 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 18-Jan-09 21:43, Patrick Elliott wrote:
> andrel wrote:
>> Ah, 'teach' may be the important word here. Most people I have met are
>> not from churches that teach missionary actions. Apart from the
>> Jehovah witnesses that come to the door (must be 9 years since I saw
>> the last one). Catholics here tend to not take serious anybody from
>> the ranks of bishop up. I have yet to meet a Muslim that has taken
>> it's faith serious enough to even know how to explain his faith to an
>> infidel. In short, all religious persons I know personally that are
>> serious about their faith and every church they are in are not of the
>> missionary type. Remember, I live in the Netherlands.
>
> And that, my friend, is likely precisely why it harder to take people at
> face value for me than it is for you. The ones like you talk about, even
> if they may be a slim majority in the US, and I am not that certain of
> that, are most definitely "not" the sort you ***see*** doing most
> charity work, or seeking to help people, etc. There is a bias, even
> among many liberal church goers in the US, that when someone opens a
> soup kitchen, one of the first questions isn't, "How many people did it
> feed?", but, "Do they preach to them before they let them eat it?" At
> best, the ones like those you are used to, try real hard to avoid
> thinking about that question, but if asked, can't honestly reply that it
> didn't occur to them. Remember I live in the good old US of A-hole here.
There are a few soup kitchens and that sort of thing in this country,
but hardly visible. You have to be homeless to know where they are, I
guess. Is there one in the town (140000 inhabitants) where I live? I
don't know. Do we have homeless people here? Sometimes I see one or two
in the summer, I think they have now migrated to the warmer Amsterdam.
Indeed our difference in experience with religious people could be
influenced by the difference in social system.
I have never been in a soup kitchen, but I assume I will be in something
similar in the near future (my sister is involved in one for (mainly)
illegal immigrants). When I am there I'll check the level of preaching.
It is related to a church. I am not sure which one, could be a born
again-ish type.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 18-Jan-09 22:06, Patrick Elliott wrote:
> Darren New wrote:
>> Patrick Elliott wrote:
>>> not the least being self contradictions,
>>
>> At least one highly religious person I had an opportunity to interact
>> with for hours at a time face to face has convinced me that self
>> contradictions aren't a problem in religion. As long as you're being
>> irrational, why stick with modus ponens?
>>
> Yes, well.. Its when they then insist that you don't know what "you" are
> talking about because its so damn obvious that god is "both" a plate of
> spaghetti and a magic hat, at the same time,
I think the pastafarians might take that as an insult to his holy
noodleness.
> that things really go down
> hill for everyone not "in the know". lol
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Patrick Elliott wrote:
> Darren New wrote:
>> Saul Luizaga wrote:
>>> This question denotes wisdom because you are willing to search and
>>> learn contrary to Patrick that only writes "you are deluding yourself
>>> you are being a moron, for your own sake STOP!!!".
>>
>> Yes. That's why I said I'm an atheist, but not like Patrick. For one
>> thing, I've accepted that irrationality is not always bad.
>>
> He is putting words in my mouth and you are letting him?
I said nothing of the sort. I simply said I'm not like you. :-)
I suppose one reading of what I said might imply I agree with him, but that
wasn't my intention.
> The cognitive dissonance involved is just more than I am willing to put up with,
especially when
> he starts claiming that I don't have friends of family that can "love
> each other like a theist can!"
Yes. That part is rather insulting.
> as though they where all brand new, no one has heard them before, etc.
Agreed. Sometimes it seems like Saul is actually interested in
conversation, and sometimes it seems like he's interested in converting.
Usually it's pretty easy to tell which is which by counting questions vs
assertions.
> Though, I admit, the funniest ones are the
The funniest ones for me are the ones that feel they have to help their
deity in his work, like *they* can show me the way to religion better than
their own God can. Funny, and annoying. :-)
> as though belief in god is like me deciding not to get
> out of bed when I wake up, and instead deciding to stay under the covers
> for a few more minutes, despite having things I need to do that day.
It's that whole "free will" bit that explains evil in the world.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Why is there a chainsaw in DOOM?
There aren't any trees on Mars.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis wrote:
> Darren New <dne### [at] san rrcom> wrote:
>> nemesis wrote:
>>> He's also The guy who defined man and woman. ;)
>> No he isn't. Once you leap from "the creator of the Big Bang" to "the guy
>> who tells you how you run your life", that's when I get annoyed.
>
> How you go from "guy who defined man and woman" to "guy who tells you how you
> run your life"?
We call it Proposition 8, making it impossible (for example) for one man to
designate another man as the person to make emergency medical decisions for
him, requiring him to choose a female instead.
Sharia is pretty harsh on homosexuality as well.
If you want your god to "define" man and woman without assigning any roles,
I'm cool with that too. Sadly, I don't believe there are many people who
think God cares about which is a man and which is a woman that doesn't also
believe that some combinations deserve punishment.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Why is there a chainsaw in DOOM?
There aren't any trees on Mars.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> The "first cause" argument is that every effect has a cause, and hence
> for the universe to exist, something before the universe must have
> caused it, and hence God exists.[1]
Huh. Looks like maybe the universe didn't need a first cause after all.
http://bite-dose.com/science/did-dark-energy-give-us-our-cosmos/
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Why is there a chainsaw in DOOM?
There aren't any trees on Mars.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> I believe you're reading disrespect into my disagreement. Regardless of
> Patrick's feelings, I don't disrespect you.
Dear friend, this words are not necessary, I already have this
consideration to you. And for what is worth you have been only
disrespectful once, Patrick many, and you corrected your question and
asked nicely again, that implicitly have an apology an I accept it
gladly, I offer the same an apology if I have being disrespectful with
you or Atheism in 1 or more occasions.
Best regards and luck to us all :-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Got a new term for you. Tragical. Its like a miracle, but when god does
stuff that's bad, because he "works in mysterious ways". lol
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-vhyqx_Duc&feature=channel
Think I am going to have to keep up with this guys videos.
Tell you the truth, I don't think we are "that" different. About the
only difference I can see is that, maybe, you are one of those that
think that given "some" ground can benefit our position. I once thought
that might be true, then I realized that, in reality, the people
fighting the hardest for beliefs are basically impervious to evidence in
most cases, without causing their whole world view to shatter like a
chandelier, and so talking to them is pointless, once you figure out
that they have put themselves in the unassailable position of stating,
"There is no evidence, ever, that would sway my belief.", and, anyone
willing to listen, isn't part of the problem in the first place. You
give ground to people who "could be" persuaded, but only as much as
needed. You never do so with someone that refuses to even acknowledge
the possible flaws, or lack of knowledge, inherent in their positions.
And, frankly, he claims I called him a moron. No, confusing "ignorant"
with "stupid" is moronic. Had he opted to take the definition for what
it "means", instead of inflating it into something worse... But, as they
say, better to say nothing, than erase all doubt.
That still doesn't mean he isn't do "some" respect for everything else
he does in his life, even to help others. It just means that he is the
reverse of an idiot savant. Instead of having one thing he does very
very well, and everything else poorly, he does everything else rather
well, and one thing very very poorly. Most of us have that handicap, in
one fashion or another. Mine is that I couldn't play a sport, or
apparently even a game of chance, without losing, even with loaded dice.
I am an idiot at it. Its a common affliction in nerds. His... is
similarly common. But, there is a difference between ignorance,
stupidity and willful blindness. The first is curable, the second
incurable, and the third, takes a great deal of practice. The first step
is to deny you have a problem at all, or could be bad at it.
--
void main () {
If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
if version = "Vista" {
call slow_by_half();
call DRM_everything();
}
call functional_code();
}
else
call crash_windows();
}
<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis wrote:
> Patrick Elliott <sel### [at] npgcablecom> wrote:
>> Darren New wrote:
>>> Patrick Elliott wrote:
>>>> not the least being self contradictions,
>>> At least one highly religious person I had an opportunity to interact
>>> with for hours at a time face to face has convinced me that self
>>> contradictions aren't a problem in religion. As long as you're being
>>> irrational, why stick with modus ponens?
>>>
>> Yes, well.. Its when they then insist that you don't know what "you" are
>> talking about because its so damn obvious that god is "both" a plate of
>> spaghetti and a magic hat, at the same time, that things really go down
>> hill for everyone not "in the know". lol
>
> LOLz. Look at the atheists making fun of their fav subject and here I am still
> feeding them! Really, what would you do with your boring vulcan/madonna dual
> lifes if there was no one you could mock of? probably commit suicide to see if
> they were right...
>
Favorite? Yeah, if by "favorite" you mean "only". Its kind of like
arguing that "insert religion of your choice"'s favorite subject is
"everyone that believes something else" too.
In response, from PX Myers to yet "another" case of "Oh no, atheists
have bus signs now!", and more specifically the ever popular, "There
probably isn't any god, so stop being an ass." Umm, well, the last bit
isn't *quite* phrased that way, but...:
""There's probably no God" is an accurate summary of the atheist
position. There's no virtue to be found in iron-clad certainty, and it
is no sign of weakness that a statement might allow for acceptance of
evidence in contradiction. People like Warner, however, think that
certainty is a necessity.
...
Let's leave certainty to the oleaginous evangelists, the jingoistic war
mongers, and the other con artists selling us bogus solutions to
imaginary problems. A little uncertainty, a little willingness to accept
that deeper knowledge might change our minds, is a good thing.
...
that I am not reliant on the whims of some all-powerful cosmic tyrant.
I've read the Bible, and his god is not a very nice anthropomorphic
hallucination: murder, war, rape, threats of eternal torment, and
micro-management of trivial aspects of human behavior seem to be his
modi operandi. I am relieved that I am not under its thumb, although it
is still worrisome that so many imagine that they are, and act as if
this evil puppetmaster were pulling their strings.
The message of atheism is personal responsibility. You cannot blame your
wickedness on a rebellious ancestor with an appetite for apples. You
cannot say the devil made you do it. Your actions are not dictated by
invisible deities whispering in your ear. Your actions have
consequences, and they are *your* actions." <- emphasis mine
--
void main () {
if version = "Vista" {
call slow_by_half();
call DRM_everything();
}
call functional_code();
}
else
call crash_windows();
}
<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Patrick Elliott wrote:
> Got a new term for you. Tragical. Its like a miracle, but when god does
> stuff that's bad, because he "works in mysterious ways". lol
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-vhyqx_Duc&feature=channel
>
> Think I am going to have to keep up with this guys videos.
I've watched some of his stuff. He's pretty funny.
This guy's pretty good too, altho less funny:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQBDGMj2h-c
> Tell you the truth, I don't think we are "that" different.
I try not to be off-putting. You don't seem to care whether you're
off-putting. I think that's the main difference in our approaches.
> think that given "some" ground can benefit our position.
I don't give any ground. I just don't feel the need to alienate people who
aren't attacking me. :-)
> and so talking to them is pointless,
... if you're trying to change their mind, yes.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Why is there a chainsaw in DOOM?
There aren't any trees on Mars.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Patrick Elliott wrote:
> The message of atheism is personal responsibility. You cannot blame your
> wickedness on a rebellious ancestor with an appetite for apples.
Well, I don't, but that's because I'm from the other side of the family. :-)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Why is there a chainsaw in DOOM?
There aren't any trees on Mars.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
