When an atheist misspells a very simple word, it’s a “typo.”
But let a “fundie” or “bible thumper” make a similar mistake, and it’s intellectual condemnation. Don’t intellectual atheists see what they have typed, hmmm? I see mine.
For once, I would like to see an atheist write “Point taken” instead of always making up excuses. Hasn’t ever happened yet. Not once. I just get banned.
You mean Adam doesn’t read replies to his thread? How odd.
Incidentally, it is important to point his error out to everyone present as a counterpoint to the incessantly claimed “intellectualism” atheists profess.
Adam hasn’t been on the website in months. And I don’t know him from Adam (literally and figuratively).
You keep digging yourself deeper, without even realizing it until I explain.
This message board is FOR atheists, “to foster debate and intellectually stimulating arguments.” Evidently you intellectuals have failed to do that. Porquoi, on se-demand?
That’s a straw man fallacy, as it is not what I said.
Is it, you seem to have started with something of a chip on your shoulder here.
A very big chip at that.
I would like to see a theist just once answer a question promptly, and with something approaching integrity, but what I can tell you, life is sometimes disappointing.
You might try a little introspection on why that is. Now can you tell me what, if any, objective evidence you can demonstrate for any deity?
knock yourself out, and when you’re done perhaps you could quote a post on here where any atheists has claimed this please, as I am dubious.
Not just atheists, all are welcome to debate here.
I invite you to read your opening posts, and see why this claim is beyond ironic.
Now one more time, what objective evidence can you demonstrate for any deity?
Persona A (presumably) misspelled a word.
Person B misspelled the word misspell while criticizing person [A] for misspelling a word.
If you don’t see a serious difference, then I really don’t care what else you have to say. Could you be clear that is what you believe so I can act accordingly? Thanks.
Atheists categorically reject any and all evidence, and simply demand “evidence” as a fatuous pretense.
There are countless books, scientific papers, videos and lectures.
A very fine book is The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict by Josh McDowell. 900 pages, thoroughly documented findings of scientists, historians and scholars worldwide
I haven’t the time nor interest to provide a list of even a fraction of evidence but here is a start:
You have mentioned the set atheists, that would include me as I am regarded as such since I hold no beliefs in god(s). Will you please point out where I incessantly professed intellectualism?
Well, I for one have been shown a great deal of evidence by theists for their various gods. However, I’ve found none of it convincing.
Oh, shit! Undercover spelling police are on the site, and describing themselves as theists. Everyone, turn on your spell checkers. I will be editing posts for the next 8 hours. Same fees as before. $5 per line. We don’t want to get fined again. Remember last time? We had to chop up Tin Man and sell his body parts for scrap to get the cash together.
What should be really embarrassing is the fact that you keep ‘poisoning the well,’ by preambling all your posts with things other atheists have allegedly done to you, and that have nothing to do with us. You are simply asking for retaliation. That’s like visiting a new friend’s home for the first time, and then complaining about the style of furniture and the color of the walls. Are you really so afraid of having your beliefs attacked that you don’t have the balls to treat people like people when you enter their home?
Can there be good without evil? I’m going to assume this is a legitimate question. Good and evil are both value judgments we place on the world and not anything inherent in the world. When I like something I call it good. If I really dislike something I call it evil. So, in response to your question, YES. It is all a matter of perspective. I personally believe it would be unproductive to see good in everything, however, I have met optimists that try to do that.
In sociology there is a theory called functionalism. Every act in a society has a function. A man rapes a woman and this is the reason for a police department, a prison, a judge. Without such acts of violence there would be no need for these other institutions. Rather than positing, everything is good or bad, how about everything has a function. Good and bad can be eliminated from the big picture and left to petty individuals who do not understand the system. (I am not saying this is a personal belief, simply demonstrating an option.)
I personally do not believe in good or bad. This thinking is dualistic and only results in irrational judgments. There are things I like and things I do not like. I find this to be much more useful language.
Do you know what a declaration of Independence is? What did the founding fathers say when they got around to establishing a government? To actually create a government? What did they say then?
Religious neutrality and a government answerable to the people have been bedrocks of our pluralistic society. It was set up so that the government could not interfere with anyone’s personal religion. The government is supposed to be neutral. Unfortunatly, with all the religious zealots in the country, this is difficult to do. They placed the word God on our money, and they are trying to face God into our schools. It will be a sad day in the world if the Christians actually gain any real power in the government.
I see all the usual tropes are being brought out … reference to repeatedly debunked garbage by well-known (and frequently duplicitous) pedlars of ex recto apologetic fabrications, fake accusations of double standards, and the resurrection of repeatedly destroyed canards.
Are you serving fries alongside that salad of snide condescension and demonstrable falsehood?
Wow you’ve polled every atheist? I am dubious but do link that research. Now, what objective evidence can you demonstrate for any deity. FYI, I reject evidence when it is insufficient or purely subjective, I can only suggest you get over it, as I am not about to start believing unevidenced superstition just to assuage anyone’s hurt feelings.
I shan’t even try and feign surprise.