Bull patties, yourself. From the Apple dictionary: “noun the theory or belief that God does not exist.”
Perhaps you are an implicit Atheist (as opposed to an explicit Atheist)? If you are, you should identify yourself as such. Atheists, who do not describe themselves further are invariably taken to be explicit. Atheism not further defined would put you in the latter category.
“As for might making right, it usually is accepted that it does, although people rarely admit it.” (#77 to wmfights)
Well then, you must accept as right the bloody subjugation of the Amerinds by the Spanish Conquistadors, or the centuries-long series of bloody raids along the Brit and French coasts conducted by the Vikings. Or be relieved to know that, after over five years of horror and destruction, the Allies finally learned that they had been right in opposing the Axis powers. They certainly looked still to be in the wrong in 1943, didn’t they. And even yet today, in cowering before various international bullies, most of the world seems to believe that liberty is a failed myth.
“I'm certainly not a member of any atheist group. (#78 to betty boop)
Yet you rise in defense of an Atheist group . . . and a militantly hostile group at that, who are determined to permit no religion but theirs be recognized by the US.
“If you want to argue with me, that's fine, but argue with ME, not some French mathematician that I don't give a rip about.” (again #78 to betty boop)
Miz boop cites authorities as examples of past failed theories or past successes to fortify a point she wishes to make. Do you imagine that the thoughts you’ve expressed have never been uttered before? Do you think that ignorance of past consequences protects you from present consequences?
“And remember, I don't have to prove anything because you can't prove a negative.”
Then you must, indeed, be an implicit Atheist. Apparently you’ve learned that it’s safer to simply utter assertions rather than have to actually defend anything
Lack of belief, belief in lack, A does not equal B, B does not equal A, whatever. It is still not a unified movement. I've known Libertarian athiests and Marxists athiests. They only had one thing in common. Can you guess what that is, or is it happy hour where you live now?
Perhaps you are an implicit Atheist (as opposed to an explicit Atheist)? If you are, you should identify yourself as such. Atheists, who do not describe themselves further are invariably taken to be explicit. Atheism not further defined would put you in the latter category.
Define your little heart out. I don't believe in God. It doesn't mean I believe in a 70% tax bracket or starving the Russian farmers. It means I don't believe in God, period.
“As for might making right, it usually is accepted that it does, although people rarely admit it.” (#77 to wmfights) Well then, you must accept as right the bloody subjugation of the Amerinds by the Spanish Conquistadors, or the centuries-long series of bloody raids along the Brit and French coasts conducted by the Vikings. Or be relieved to know that, after over five years of horror and destruction, the Allies finally learned that they had been right in opposing the Axis powers. They certainly looked still to be in the wrong in 1943, didn’t they. And even yet today, in cowering before various international bullies, most of the world seems to believe that liberty is a failed myth.
You didn't understand what I was saying. I was saying that Christians have accepted that Might = Right, they just don't realize they've accepted it, because it's always worked in their favor. They've had quite a winning streak these last 700 years. They accept it as their due. Evidence that their God was RIGHT and their MIGHT proves it.
“I'm certainly not a member of any atheist group. (#78 to betty boop) Yet you rise in defense of an Atheist group . . . and a militantly hostile group at that, who are determined to permit no religion but theirs be recognized by the US.
Read back. I did not "rise to their defense." I merely agreed that it would be irritating to have this spiritual evaluation a MANDATORY part of my military career.
Miz boop cites authorities as examples of past failed theories or past successes to fortify a point she wishes to make. Do you imagine that the thoughts you’ve expressed have never been uttered before? Do you think that ignorance of past consequences protects you from present consequences?
I don't care who else has said it. Appeals to authority mean nothing to me, which is why I never use them. I do not care what any mathematician, author, philosopher, shephard, heir, politician, or movie star has said. Tell me your own thoughts in simple terms... or just show off your ability to Google, cut, and paste. I can tell you which approach will keep the lines of communication open with ME. If communicating with me is not important to you, then stop trying to communicate with me.
“And remember, I don't have to prove anything because you can't prove a negative.” Then you must, indeed, be an implicit Atheist. Apparently you’ve learned that it’s safer to simply utter assertions rather than have to actually defend anything
No, it is simply a logical fallacy that you have to believe in anything you can't prove the non-existence of. This is a basic.
The funny thing about atheists is they know very well that God exists. How otherwise could they complain about Him/deny Him?
Thank you so very much for writing!