my views are different from theirs.) but I am pro-abortion because the alternatives are much worse for everyone, not just the child. I am pro-abortion because I do not value human life above all else. Not to say I don't value human life, I just don't think we're completely above everything else.

To say an embryo is potential for human life is undeniable. The only difference between pro-choice and anti-abortionists is where you think that life begins. I don't consider a chunk of cells life either, some might, but I don't think you necessarily need to be religious to believe that.

Crap, I'm ranting again. Sorry. /rant

[Icor]

I don't want to adopt any philosophy that encourages murder, or intolerance, or ... anything bad, really. I won't say that I don't like philosophies that might indirectly cause people to do harm somehow, because I don't think there's a truly "evil" philosophy out there, with the exception of Nazism or something.

Separation of Church and state is important, as far as I'm concerned. It enriches both worlds and eliminates a lot of potential conflict. Scripturaly, the government is supposed to endure theistic morals, but everyone knows that's not a possibility in today's culture.

[Mudder]

Separation of Church and state is important' date=' as far as I'm concerned. It enriches both worlds and eliminates a lot of potential conflict. Scripturaly, the government is supposed to endure theistic morals, but everyone knows that's not a possibility in today's culture.[/quote']

So then you support legislation to permit gay marriage?

Otherwise you are not for the Separation of church and State. Banning gay marriage is strictly a religious view and there is absolutely no other reason for this legislation.

Do you want teaching creationism alongside Evolution in public schools, or anything similar? If so you are not for the Separation of church and state.

[a-guitarist]

I don't see how Gay Marriage is a religious issue at all... in the least. Get a civil union, same damn thing. No need to worry about a catholic priest or a baptist minister (they're like... always four hours late anyways), or a monk. And you get the same rights as married couples, and none of the religious hassle.

Solved.

Next on my solving the world agenda: Endangered Panda Bears. Don't ****ing shoot them.

I think I'm done for the day.

a-g

[Icor]

Ahh, Mudder, there's a conundrum there. I don't think marriage should be a federal issue at all. As soon as they say either "yes you can", or "no you can not", I am against it. It isn't their business. I'm not against gay-anything. I'm against freedom-robbing.

Also, you ask if I want creationism being taught alongside evolution in public schools; yet another conundrum. I don't believe there should even be public schools... at least not federally subsidized or tax-funded public schools.

[Andre]

There are a few takes on it. My own view, if you want to give it a label, is commonly referred to as agnostic atheism.

Basically, I do not believe in the existence of any deity or higher power, however I am aware of the fact that it is IMPOSSIBLE to prove that.

If that makes any sense.

Dey

second that. THOUGH in saying that, I do believe in reincarnation.

[Pali]

A-G, civil unions that grant the same rights that marriage does are not available for gays in many states. And despite that a few states have now allowed gay marriage, those marriages are not recognized by the federal government and therefore are given none of the federal rights that heterosexual marriage is.

The way I see it, the best way to deal with the issue of gay marriage is to make marriage a purely religious ceremony that legally means absolutely nothing, empower civil unions with all the legal rights and privileges that marriage now has at all levels of government, and make civil unions available for any partnership that wishes one.

[Mudder]

Ahh' date=' Mudder, there's a conundrum there. I don't think marriage should be a federal issue [i']at all. As soon as they say either "yes you can", or "no you can not", I am against it. It isn't their business. I'm not against gay-anything. I'm against freedom-robbing.

Your against the government saying you can do something? What type of government do you want us to have. The kind the founding fathers wanted?

Also' date=' you ask if I want creationism being taught alongside evolution in public schools; yet another conundrum. I don't believe there should even [i']be public schools... at least not federally subsidized or tax-funded public schools.

Without the public school system our country would be so incredibly far behind it is not even funny. We would never have gotten anywhere near where we are today.

[Malchaeius]

The U.S. already ranks pretty poorly behind other nations when it comes to pre-undergraduate level education Mudder.

[J.Twendrist]

Personally, I'm more worried about Government control in the economy, the printing and borrowing of money that will send us to ruin (but, at least we'll have one last spending hoorah!), the blatant failures of the past few presidents, advisor's, and congressmen, which have led us here, and the fact the North Korea now has a delivery system for their bombs.