Just thought I'd give an opportunity for the posters, and I'm
particularly targeting the nontheists although as always everyone is
of course free to comment, to talk about how AvC may have--probably
only slightly--transformed perspectives towards the nature of
religiosity versus rationality. Who or what changed your perspective?
Theists, as always, are allowed to lie.
Well, i've become much more aware of how fundamentally flawed the
thinking of theists really is as a result of their theism. Before I
posted at AvC (not to mention the rest of the anti-theist stuff I
regularly check out elsewhere), I was under the impression that most
theists simply never examined their beliefs and the implications of
their beliefs but just sort of accepted what they were told with a
unthoughtful acceptance and compartmentalization. And now I
understand that I was very much mistaken and that theists are a
confused and fractally wrong bunch who happen to think that their
world-view is consistent and logically sound.
Theists are a completely different animal than I thought they were.
On Nov 26, 3:42 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> Just thought I'd give an opportunity for the posters, and I'm
> particularly targeting the nontheists although as always everyone is
> of course free to comment, to talk about how AvC may have--probably
> only slightly--transformed perspectives towards the nature of
> religiosity versus rationality. Who or what changed your perspective?
> Theists, as always, are allowed to lie.
On Nov 26, 3:42 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> Just thought I'd give an opportunity for the posters, and I'm
> particularly targeting the nontheists although as always everyone is
> of course free to comment, to talk about how AvC may have--probably
> only slightly--transformed perspectives towards the nature of
> religiosity versus rationality. Who or what changed your perspective?
> Theists, as always, are allowed to lie.
I am here only for short time but like many Christians in my city
Christians are big hypocrites here.Biggest hypocrites are LimaToo,
Borgan, Chris, chx, Treebeard and simon.
No one gives proof that say God is real without lieing about SpiderMan
is real in the same way.
Christians here much like Korean Christians in my city but not even
outward nice people like Korean Christians.
Many Christians are hypocrites and commit discrimination act against
Judaists and gay people and after commiting crimes just say "Time to
move forward not look back" and keep doing it again.Just like
Christian Palin. Then they hide like Flyfisher son of minister who
made boasting prophecy of Christian Palin winning because she was true
Christian.
Some Christians also complain to Martin and try to get my connection
taken away but Ha ha they cannot stop me for posting on this website
Sorry mainly my English is not good but I think my logic is okay Yes?
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 6:42 PM, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> Just thought I'd give an opportunity for the posters, and I'm
> particularly targeting the nontheists although as always everyone is
> of course free to comment, to talk about how AvC may have--probably
> only slightly--transformed perspectives towards the nature of
> religiosity versus rationality. Who or what changed your perspective?
> Theists, as always, are allowed to lie.
Well I had the typical misconceptions about what an agnostic is versus what
an atheist is.
My only defense when I was confronted on these misconceptions was that I was
an "uneducated" atheist in that I really wasn't aware of people like the
Four Horsemen and all the discussions happening about atheism and atheists
despite the fact that I've been a life long atheist.
So, I've received a serious and I would say very positive education here by
a lot of people here who are a lot younger than me and a lot smarter ;-) as
well as those exceptionally bright people in my age group and older.
I could make a long list giving credit but really it was just being here,
participating in and reading the discussions.
Each person offers a unique perspective and has different areas of specialty
or interest which makes this site lively and interesting despite the
prolific and particularly nasty trolls.
I've also received a direct insight into the minds of theists and theism and
it's confirmed a lot of what I believed but was never really able to get
people to openly state in real life. Here they do so unashamedly.
It's been an eye opener.
-- Witchy Woman, AvC Anti-Spam Brigade.
"Fear of serious injury cannot alone justify suppression of free speech and
assembly. Men feared witches and burned women. It is the function of speech
to free men from the bondage of irrational fears." --Louis D. Brandeis, US
Supreme Court Justice
> On Nov 26, 3:42 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> > Just thought I'd give an opportunity for the posters, and I'm
> > particularly targeting the nontheists although as always everyone is
> > of course free to comment, to talk about how AvC may have--probably
> > only slightly--transformed perspectives towards the nature of
> > religiosity versus rationality. Who or what changed your perspective?
> > Theists, as always, are allowed to lie.
> I am here only for short time but like many Christians in my city
> Christians are big hypocrites here.Biggest hypocrites are LimaToo,
> Borgan, Chris, chx, Treebeard and simon.
> No one gives proof that say God is real without lieing about SpiderMan
> is real in the same way.
> Christians here much like Korean Christians in my city but not even
> outward nice people like Korean Christians.
> Many Christians are hypocrites and commit discrimination act against
> Judaists and gay people and after commiting crimes just say "Time to
> move forward not look back" and keep doing it again.Just like
> Christian Palin. Then they hide like Flyfisher son of minister who
> made boasting prophecy of Christian Palin winning because she was true
> Christian.
> Some Christians also complain to Martin and try to get my connection
> taken away but Ha ha they cannot stop me for posting on this website
> Sorry mainly my English is not good but I think my logic is okay Yes?
Yes :-). Your logic is quite good!
-- Witchy Woman, AvC Anti-Spam Brigade.
"Fear of serious injury cannot alone justify suppression of free speech and
assembly. Men feared witches and burned women. It is the function of speech
to free men from the bondage of irrational fears." --Louis D. Brandeis, US
Supreme Court Justice
I remember you making a comment about you hoping certain theists you
knew in real life were different.
It's sad, but I guess you know by now that they aren't. Theists pass
as people based entirely to the degree that they act like atheists.
It's nice to think the ones you know casually are saner than they are.
But it's significant that only when it comes to religion are they
willing to throw their ethics, their compassion, their sanity, their
rationality away.
On Nov 26, 4:51 pm, Dag Yo <sir_ro...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Well, i've become much more aware of how fundamentally flawed the
> thinking of theists really is as a result of their theism. Before I
> posted at AvC (not to mention the rest of the anti-theist stuff I
> regularly check out elsewhere), I was under the impression that most
> theists simply never examined their beliefs and the implications of
> their beliefs but just sort of accepted what they were told with a
> unthoughtful acceptance and compartmentalization. And now I
> understand that I was very much mistaken and that theists are a
> confused and fractally wrong bunch who happen to think that their
> world-view is consistent and logically sound.
> Theists are a completely different animal than I thought they were.
> On Nov 26, 3:42 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> > Just thought I'd give an opportunity for the posters, and I'm
> > particularly targeting the nontheists although as always everyone is
> > of course free to comment, to talk about how AvC may have--probably
> > only slightly--transformed perspectives towards the nature of
> > religiosity versus rationality. Who or what changed your perspective?
> > Theists, as always, are allowed to lie.- Hide quoted text -
Or he's kidding. I dunno. Either way--Woodbridge better poster than
Brock. Woodbridge more original than Christian Brock. Both repetitive.
But Woodbridge must eat real food. Brock eat dog food in cage. Brock
escape, Brock hit by car. Brock die. Nobody sad.
On Nov 26, 5:03 pm, "Trance Gemini" <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 6:59 PM, Woodbridge <Woodbri...@archaeologist.com>wrote:
> > On Nov 26, 3:42 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> > > Just thought I'd give an opportunity for the posters, and I'm
> > > particularly targeting the nontheists although as always everyone is
> > > of course free to comment, to talk about how AvC may have--probably
> > > only slightly--transformed perspectives towards the nature of
> > > religiosity versus rationality. Who or what changed your perspective?
> > > Theists, as always, are allowed to lie.
> > I am here only for short time but like many Christians in my city
> > Christians are big hypocrites here.Biggest hypocrites are LimaToo,
> > Borgan, Chris, chx, Treebeard and simon.
> > No one gives proof that say God is real without lieing about SpiderMan
> > is real in the same way.
> > Christians here much like Korean Christians in my city but not even
> > outward nice people like Korean Christians.
> > Many Christians are hypocrites and commit discrimination act against
> > Judaists and gay people and after commiting crimes just say "Time to
> > move forward not look back" and keep doing it again.Just like
> > Christian Palin. Then they hide like Flyfisher son of minister who
> > made boasting prophecy of Christian Palin winning because she was true
> > Christian.
> > Some Christians also complain to Martin and try to get my connection
> > taken away but Ha ha they cannot stop me for posting on this website
> > Sorry mainly my English is not good but I think my logic is okay Yes?
> Yes :-). Your logic is quite good!
> --
> Witchy Woman, AvC Anti-Spam Brigade.
> "Fear of serious injury cannot alone justify suppression of free speech and
> assembly. Men feared witches and burned women. It is the function of speech
> to free men from the bondage of irrational fears." --Louis D. Brandeis, US
> Supreme Court Justice- Hide quoted text -
> Or he's kidding. I dunno. Either way--Woodbridge better poster than
> Brock. Woodbridge more original than Christian Brock. Both repetitive.
> But Woodbridge must eat real food. Brock eat dog food in cage. Brock
> escape, Brock hit by car. Brock die. Nobody sad.
> On Nov 26, 5:03 pm, "Trance Gemini" <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 6:59 PM, Woodbridge <Woodbri...@archaeologist.com>wrote:
> > > On Nov 26, 3:42 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> > > > Just thought I'd give an opportunity for the posters, and I'm
> > > > particularly targeting the nontheists although as always everyone is
> > > > of course free to comment, to talk about how AvC may have--probably
> > > > only slightly--transformed perspectives towards the nature of
> > > > religiosity versus rationality. Who or what changed your perspective?
> > > > Theists, as always, are allowed to lie.
> > > I am here only for short time but like many Christians in my city
> > > Christians are big hypocrites here.Biggest hypocrites are LimaToo,
> > > Borgan, Chris, chx, Treebeard and simon.
> > > No one gives proof that say God is real without lieing about SpiderMan
> > > is real in the same way.
> > > Christians here much like Korean Christians in my city but not even
> > > outward nice people like Korean Christians.
> > > Many Christians are hypocrites and commit discrimination act against
> > > Judaists and gay people and after commiting crimes just say "Time to
> > > move forward not look back" and keep doing it again.Just like
> > > Christian Palin. Then they hide like Flyfisher son of minister who
> > > made boasting prophecy of Christian Palin winning because she was true
> > > Christian.
> > > Some Christians also complain to Martin and try to get my connection
> > > taken away but Ha ha they cannot stop me for posting on this website
> > > Sorry mainly my English is not good but I think my logic is okay Yes?
> > Yes :-). Your logic is quite good!
> > --
> > Witchy Woman, AvC Anti-Spam Brigade.
> > "Fear of serious injury cannot alone justify suppression of free speech and
> > assembly. Men feared witches and burned women. It is the function of speech
> > to free men from the bondage of irrational fears." --Louis D. Brandeis, US
> > Supreme Court Justice- Hide quoted text -
Well, I very much used to be a theism apologist, but after Dev's
postings and others (though mostly the former) and after re-examining
the potential harm religion poses, I'm more adamant about ridding the
world of religion and not excusing theists who don't outright condemn
the unethical pursuits of their cohorts.
I also think that Simpleton and Drafterman (and others, of course)
have led me to keep even more analytical about my own thoughts and be
even more wary of hidden emotions that I might have through their
careful dissection of my posts.
On Nov 27, 1:42 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> Just thought I'd give an opportunity for the posters, and I'm
> particularly targeting the nontheists although as always everyone is
> of course free to comment, to talk about how AvC may have--probably
> only slightly--transformed perspectives towards the nature of
> religiosity versus rationality. Who or what changed your perspective?
> Theists, as always, are allowed to lie.
Thanks, watts. I've helped turn ol' rappoccio to a self-proclaimed
"theist" to one of the smartest and best anti-theists I've encountered
in any real or electronic regard--at least, according to him. The main
thing I can usually accomplish is getting atheists past their
inhibitions--most of them are still willing to grant faith unnecessary
concessions just because they're used to it.
I fuck with theists too much for my own amusement here, I know. We'll
see what happens eventually.
On Nov 26, 5:37 pm, watts <watts....@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well, I very much used to be a theism apologist, but after Dev's
> postings and others (though mostly the former) and after re-examining
> the potential harm religion poses, I'm more adamant about ridding the
> world of religion and not excusing theists who don't outright condemn
> the unethical pursuits of their cohorts.
> I also think that Simpleton and Drafterman (and others, of course)
> have led me to keep even more analytical about my own thoughts and be
> even more wary of hidden emotions that I might have through their
> careful dissection of my posts.
> On Nov 27, 1:42 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> > Just thought I'd give an opportunity for the posters, and I'm
> > particularly targeting the nontheists although as always everyone is
> > of course free to comment, to talk about how AvC may have--probably
> > only slightly--transformed perspectives towards the nature of
> > religiosity versus rationality. Who or what changed your perspective?
> > Theists, as always, are allowed to lie.- Hide quoted text -
Well, it's not often you come across a raving and ranting person (more
or less in good humor) who is also quite rational about it all. You
make a good case and present an interesting perspective. I suppose
you have growing up in the Bible Belt to thank for that?
Or if not, I wonder if those who are more surrounded by religious
bigots (redundant?) and who become atheists are more strongly
outspoken against theism. Be interesting to see if there was a
correlation. I would guess that me growing up in California where
religion is less in your face may have resulted in me having a more
ambivalent attitude towards religion.
On Nov 27, 3:07 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> Thanks, watts. I've helped turn ol' rappoccio to a self-proclaimed
> "theist" to one of the smartest and best anti-theists I've encountered
> in any real or electronic regard--at least, according to him. The main
> thing I can usually accomplish is getting atheists past their
> inhibitions--most of them are still willing to grant faith unnecessary
> concessions just because they're used to it.
> I fuck with theists too much for my own amusement here, I know. We'll
> see what happens eventually.
> On Nov 26, 5:37 pm, watts <watts....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Well, I very much used to be a theism apologist, but after Dev's
> > postings and others (though mostly the former) and after re-examining
> > the potential harm religion poses, I'm more adamant about ridding the
> > world of religion and not excusing theists who don't outright condemn
> > the unethical pursuits of their cohorts.
> > I also think that Simpleton and Drafterman (and others, of course)
> > have led me to keep even more analytical about my own thoughts and be
> > even more wary of hidden emotions that I might have through their
> > careful dissection of my posts.
> > On Nov 27, 1:42 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> > > Just thought I'd give an opportunity for the posters, and I'm
> > > particularly targeting the nontheists although as always everyone is
> > > of course free to comment, to talk about how AvC may have--probably
> > > only slightly--transformed perspectives towards the nature of
> > > religiosity versus rationality. Who or what changed your perspective?
> > > Theists, as always, are allowed to lie.- Hide quoted text -
Yeah. I did have a religious background, and that probably
contributed. And I've been forced into fights and plan to start fights
because this is a fight, and anyone who doesn't see that is just sick.
Read books. Read history. Read current events. Read science and
philosophy too, sure--if you're sane, you'll just see more than ever
that theism is nuts. If you'd like, I could send you a list of books
you might like.
Some of the most secular and (consequently) well-off countries,
despite their lower crime rates, are letting a radical Muslim
insurgency leak in--particularly in Western Europe. We have a lot of
liberals here in the States making apologies for religious terrorists,
and I think this can really be attributed to the fact that those who
haven't really known religious nuts tend to assume they have ulterior
motives. French Socialists made the same mistake with Hitler--he
couldn't be _that_ crazy, right?
America is largely more militant than the European countries because
we have more people who are familiar with religious fundamentalism,
and understand that it isn't strictly "economic" but that _people are
crazy enough to believe this shit_. Our Sarah Palins and George W.
Bushes help us to understand the Ahmadinejads and bin Ladens better
than the countries without the religious nuts who hold back basic
human rights. I won't deny the issues of corporatism in our government
but if you take the case studies into account, religion always play a
role in those. You're a reader--read. Learn. There's a remarkable
picture that starts to come at bare minimum into your peripheral
vision if you really put your heart and mind into it and read.
On Nov 26, 6:13 pm, watts <watts....@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well, it's not often you come across a raving and ranting person (more
> or less in good humor) who is also quite rational about it all. You
> make a good case and present an interesting perspective. I suppose
> you have growing up in the Bible Belt to thank for that?
> Or if not, I wonder if those who are more surrounded by religious
> bigots (redundant?) and who become atheists are more strongly
> outspoken against theism. Be interesting to see if there was a
> correlation. I would guess that me growing up in California where
> religion is less in your face may have resulted in me having a more
> ambivalent attitude towards religion.
> On Nov 27, 3:07 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> > Thanks, watts. I've helped turn ol' rappoccio to a self-proclaimed
> > "theist" to one of the smartest and best anti-theists I've encountered
> > in any real or electronic regard--at least, according to him. The main
> > thing I can usually accomplish is getting atheists past their
> > inhibitions--most of them are still willing to grant faith unnecessary
> > concessions just because they're used to it.
> > I fuck with theists too much for my own amusement here, I know. We'll
> > see what happens eventually.
> > On Nov 26, 5:37 pm, watts <watts....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Well, I very much used to be a theism apologist, but after Dev's
> > > postings and others (though mostly the former) and after re-examining
> > > the potential harm religion poses, I'm more adamant about ridding the
> > > world of religion and not excusing theists who don't outright condemn
> > > the unethical pursuits of their cohorts.
> > > I also think that Simpleton and Drafterman (and others, of course)
> > > have led me to keep even more analytical about my own thoughts and be
> > > even more wary of hidden emotions that I might have through their
> > > careful dissection of my posts.
> > > On Nov 27, 1:42 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> > > > Just thought I'd give an opportunity for the posters, and I'm
> > > > particularly targeting the nontheists although as always everyone is
> > > > of course free to comment, to talk about how AvC may have--probably
> > > > only slightly--transformed perspectives towards the nature of
> > > > religiosity versus rationality. Who or what changed your perspective?
> > > > Theists, as always, are allowed to lie.- Hide quoted text -
God’s existence can be known by light of human reason with certainty.
This is Catholic dogma. That atheists here have an innate expectation
there *should* be evidence of God, furnished for me a little proof of
God. Thanks.
On Nov 26, 3:42 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> Just thought I'd give an opportunity for the posters, and I'm
> particularly targeting the nontheists although as always everyone is
> of course free to comment, to talk about how AvC may have--probably
> only slightly--transformed perspectives towards the nature of
> religiosity versus rationality. Who or what changed your perspective?
> Theists, as always, are allowed to lie.
> God’s existence can be known by light of human reason with certainty.
> This is Catholic dogma. That atheists here have an innate expectation
> there *should* be evidence of God, furnished for me a little proof of
> God. Thanks.
> On Nov 26, 3:42 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> > Just thought I'd give an opportunity for the posters, and I'm
> > particularly targeting the nontheists although as always everyone is
> > of course free to comment, to talk about how AvC may have--probably
> > only slightly--transformed perspectives towards the nature of
> > religiosity versus rationality. Who or what changed your perspective?
> > Theists, as always, are allowed to lie.- Hide quoted text -
That atheists here are unpersuaded by the many solid proofs makes me
appreciate just how difficult it must be to assess the evidence
without benefit of a trusted teacher, and greatful to have had a
Catholic education.
On Nov 26, 7:50 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> I appreciate posts like this, proving me right about everything in a
> way the educated posters never could. Thank you, likewise.
> On Nov 26, 8:43 pm, Alan Wostenberg <awo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > God’s existence can be known by light of human reason with certainty.
> > This is Catholic dogma. That atheists here have an innate expectation
> > there *should* be evidence of God, furnished for me a little proof of
> > God. Thanks.
> > On Nov 26, 3:42 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> > > Just thought I'd give an opportunity for the posters, and I'm
> > > particularly targeting the nontheists although as always everyone is
> > > of course free to comment, to talk about how AvC may have--probably
> > > only slightly--transformed perspectives towards the nature of
> > > religiosity versus rationality. Who or what changed your perspective?
> > > Theists, as always, are allowed to lie.- Hide quoted text -
Rather the atheists here _are_ persuaded by the many solid proofs.
You just have the habit of fallacy of thinking proofs of god's
existence are solid and proofs of god's non-existence or unprovability
are not solid. You have it ass-backwards, which isn't surprising
since most theists' heads are up their asses.
On Nov 27, 5:55 pm, Alan Wostenberg <awo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> That atheists here are unpersuaded by the many solid proofs makes me
> appreciate just how difficult it must be to assess the evidence
> without benefit of a trusted teacher, and greatful to have had a
> Catholic education.
> On Nov 26, 7:50 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> > I appreciate posts like this, proving me right about everything in a
> > way the educated posters never could. Thank you, likewise.
> > On Nov 26, 8:43 pm, Alan Wostenberg <awo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > God’s existence can be known by light of human reason with certainty.
> > > This is Catholic dogma. That atheists here have an innate expectation
> > > there *should* be evidence of God, furnished for me a little proof of
> > > God. Thanks.
> > > On Nov 26, 3:42 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> > > > Just thought I'd give an opportunity for the posters, and I'm
> > > > particularly targeting the nontheists although as always everyone is
> > > > of course free to comment, to talk about how AvC may have--probably
> > > > only slightly--transformed perspectives towards the nature of
> > > > religiosity versus rationality. Who or what changed your perspective?
> > > > Theists, as always, are allowed to lie.- Hide quoted text -
Before I came here (to be honest, I'd say probably specifically before you
came here), I was a "live-and-let-live" atheist--I felt "Hey, theism isn't
for me, but as long as you don't harm me, it's fine with me if it is for
you." I have since realized that theism is not harmless, even in the
"benign" cases, and that the only hope for the future of our society and
yes, even the planet, is to get rid of religion.
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 6:42 PM, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> Just thought I'd give an opportunity for the posters, and I'm
> particularly targeting the nontheists although as always everyone is
> of course free to comment, to talk about how AvC may have--probably
> only slightly--transformed perspectives towards the nature of
> religiosity versus rationality. Who or what changed your perspective?
> Theists, as always, are allowed to lie.
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 8:13 PM, watts <watts....@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well, it's not often you come across a raving and ranting person (more
> or less in good humor) who is also quite rational about it all. You
> make a good case and present an interesting perspective. I suppose
> you have growing up in the Bible Belt to thank for that?
> Or if not, I wonder if those who are more surrounded by religious
> bigots (redundant?) and who become atheists are more strongly
> outspoken against theism. Be interesting to see if there was a
> correlation. I would guess that me growing up in California where
> religion is less in your face may have resulted in me having a more
> ambivalent attitude towards religion.
I think there's something to that. I grew up in Massachusetts, and religion
was pretty much invisible. When I realized I was an atheist, I adopted a
very "live and let live" attitude towards religion (until I came here, of
course).
> On Nov 27, 3:07 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> > Thanks, watts. I've helped turn ol' rappoccio to a self-proclaimed
> > "theist" to one of the smartest and best anti-theists I've encountered
> > in any real or electronic regard--at least, according to him. The main
> > thing I can usually accomplish is getting atheists past their
> > inhibitions--most of them are still willing to grant faith unnecessary
> > concessions just because they're used to it.
> > I fuck with theists too much for my own amusement here, I know. We'll
> > see what happens eventually.
> > On Nov 26, 5:37 pm, watts <watts....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Well, I very much used to be a theism apologist, but after Dev's
> > > postings and others (though mostly the former) and after re-examining
> > > the potential harm religion poses, I'm more adamant about ridding the
> > > world of religion and not excusing theists who don't outright condemn
> > > the unethical pursuits of their cohorts.
> > > I also think that Simpleton and Drafterman (and others, of course)
> > > have led me to keep even more analytical about my own thoughts and be
> > > even more wary of hidden emotions that I might have through their
> > > careful dissection of my posts.
> > > On Nov 27, 1:42 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> > > > Just thought I'd give an opportunity for the posters, and I'm
> > > > particularly targeting the nontheists although as always everyone is
> > > > of course free to comment, to talk about how AvC may have--probably
> > > > only slightly--transformed perspectives towards the nature of
> > > > religiosity versus rationality. Who or what changed your perspective?
> > > > Theists, as always, are allowed to lie.- Hide quoted text -
> Rather the atheists here _are_ persuaded by the many solid proofs.
> You just have the habit of fallacy of thinking proofs of god's
> existence are solid and proofs of god's non-existence or unprovability
> are not solid. You have it ass-backwards, which isn't surprising
> since most theists' heads are up their asses.
> On Nov 27, 5:55 pm, Alan Wostenberg <awo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > That atheists here are unpersuaded by the many solid proofs makes me
> > appreciate just how difficult it must be to assess the evidence
> > without benefit of a trusted teacher, and greatful to have had a
> > Catholic education.
> > On Nov 26, 7:50 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> > > I appreciate posts like this, proving me right about everything in a
> > > way the educated posters never could. Thank you, likewise.
> > > On Nov 26, 8:43 pm, Alan Wostenberg <awo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > God’s existence can be known by light of human reason with certainty.
> > > > This is Catholic dogma. That atheists here have an innate expectation
> > > > there *should* be evidence of God, furnished for me a little proof of
> > > > God. Thanks.
> > > > On Nov 26, 3:42 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> > > > > Just thought I'd give an opportunity for the posters, and I'm
> > > > > particularly targeting the nontheists although as always everyone is
> > > > > of course free to comment, to talk about how AvC may have--probably
> > > > > only slightly--transformed perspectives towards the nature of
> > > > > religiosity versus rationality. Who or what changed your perspective?
> > > > > Theists, as always, are allowed to lie.- Hide quoted text -
Most atheists seem to experience this "drift" on the group. The few
who don't are generally hecklers and trolls, and sometimes seem to
give away being theists with their "arguments" (like Walt, who acts
like he's a beacon of morality, argues that theism is necessary for
morality, and then claims to be an atheist...right). Theists say they
have "stronger faith", but they know they're supposed to say that, and
nothing in their posting styles indicates a change that is actual as
opposed to imagined.
I think the main priority now is getting all the other "live and let
live" nonbelievers to wake up. It seems pretty easy to do it if they
aren't completely stupid.
On Nov 26, 9:09 pm, "Turner Hayes" <lordlacol...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Before I came here (to be honest, I'd say probably specifically before you
> came here), I was a "live-and-let-live" atheist--I felt "Hey, theism isn't
> for me, but as long as you don't harm me, it's fine with me if it is for
> you." I have since realized that theism is not harmless, even in the
> "benign" cases, and that the only hope for the future of our society and
> yes, even the planet, is to get rid of religion.
> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 6:42 PM, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> > Just thought I'd give an opportunity for the posters, and I'm
> > particularly targeting the nontheists although as always everyone is
> > of course free to comment, to talk about how AvC may have--probably
> > only slightly--transformed perspectives towards the nature of
> > religiosity versus rationality. Who or what changed your perspective?
> > Theists, as always, are allowed to lie.- Hide quoted text -
> Just thought I'd give an opportunity for the posters, and I'm
> particularly targeting the nontheists although as always everyone is
> of course free to comment, to talk about how AvC may have--probably
> only slightly--transformed perspectives towards the nature of
> religiosity versus rationality. Who or what changed your perspective?
> Theists, as always, are allowed to lie.
> I don't think it changed my opinion at all. I'm here to learn and have
> fun.
> On Nov 26, 3:42 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> > Just thought I'd give an opportunity for the posters, and I'm
> > particularly targeting the nontheists although as always everyone is
> > of course free to comment, to talk about how AvC may have--probably
> > only slightly--transformed perspectives towards the nature of
> > religiosity versus rationality. Who or what changed your perspective?
> > Theists, as always, are allowed to lie.- Hide quoted text -
> You're here to learn but not change your opinions? So your opinions
> are not contingent on information? Wow <sarcasm> that's a shock.
> On Nov 26, 9:26 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I don't think it changed my opinion at all. I'm here to learn and have
> > fun.
> > On Nov 26, 3:42 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> > > Just thought I'd give an opportunity for the posters, and I'm
> > > particularly targeting the nontheists although as always everyone is
> > > of course free to comment, to talk about how AvC may have--probably
> > > only slightly--transformed perspectives towards the nature of
> > > religiosity versus rationality. Who or what changed your perspective?
> > > Theists, as always, are allowed to lie.- Hide quoted text -
> I see facts as part of a solution. I really don't think my opinion has
> changed since day one, just matured.
> On Nov 26, 8:31 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> > You're here to learn but not change your opinions? So your opinions
> > are not contingent on information? Wow <sarcasm> that's a shock.
> > On Nov 26, 9:26 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I don't think it changed my opinion at all. I'm here to learn and have
> > > fun.
> > > On Nov 26, 3:42 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> > > > Just thought I'd give an opportunity for the posters, and I'm
> > > > particularly targeting the nontheists although as always everyone is
> > > > of course free to comment, to talk about how AvC may have--probably
> > > > only slightly--transformed perspectives towards the nature of
> > > > religiosity versus rationality. Who or what changed your perspective?
> > > > Theists, as always, are allowed to lie.- Hide quoted text -
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 11:35 PM, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I see facts as part of a solution. I really don't think my opinion has
> changed since day one, just matured.
> On Nov 26, 8:31 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> > You're here to learn but not change your opinions? So your opinions
> > are not contingent on information? Wow <sarcasm> that's a shock.
> > On Nov 26, 9:26 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I don't think it changed my opinion at all. I'm here to learn and have
> > > fun.
> > > On Nov 26, 3:42 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> > > > Just thought I'd give an opportunity for the posters, and I'm
> > > > particularly targeting the nontheists although as always everyone is
> > > > of course free to comment, to talk about how AvC may have--probably
> > > > only slightly--transformed perspectives towards the nature of
> > > > religiosity versus rationality. Who or what changed your perspective?
> > > > Theists, as always, are allowed to lie.- Hide quoted text -
|
