Does religious bigotry bother you at all?

Any form of bigotry disgusts me.

[QUOTE="theone86"]

[QUOTE="thegerg"] Haha. Yes I do. Why do you make such a silly accusation?thegerg

You're saying that a belief that there is no god is irrational, therefore you do not understand reason.

The statement that there is a god is an unproven statement, saying that there's no proof for the non-existence of god infers that there is proof for the existence of god. There's no proof for the existence of god, ergo it is rational to believe there is no god.

[QUOTE="theone86"]

[QUOTE="thegerg"] You are assuming that one who who has convinced themselves they will see said relative again has done so because they can't deal with an unpleasant situation.

thegerg

No I'm not, that's the nature of denial.

When do those new rules go into effect again?

Now you're using double-speak, great, keep it up. I never said believing they might see a dead relative again means they are in denial, I said convincing themselves they will see a dead relative again means they are in denial. Are you done whipping out fallacies, or are you just going to keep riding that this entire time?

[QUOTE="theone86"]

[QUOTE="thegerg"] Belief in something for which there is no evidence is irrational. You seem to be confused.thegerg

The statement that there is a god is an unproven statement, saying that there's no proof for the non-existence of god infers that there is proof for the existence of god. There's no proof for the existence of god, ergo it is rational to believe there is no god.

There doesn't need to be proof for the non-existence of god in order for it to be a rational belief. I don't believe in fairies or Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny. There's no disproof for those either, but it's still rational not to believe in them.

No, saying there is no proof for the non-existence of a god does not infer that there is proof of a god. You seem to be very confused. Saying there is no proof for the non-existence of a god simply means there is no proof for the non-existence of a god. thegerg

There doesn't need to be proof for the non-existence of god in order for it to be a rational belief. I don't believe in fairies or Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny. There's no disproof for those either, but it's still rational not to believe in them.

[QUOTE="theone86"]

[QUOTE="thegerg"] What is the nature of denial? Assuming the reasoning for why one might believe they will see a dead relative again?thegerg

When do those new rules go into effect again?

Now you're using double-speak, great, keep it up. I never said believing they might see a dead relative again means they are in denial, I said convincing themselves they will see a dead relative again means they are in denial. Are you done whipping out fallacies, or are you just going to keep riding that this entire time?

It's right there in your own ****ing quote. Are you just going to keep switching out words and playing a poor semantical game or do you actually feel like offering up an argument?

[QUOTE="theone86"]

[QUOTE="thegerg"] No, saying there is no proof for the non-existence of a god does not infer that there is proof of a god. You seem to be very confused. Saying there is no proof for the non-existence of a god simply means there is no proof for the non-existence of a god. thegerg

There doesn't need to be proof for the non-existence of god in order for it to be a rational belief. I don't believe in fairies or Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny. There's no disproof for those either, but it's still rational not to believe in them.

No I'm not, you're conflating the two. Fairies don't exist, there is no evidence for them existing. Beliving that they don't exist is not an irrational belief, just as beliving god does not exist is not an irrational belief.

[QUOTE="theone86"]

[QUOTE="thegerg"] No, saying there is no proof for the non-existence of a god does not infer that there is proof of a god. You seem to be very confused. Saying there is no proof for the non-existence of a god simply means there is no proof for the non-existence of a god. thegerg

There doesn't need to be proof for the non-existence of god in order for it to be a rational belief. I don't believe in fairies or Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny. There's no disproof for those either, but it's still rational not to believe in them.

Actually no, you're confusing the lack of belief in something (I don't believe in God) with the belief in something (the non-existence of fairies or Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny).

[QUOTE="thegerg"][QUOTE="theone86"]

There doesn't need to be proof for the non-existence of god in order for it to be a rational belief. I don't believe in fairies or Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny. There's no disproof for those either, but it's still rational not to believe in them.

No I'm not, you're conflating the two. Fairies don't exist, there is no evidence for them existing. Beliving that they don't exist is not an irrational belief, just as beliving god does not exist is not an irrational belief.

[QUOTE="thegerg"][QUOTE="theone86"]

There doesn't need to be proof for the non-existence of god in order for it to be a rational belief. I don't believe in fairies or Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny. There's no disproof for those either, but it's still rational not to believe in them.

No I'm not, you're conflating the two. Fairies don't exist, there is no evidence for them existing. Beliving that they don't exist is not an irrational belief, just as beliving god does not exist is not an irrational belief.

I don't believe it is either. But, on the contrary, I don't believe BELIEVING in God is irrational, either, because there is at least some fact backing at least the NATURAL parts of the Old and New Testiment (i.e. Noah's ark, Jesus' existence and speeches,ect.) If NONE of that was true, then it might be a bit irrational, though.the_plan_man

From what I understand the ark was never found? Not saying your wrong but it would be very interesting if they did find something that could be called the ark

I'm atheist and I'm far more offended by bigots like Bill Maher and Richard Dawkins.DaBrainz

[QUOTE="theone86"]

[QUOTE="thegerg"] You're confusing the lack of a belief in something (" I don't believe in fairies or Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny") with the belief in something ("the non-existence of a god").thegerg

No I'm not, you're conflating the two. Fairies don't exist, there is no evidence for them existing. Beliving that they don't exist is not an irrational belief, just as beliving god does not exist is not an irrational belief.

That doesn't make the belief in the non-existence of god irrational. The supposition that god exists is unfounded, the demand that there must be disproof of god's existence is irrational because one cannot disprove a negative.

[QUOTE="the_plan_man"] I don't believe it is either. But, on the contrary, I don't believe BELIEVING in God is irrational, either, because there is at least some fact backing at least the NATURAL parts of the Old and New Testiment (i.e. Noah's ark, Jesus' existence and speeches,ect.) If NONE of that was true, then it might be a bit irrational, though.Bane_09

From what I understand the ark was never found? Not saying your wrong but it would be very interesting if they did find something that could be called the ark

[QUOTE="thegerg"][QUOTE="theone86"]

No I'm not, you're conflating the two. Fairies don't exist, there is no evidence for them existing. Beliving that they don't exist is not an irrational belief, just as beliving god does not exist is not an irrational belief.

That doesn't make the belief in the non-existence of god irrational. The supposition that god exists is unfounded, the demand that there must be disproof of god's existence is irrational because one cannot disprove a negative.

[QUOTE="theone86"]

[QUOTE="thegerg"] You're confusing the lack of a belief in something (" I don't believe in fairies or Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny") with the belief in something ("the non-existence of a god").the_plan_man

No I'm not, you're conflating the two. Fairies don't exist, there is no evidence for them existing. Beliving that they don't exist is not an irrational belief, just as beliving god does not exist is not an irrational belief.

There's no proof that the Bible is real or even was ever intended to be taken as anything more than allegory when it was first "written."

[QUOTE="Bane_09"]

[QUOTE="thegerg"] You're confusing the lack of a belief in something (" I don't believe in fairies or Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny") with the belief in something ("the non-existence of a god").thegerg

Actually no, you're confusing the lack of belief in something (I don't believe in God) with the belief in something (the non-existence of fairies or Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny).

I was merely showing you how dumb your arguments sound

[QUOTE="theone86"]

[QUOTE="thegerg"] There is no evidence of a god not existing. Would you take that lack of evidence in something as evidence for its opposite?the_plan_man

That doesn't make the belief in the non-existence of god irrational. The supposition that god exists is unfounded, the demand that there must be disproof of god's existence is irrational because one cannot disprove a negative.

And what does it mean to be agnostic?

[QUOTE="thegerg"][QUOTE="theone86"]

No I'm not, you're conflating the two. Fairies don't exist, there is no evidence for them existing. Beliving that they don't exist is not an irrational belief, just as beliving god does not exist is not an irrational belief.

theone86

That doesn't make the belief in the non-existence of god irrational. The supposition that god exists is unfounded, the demand that there must be disproof of god's existence is irrational because one cannot disprove a negative.

I think you should give up, gerg is a lost cause

[QUOTE="theone86"]

[QUOTE="thegerg"] There is no evidence of a god not existing. Would you take that lack of evidence in something as evidence for its opposite?thegerg

That doesn't make the belief in the non-existence of god irrational. The supposition that god exists is unfounded, the demand that there must be disproof of god's existence is irrational because one cannot disprove a negative.

There doesn't need to be proof to support the belief that there is not a god in order for it to be rational as there is no evidence of a god in the first place.

[QUOTE="theone86"]

[QUOTE="thegerg"] There is no evidence of a god not existing. Would you take that lack of evidence in something as evidence for its opposite?Bane_09

That doesn't make the belief in the non-existence of god irrational. The supposition that god exists is unfounded, the demand that there must be disproof of god's existence is irrational because one cannot disprove a negative.

I think you should give up, gerg is a lost cause

"I mean that they remain in the upper world: but this must not be allowed; they must be made to descend again among the prisoners in the den, and partake of their labors and honors, whether they are worth having or not."-Socrates

The winner: TheOne

The loser: Gerg

[QUOTE="the_plan_man"][QUOTE="theone86"]

That doesn't make the belief in the non-existence of god irrational. The supposition that god exists is unfounded, the demand that there must be disproof of god's existence is irrational because one cannot disprove a negative.

And what does it mean to be agnostic?

[QUOTE="the_plan_man"][QUOTE="theone86"]

No I'm not, you're conflating the two. Fairies don't exist, there is no evidence for them existing. Beliving that they don't exist is not an irrational belief, just as beliving god does not exist is not an irrational belief.

There's no proof that the Bible is real or even was ever intended to be taken as anything more than allegory when it was first "written."

[QUOTE="Bane_09"]

[QUOTE="theone86"]

That doesn't make the belief in the non-existence of god irrational. The supposition that god exists is unfounded, the demand that there must be disproof of god's existence is irrational because one cannot disprove a negative.

theone86

I think you should give up, gerg is a lost cause

"I mean that they remain in the upper world: but this must not be allowed; they must be made to descend again among the prisoners in the den, and partake of their labors and honors, whether they are worth having or not."-Socrates

Great quote, it reminds me that I have not been reading my philosophy lately :cry:

Religion (mainly christianity) does more harm than it does good. Any rational person with a brain knows that the bible is nothing more thanfiction written by regular men for the sole purpose of controlling society. Their are too many contradictions and holes in the bible in which I'll never understand how one could actually take it seriously. The bible has mentions of stoning people to death, suppression of women, suppression of blacks, suppression of gays, etc. Their are simply too many to list... I personally don't have a problem with religious people, but when they start spreading their religion, the line has been crossed.

Religion (mainly christianity) does more harm than it does good. Any rational person with a brain knows that the bible is nothing more thanfiction written by regular men for the sole purpose of controlling society. Their are too many contradictions and holes in the bible in which I'll never understand how one could actually take it seriously. The bible has mentions of stoning people to death, suppression of women, suppression of blacks, suppression of gays, etc. Their are simply too many to list... I personally don't have a problem with religious people, but when they start spreading their religion, the line has been crossed.

Polaris1021

^ This.Dumdums14

[QUOTE="Polaris1021"]

Religion (mainly christianity) does more harm than it does good. Any rational person with a brain knows that the bible is nothing more thanfiction written by regular men for the sole purpose of controlling society. Their are too many contradictions and holes in the bible in which I'll never understand how one could actually take it seriously. The bible has mentions of stoning people to death, suppression of women, suppression of blacks, suppression of gays, etc. Their are simply too many to list... I personally don't have a problem with religious people, but when they start spreading their religion, the line has been crossed.

the_plan_man

^ This.Dumdums14

[QUOTE="theone86"]

[QUOTE="thegerg"] You're confusing the lack of a belief in something (" I don't believe in fairies or Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny") with the belief in something ("the non-existence of a god").thegerg

No I'm not, you're conflating the two. Fairies don't exist, there is no evidence for them existing. Beliving that they don't exist is not an irrational belief, just as beliving god does not exist is not an irrational belief.

Religion (mainly christianity) does more harm than it does good. Any rational person with a brain knows that the bible is nothing more thanfiction written by regular men for the sole purpose of controlling society. Their are too many contradictions and holes in the bible in which I'll never understand how one could actually take it seriously. The bible has mentions of stoning people to death, suppression of women, suppression of blacks, suppression of gays, etc. Their are simply too many to list... I personally don't have a problem with religious people, but when they start spreading their religion, the line has been crossed.

Polaris1021

Why do you feel disgust for people who treat other people like meat? Why do you cry moral outrage when your partner wsleeps around? Why are you annoyed at the ebayer who screws you out of money?

Did you know that not every Christian takes every little detail in the bible literally?

Did you know that crazy people like to take excerpts of the bible completely out of context? For example, the bible forbids sodomy, which they use to refer to any non-vaginal form of sex and NOT homosexuality. Did you know that crazy people can, in fact, be triggered by F***ING ANYTHING?

Plus, religious people spread their word because they believe it's their duty to do so. It's not about there being a higher entity, it's about the values that their religion teaches. Athiesm is nothing more than "God ain't!"

EDIT: lolol I mixed up "there" with "their".

[QUOTE="Polaris1021"]

Religion (mainly christianity) does more harm than it does good. Any rational person with a brain knows that the bible is nothing more thanfiction written by regular men for the sole purpose of controlling society. Their are too many contradictions and holes in the bible in which I'll never understand how one could actually take it seriously. The bible has mentions of stoning people to death, suppression of women, suppression of blacks, suppression of gays, etc. Their are simply too many to list... I personally don't have a problem with religious people, but when they start spreading their religion, the line has been crossed.

Spitfirer

Why do you feel disgust for people who treat other people like meat? Why do you cry moral outrage when your partner wsleeps around? Why are you annoyed at the ebayer who screws you out of money?

Did you know that not every Christian takes every little detail in the bible literally?

Did you know that crazy people like to take excerpts of the bible completely out of context? For example, the bible forbids sodomy, which they use to refer to any non-vaginal form of sex and NOT homosexuality. Did you know that crazy people can, in fact, be triggered by F***ING ANYTHING?

Plus, religious people spread their word because they believe it's their duty to do so. It's not about their being a higher entity, it's about the values that their religion teaches. Athiesm is nothing more than "God ain't!"

[QUOTE="thegerg"][QUOTE="theone86"]

No I'm not, you're conflating the two. Fairies don't exist, there is no evidence for them existing. Beliving that they don't exist is not an irrational belief, just as beliving god does not exist is not an irrational belief.

Lonelynight

I know you are but what is he? The absense of evidence doesn't mean the evidence of absense. All he's trying to say.

I know you are but what is he? The absense of evidence doesn't mean the evidence of absense. All he's trying to say.

the_plan_man

I agree wholeheartedly.

The absense of evidence doesn't mean the evidence of absense. the_plan_man

[QUOTE="the_plan_man"] The absense of evidence doesn't mean the evidence of absense. Lonelynight

What I find contradictory about those intolerant of religion is how they attempt to present themselves as enlightened tolerant people when it comes to some groups but in reality they are close minded and intolerant. But they don't see the hypocrisy inherent within themselves.LJS9502_basic

So you think that activly banning a group of people from an event/location is as bad as saying you don't agree with what they are doing?

Its like suggesting that talking of murder is as bad as the act of murder.