Posted on 07/21/2011 6:57:25 PM PDT by TheDingoAteMyBaby
Edited on 07/21/2011 6:58:41 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
It
(Excerpt) Read more at myfoxhouston.com ...
I’ll wait for the DVD.
Did you here about the atheist with dyslexia who didn’t believe in Dogs?
What atheists don’t get is that the IDEA of God is a fact. They reside in the smugness of their argument that “you can’t prove there is a God.” They overlook the importance of the idea of God and are therefore pathetic. The ones who attack believers are...well, let me just say I’d like to pinch their damn heads off.
Atheism is a religion in its own right. The premise of an atheists argument is dependent upon an anti-supernatural bias.
By definition such bias is illogical. That notwithstanding, by definition scientists must eschew supernatural explanations with respect to rigorous proofs.
“Atheism is a religion in its own right. The premise of an atheists argument is dependent upon an anti-supernatural bias.”
I don’t have an argument. I just don’t believe in the existence of gods.
Can you imagine Cortez showing up in the New World with a single M-16 and vast quantities of ammunition? With a single common ordinary tool, he could've translated the supernatural ability of penicillan into a vast empire where a single potatoe would cost currently $100 in gold or even more.
One of the premises of atheists is that the overwhelming perspective of virtually EVERY civilization since the dawn of history has embraced supra-natrualism in some form, fashiom or practice; such notion is antiquated and superfluous to reason, and a rational view of the universe. It would appear that modernist enlightened philosophy would require the notion of oblivion to become paramount. That on its face smacks to be no less than Nirvana.
If you're position is that God does not exist, or that supra-natural beings do not, then you truly do no understand quantum mechanics.
The fact of the matter is: is anti-supernaturalism rational?
My original statement is one that I stand next to and proudly wear as a badge: atheism is a religion.
The basis of a religion is dogma w/out any proof.
Atheism has no proof to support its claims.
“My original statement is one that I stand next to and proudly wear as a badge: atheism is a religion.”
Well then, how about follow the golden rule and give my religion the same respect that you would like for me to give to yours.
My first thought, too. I’m not at all religious (not sure if I’m agnostic or atheist) and even I get offended by how blatant the movie makers are in portraying Christians as bad people. They won’t show the reality of Muslims-as-terrorists for fear of offending the filthy sand critters, but it’s perfectly fine in their eyes to always portray good God-loving and God-fearing people in a bad light. Not cool!
But Hollyweird never respects anything to do with traditional American values.
I'm an evengelical Protestant, i.e., Plymouth Bretheran, and that intimates fundamental Christian having ideation of sola scriptura et ali. You don't see me running amok on the Catholic theology threads.
What's your problem in this instance?
I’m sorry, I didn’t realize that I was running amok. I’ll go now.
I'll concede the notion you may one day be able to prove a rational basis to anti-supernatrual bias.
Until then, I can't fathom WHY you'd waste any effort to the contrary of my beliefs.
Maybe that's all you have in your arsenal: screaming NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO (et ali).
I agree with you 100 percent, NS. I know and love many such good people who believe themselves atheists.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.