Atheists Call 9-11 Memorial Cross "Grossly Offensive"

[Juddog]

Then you're an agnostic.

At this point you're literally ignoring the English dictionary.

That's one step away from arguing with someone that "red" really means "blue".

 

[Juddog]

Fixed to show the absurdity.
Yeah, you've already said that. But thanks for putting in some variables.

I suppose putting in variables is useless with you, based upon your lack of grasp of logic you probably don't understand basic math either, since now you're saying 7th grade algebra is wrong.

 

[Juddog]

buckshot24 let me ask you this - to what level of math did you graduate? I'll try to break it down to that level for you. Since you showed you can't understand algebra, this is an honest question.

 

[buckshot24]

You have demonstrated a clear lack of basic logic. When you say "lol evilbible" and don't address any of the points contained therein, you are attacking the source, versus refuting the direct evidence. This is a very basic logic fallacy.

We can't even agree on what belief is now I'm supposed to go into that entire site and debunk every single one of their claims? No thanks.

It's literally no different than me responding to every single one of your posts saying "lol buckshot24" without addressing your point.

You're welcomed to do that. "lol evilbible" isn't supposed to be a refutation its just me laughing at the source. You've taken it further than it was intended. If I wanted to I could find sources that answer every single one of the claims evilbible makes. If I did that what would be the end result? Why do I have to refute all of those claims? If I don't I'm forced to concede them? Get real.

 

[Retro Rob]

Stamp collectors don't try to shoehorn stamp collecting into legislation and educational cirricula, either, genius. Stamp collectors don't go door-to-door trying to get more people to collect stamps. Stamp collectors don't shoot abortion doctors or fly planes into buildings. Stamp collectors don't refuse medical treatment to their sick children and allow them to die of cureable disease.

Bad analogy is bad.

Tell me, out of the billions of religious people on the planet, what percentage have done what I bolded?

 

[buckshot24]

buckshot24 let me ask you this - to what level of math did you graduate? I'll try to break it down to that level for you. Since you showed you can't understand algebra, this is an honest question.

Calculus 4 (differential equations).

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Why does anyone think they can change the beliefs of another person?

Are insults the key to changing the other person's beliefs?

 

[buckshot24]

At this point you're literally ignoring the English dictionary.

That's one step away from arguing with someone that "red" really means "blue".

Ok, I really don't care about this point. Ok you have no beliefs. You don't believe that your wife will be faithful. You don't believe that killing somebody is worse than giving them food. You don't believe anything. Got it.

 

[Juddog]

We can't even agree on what belief is now I'm supposed to go into that entire site and debunk every single one of their claims? No thanks.

There is a definition in the dictionary. To argue against the English language definition of something while using it to communicate is pointless - pick up a dictionary and look in it; problem solved.

You're welcomed to do that. "lol evilbible" isn't supposed to be a refutation its just me laughing at the source. You've taken it further than it was intended. If I wanted to I could find sources that answer every single one of the claims evilbible makes. If I did that what would be the end result? Why do I have to refute all of those claims? If I don't I'm forced to concede them? Get real.

Translation: "I don't like the evidence, so I'll laugh at it, without addressing it." This is no different than the church punishing Galileo when he pointed out that Earth wasn't the center of the universe. Everything you've posted in this thread seems to indicate that you're arguing from the viewpoint of someone born on this planet a thousand years ago before calculus was invented and before Galileo discovered how the orbit of the earth worked.

 

[Juddog]

Ok, I really don't care about this point. Ok you have no beliefs.

This should read that "you have no beliefs in deities", but at least you're getting closer to understanding.

 

[Juddog]

Calculus 4 (differential equations).

If you got through Calculus, then why are you arguing against basic algebra?

 

[Retro Rob]

Ok, I really don't care about this point. Ok you have no beliefs. You don't believe that your wife will be faithful. You don't believe that killing somebody is worse than giving them food. You don't believe anything. Got it.

Atheists hold beliefs....just not the same ones you do.

 

[thraashman]

Why does anyone think they can change the beliefs of another person?

Are insults the key to changing the other person's beliefs?

Yes they absolutely are you raging jackass!

 

[Juddog]

Why does anyone think they can change the beliefs of another person?

Are insults the key to changing the other person's beliefs?

I asked this of some mormons that came to my door and they just kept going on about how the Latter Day Saints was somehow the "correction version" of things. Insults are not the key, but when someone doesn't underestand basic definitions that are clearly stated in the dictionary, that's a good place to start as a middle ground of understanding.

 

[ThinClient]

I've seen the best of what they have to offer. Did you notice how each passage is a single verse? It's a site of quote mines.

and yet, those verses came right out of your not-so-holy book

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Yes they absolutely are you raging jackass!

I guess I need to put this under the "The more you know" column....

 

[buckshot24]

There is a definition in the dictionary. To argue against the English language definition of something while using it to communicate is pointless - pick up a dictionary and look in it; problem solved.

Yes, you have no beliefs. Conceded.

Translation: "I don't like the evidence, so I'll laugh at it, without addressing it."

So I AM supposed to run down every bunny trail and address all the points TO YOU or I'm ignoring the evidence. That is just stupid.

This is no different than the church punishing Galileo when he pointed out that Earth wasn't the center of the universe. Everything you've posted in this thread seems to indicate that you're arguing from the viewpoint of someone born on this planet a thousand years ago before calculus was invented and before Galileo discovered how the orbit of the earth worked.

I love how you're arguing to follow evidence and yet you've constructed evidence out of thin air to attack me. You have ZERO evidence that I've not dealt with this idiotic site on my own. I don't need to demonstrate the false accusations of that site publicly to your satisfaction in order to have dealt with them. And do you honestly think I've never seen those accusations before? Do you think I just discovered it because TC posted a link?

 

[ThinClient]

Exactly!

People who don't collect stamps don't attempt to prove that collecting stamps is worthless by deducing why people collect stamps -- they just don't collect stamps. Establishing why others do is pointless, and when non-stamp collecting becomes a hobby.

Believing in something when there is no evidence whatsoever to support even the existence of said thing is irrational.

Belief in the judeo christian god or allah or thor or any other well known god is no different than believing in fairies, unicorns, vampires, Rumpelstiltskin, leprechauns, and "the great JuJu of the mountain."

 

[ThinClient]

So I AM supposed to run down every bunny trail and address all the points TO YOU or I'm ignoring the evidence. That is just stupid.

Not really. It's called supporting your positive claim.

Right now, no evidence is known to exist that a god exists.

You are making the claim that one does. The burden of proof rests on the shoulders of those making the positive claim.

Prove your case.

 

[thraashman]

I guess I need to put this under the "The more you know" column....

I couldn't help but be "that guy" for your post. It's part of who I am. I also don't like to let potential dirty jokes go unsaid. But as far as changing people's beliefs, I don't think it's quite that. At least for me it's not. I don't expect to make a Christian disregard their belief, I wish to make them think critically about them. I don't want them to ignore science because they feel it might conflict with their religion. I wish them to think rationally even if that means incorporating their religion into the science. And I also wish to keep those who are religious from using their beliefs as an excuse for bad behavior.

 

[shadow9d9]

Exactly!

People who don't collect stamps don't attempt to prove that collecting stamps is worthless by deducing why people collect stamps -- they just don't collect stamps. Establishing why others do is pointless, and when non-stamp collecting becomes a hobby.

They would if stamp collectors went around preaching, oppressing others, and using their stamp collecting to legislate based on their stamp collecting.

 

[ThinClient]

LOL :awe:

 

[buckshot24]

If you got through Calculus, then why are you arguing against basic algebra?

Since you're so keen on the definition are you suggesting that there is only one kind of atheist? There aren't different kinds of atheism? Say, positive atheism vs negative atheism?

 

[Broheim]

Then you're an agnostic.

no

ag·nos·tic (g-nstk)
n.
1.
a. One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God.
b. One who is skeptical about the existence of God but does not profess true atheism.
2. One who is doubtful or noncommittal about something.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

I couldn't help but be "that guy" for your post. It's part of who I am. I also don't like to let potential dirty jokes go unsaid. But as far as changing people's beliefs, I don't think it's quite that. At least for me it's not. I don't expect to make a Christian disregard their belief, I wish to make them think critically about them. I don't want them to ignore science because they feel it might conflict with their religion. I wish them to think rationally even if that means incorporating their religion into the science. And I also wish to keep those who are religious from using their beliefs as an excuse for bad behavior.

I came from a Southern Baptist upbringing and now I consider myself as an agnostic. I don't care what anyone's beliefs are unless they affect my or other people's livelihood. Believers should never allow their beliefs to affect the lives of other people and I agree it should never be used as an excuse for bad behavior.