> Le 2012-01-30 17:25, Fidem Turbare, atheist goddess a écrit :
>> If you could present a short statement that reflects how or why
>> atheism is fun or profoundly satisfying, what might that statement
>> be? I'll start in the realm of the infinite pursuit of knowledge
>> acquisition:
>> If you challenge my ideas, and present to me my errors, then, upon the
>> honour of my character, constructively I shall build.
> Well, it's not "atheism" per se,
No it isn't, It looks as if ALL of the atheist responses, like this
one, can't find ANYTHING about *atheism* which is FUN! 8^o
They all talk in the NEGATIVE defining themselves as NOT Religion.
"Not being.. " this or that ABOUT RELIGION!
They DEFINE themselves in terms of their Dopplegangers,
not able to find a SINGLE THING in ATHEISM ITSELF
which is fun;
> But not being shackled by religious dogmas
That's like a woman, asked what's great about being a woman
replying " Er, um... Not being a MAN" !!?!
Then he goes on to describe 'liberty' as consuming
three things, which people who are NOT atheists
can also enjoy, including various religious folk:
> brings liberty,
The idea that atheism brings liberty is not merely a joke,
but a patent ABSURDITY given that NO ATHEIST REGIME IN HISTORY
EVERY BROUGHT LIBERTY!!!! B^p
And you can see why not when you see how this IDIOT atheist
DEFINES Liberty:
> which I might define thusly:
> Sex,
All religions celebrate procreation,
Hindus make it an artform, the Karma Sutra, you ignorant twonk
> pork, wine.
The most numerous religion on the planet, Christians,
enjoy bacon at breakfast and as for wine, you ridiculous tool,
IT's THEIR SACRED SACRAMENT!
>> Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
As distinct from Prophet Dawkin's claim that atheist "Gods came
into being....";
[ Isn't it fun to try and explain Atheist Dogma while people
are laughing at you: BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAA ]
--
Ex- Atheist, now Prophet, Richard Dawkins claims a "superpowerful
intelligent and moral energy" entity, "like God", is plausible and
could have 'evolved' somewhere in the Universe "by an explicable
scientific progression of incremental evolution", (which no
atheist can explain). B^D
# "After two hours of conversation, Professor Dawkins walks far afield.
# He talks of the possibility that we might co-evolve with computers, a
# silicon destiny. And he’s intrigued by the playful, even soul-stirring
# writings of Freeman Dyson, the theoretical physicist.
#
# 'In one essay, Professor Dyson casts millions of speculative years
# into the future. Our galaxy is dying and humans have evolved into
# something like bolts of superpowerful intelligent and moral energy.
#
# Doesn’t that description sound an awful lot like God?
#
# "Certainly," Professor Dawkins replies. "It’s highly plausible that
# in the universe there are God-like creatures."
#
# He raises his hand, just in case a reader thinks he’s gone around a
# religious bend. "It’s very important to understand that these Gods
# came into being by an explicable scientific progression of
# incremental evolution."'
#
# Could they be immortal? The professor shrugs.
#
# “Probably not.” He smiles and adds, “But I
# wouldn’t want to be too dogmatic about that.”"
So, which atheist is going to explain the inexplicable,
unscientific, BELIEF in "these {atheist] Gods", with no proof
whatsoever, and show us the evidence of how, and where, God evolved?
> On 1/30/2012 2:25 PM, Fidem Turbare, atheist goddess wrote:
>> If you could present a short statement that reflects how or why
>> atheism is fun or profoundly satisfying, what might that statement
>> be? I'll start in the realm of the infinite pursuit of knowledge
>> acquisition:
>> If you challenge my ideas, and present to me my errors, then, upon the
>> honour of my character, constructively I shall build.
> I'm not sure, exactly, that I'd call *atheism* fun, per se.
Apparently none of the atheists can name anything that is fun?
You are all sch a dour, dismal, despairing lot.. which is
why EVERY atheist regime is INFAMOUS for its dull grey dismal
conformity and monotony....
No it isn't, It looks as if ALL of the atheist responses, like this
one, can't find ANYTHING about *atheism* which is FUN! 8^o
They all talk in the NEGATIVE defining themselves as NOT Religion.
"Not being.. " this or that ABOUT RELIGION!
They DEFINE themselves in terms of their Dopplegangers,
not able to find a SINGLE THING in ATHEISM ITSELF
which is fun;
> My atheism is simply a lack of belief in deities.
And clearly such a trivial, useless and impotent
TO have any fun you would have to go..
> Beyond atheism,
Bingo
> I have materialism and humanism and sometimes I find that fun. :)
So leave out the Atheism and you have not lost any marginal utility
or fun, in life!
Precisely! atheism is useless and worthless..the irrelevant, impotent
ineffectual sub-branch of empty Nihilism...
it adds NOTHING to the good things in life.. sex, science, good food, art, music, friendships, philosophy..compassion, love..
--
Ex- Atheist, now Prophet, Richard Dawkins claims a "superpowerful
intelligent and moral energy" entity, "like God", is plausible and
could have 'evolved' somewhere in the Universe "by an explicable
scientific progression of incremental evolution", (which no
atheist can explain). B^D
# "After two hours of conversation, Professor Dawkins walks far afield.
# He talks of the possibility that we might co-evolve with computers, a
# silicon destiny. And he’s intrigued by the playful, even soul-stirring
# writings of Freeman Dyson, the theoretical physicist.
#
# 'In one essay, Professor Dyson casts millions of speculative years
# into the future. Our galaxy is dying and humans have evolved into
# something like bolts of superpowerful intelligent and moral energy.
#
# Doesn’t that description sound an awful lot like God?
#
# "Certainly," Professor Dawkins replies. "It’s highly plausible that
# in the universe there are God-like creatures."
#
# He raises his hand, just in case a reader thinks he’s gone around a
# religious bend. "It’s very important to understand that these Gods
# came into being by an explicable scientific progression of
# incremental evolution."'
#
# Could they be immortal? The professor shrugs.
#
# “Probably not.” He smiles and adds, “But I
# wouldn’t want to be too dogmatic about that.”"
So, which atheist is going to explain the inexplicable,
unscientific, BELIEF in "these {atheist] Gods", with no proof
whatsoever, and show us the evidence of how, and where, God evolved?
Discussion subject changed to "Subject: Re: Intellectual challenge: Why is it No fun to be an atheist? - Atheists can't find ANYTHING Fun about atheism! BWAAAAHAHAHAAAAA" by fasgnadh
> On 12-01-30 04:25 PM, Fidem Turbare, atheist goddess wrote:
>> If you could present a short statement that reflects how or why
>> atheism is fun or profoundly satisfying, what might that statement
>> be?
> Atheism's only satisfying in so much as you're not having to expend
> a lot of effort
true, it can't take much energy to say
"I don't believe in.. x"
> maintaining a lot of beliefs,
Sure, if you don't have kids or they don't love you
you don't have to believe you are loved.
I can see why you have no fun.
How would you describe your atheism, in relation
to the Fruits of the Spirit, "love, joy, peace,
forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,
gentleness and self-control.
Against such things there is no law." - Galatians 5:22-23
> worries and fears that
> simply have no basis in fact, I find.
> What DOES happen, however, is that by being free to direct your
> intellect wherever the facts take you,
Ah clearly you live in one of the free, open, progressive
secular democracies built and sustained by MAJORITY religious
societies, not an atheist state, every one of which was a
TOTALITARIAN tyranny, oppressing intellectual freedom,
imposing the forced indoctrination of children, eradicating
freedom of belief, thought and speech and
"the state established atheism as the only scientific truth."
- Daniel Peris,
"Storming the Heavens: The Soviet League of the Militant Godless"
Cornell University Press 1998 ISBN 9780801434853
"Criticism of atheism was strictly forbidden"
"Between 1917 and 1940, 130,000 Orthodox priests were arrested.
In 1918, the Cheka under Felix Dzerzhinsky executed over
3000 Orthodox clergymen of all ranks.
Some were drowned in ice-holes or poured over with cold water
in winter until they turned to ice-pillars.
-John Shelton Curtis, The Russian Church and the Soviet State
(Boston: Little Brown, 1953)
Aren't you lucky you live in a MAJORITY RELIGIOUS society
with DEMOCRACY and FREEDOM where
> you can spend more of your
> time learning about, and studying, the natural world around you.
> That, to me, is profoundly satisfying.
Thank God we don't live in atheist tyrannies, eh?
> As a bit of an amateur astronomer, the universe is simply a
> fascinating place full of interesting things to learn about.
Yes, all those theist Astronomers; Copernicus, Tycho, Galileo
sure taught you atheist flat-earthers something, eh?
> Nothing
> better than a hot thermos of tea on a cold, clear autumn night with
> the milky way o'erhead.
Amen to that brother, get as far from empty atheist Nihilism
and into the real world as you can!
--
Ex- Atheist, now Prophet, Richard Dawkins claims a "superpowerful
intelligent and moral energy" entity, "like God", is plausible and
could have 'evolved' somewhere in the Universe "by an explicable
scientific progression of incremental evolution", (which no
atheist can explain). B^D
# "After two hours of conversation, Professor Dawkins walks far afield.
# He talks of the possibility that we might co-evolve with computers, a
# silicon destiny. And he’s intrigued by the playful, even soul-stirring
# writings of Freeman Dyson, the theoretical physicist.
#
# 'In one essay, Professor Dyson casts millions of speculative years
# into the future. Our galaxy is dying and humans have evolved into
# something like bolts of superpowerful intelligent and moral energy.
#
# Doesn’t that description sound an awful lot like God?
#
# "Certainly," Professor Dawkins replies. "It’s highly plausible that
# in the universe there are God-like creatures."
#
# He raises his hand, just in case a reader thinks he’s gone around a
# religious bend. "It’s very important to understand that these Gods
# came into being by an explicable scientific progression of
# incremental evolution."'
#
# Could they be immortal? The professor shrugs.
#
# “Probably not.” He smiles and adds, “But I
# wouldn’t want to be too dogmatic about that.”"
So, which atheist is going to explain the inexplicable,
unscientific, BELIEF in "these {atheist] Gods", with no proof
whatsoever, and show us the evidence of how, and where, God evolved?
Discussion subject changed to "Intellectual challenge: Why is it No fun to be an atheist? , - Two more Atheists can't find ANYTHING Fun about atheism! BWAAAAHAHAHAAAAA" by fasgnadh
> "Don Martin"<drdonmar...@comcast.net> skrev i melding
> news:5l9ei7dj1a5t9jlblkfuuvak17a3j3ecog@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 14:25:10 -0800 (PST), "Fidem Turbare, atheist goddess"
>> <fidem.turb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> If you could present a short statement that reflects how or why
>>> atheism is fun or profoundly satisfying, what might that statement
>>> be? I'll start in the realm of the infinite pursuit of knowledge
>>> acquisition:
>> My atheism is satisfying to me in that it frees me from guilt
>> based on "sins"
Another negative definition which ascribes the absence of guilt
to atheism, whereas others, such as agnostics, like myself, and
many religious don't feel guilt
> that are solely the creations of the religious imagination.
So freedom from that is not a unique property of atheism, per se.
However, wrongdoing such as Murder, as was practised in every atheist regime, or lying, as in Pravda Propaganda, SHOULD produce guilt!
Not feeling it is, like lacking empathy for the victims,
the mark of sociopaths.
"The atheist states involved massive guilt and punitive 're-education'
for those who deviated from the party line, engaged in "Wrongthink",
or showed bourgeois/ reactionary counter-revolutionary thinking.
Public Self Criticism sessions publicly humiliated aged intellectuals
and others, who were beaten and forced to wear self-denouncing placards
and dunces hats.. or worse.. sent to Gulags, "re-Education" camps and Lunatic asylums to brainwash those who thought and believed contrary to the Atheist Regime's Group Mind.
They were far more oppressive than the free open, progressive secular
democracies built by majority religious populations, which we all
enjoy living in.. even you atheist hypocrites!
>> Whatever guilts I do experience are
>> firmly based on the reality of my own actions toward others,
And you don't thatink that's how people other than atheists,
including religious people, feel guilt?
You clearly haven't read Freud or Jung! B^D
>> I also enjoy the fact that I can behave
>> decently on my own hook, without the carrot of reward or the stick of
>> punishment
>> directing my behavior toward other people, animals, and the world in
>> general.
So you are now complaining about our secular legal and justice systems.
And how, exactly does atheism contribute to your behaviour being 'on a hook'? WTF?
> Seconded.
> T
Two more atheists who don't get ANY fun from atheism per se,
but claim it's all about NOT being religious.. defined in the empty negative, with no evidence that atheism is the sole alternative to
the problems discussed.
"He's glad he stays dry on rainy days by never leaving his house,
others achieve the same with cars, umbrellas, raincoats etc etc"
That's his fun.. not leaving the house. pffft
Atheism, the most trivial, impotent, ineffectual, useless,
sub branch of pointless Nihilism.
The only fun they have is pretending that they are superior
to religious people.. the very definition of REACTIONARIES.
--
Ex- Atheist, now Prophet, Richard Dawkins claims a "superpowerful
intelligent and moral energy" entity, "like God", is plausible and
could have 'evolved' somewhere in the Universe "by an explicable
scientific progression of incremental evolution", (which no
atheist can explain). B^D
# "After two hours of conversation, Professor Dawkins walks far afield.
# He talks of the possibility that we might co-evolve with computers, a
# silicon destiny. And he’s intrigued by the playful, even soul-stirring
# writings of Freeman Dyson, the theoretical physicist.
#
# 'In one essay, Professor Dyson casts millions of speculative years
# into the future. Our galaxy is dying and humans have evolved into
# something like bolts of superpowerful intelligent and moral energy.
#
# Doesn’t that description sound an awful lot like God?
#
# "Certainly," Professor Dawkins replies. "It’s highly plausible that
# in the universe there are God-like creatures."
#
# He raises his hand, just in case a reader thinks he’s gone around a
# religious bend. "It’s very important to understand that these Gods
# came into being by an explicable scientific progression of
# incremental evolution."'
#
# Could they be immortal? The professor shrugs.
#
# “Probably not.” He smiles and adds, “But I
# wouldn’t want to be too dogmatic about that.”"
So, which atheist is going to explain the inexplicable,
unscientific, BELIEF in "these {atheist] Gods", with no proof
whatsoever, and show us the evidence of how, and where, God evolved?
Discussion subject changed to "Intellectual challenge: Why is it No fun to be an atheist? - Atheists can't find ANYTHING Fun about atheism! BWAAAAHAHAHAAAAA" by fasgnadh
Fidem Turbare, trys to twist the atheist admission: NO FUN in ATHEISM :
> On Jan 30, 10:59 pm, fasgnadh<fasgn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On 31/01/2012 9:53 AM, DanielSan wrote:
>>> On 1/30/2012 2:25 PM, Fidem Turbare, atheist goddess wrote:
>>>> If you could present a short statement that reflects how or why
>>>> atheism is fun or profoundly satisfying, what might that statement
>>>> be? I'll start in the realm of the infinite pursuit of knowledge
>>>> acquisition:
>>>> If you challenge my ideas, and present to me my errors, then, upon the
>>>> honour of my character, constructively I shall build.
Liar you snipped and misrepresented my argument!
>>> I'm not sure, exactly, that I'd call *atheism* fun, per se.
No it isn't, It looks as if ALL of the atheist responses, like this
one, can't find ANYTHING about *atheism* which is FUN! 8^o
[snip -- the same question/claim in various forms]
<Unsnip> the atheist liars attempt to bury the logical argument
rather than debate it, is clearly fraudulent as this is NOT
"the same question/claim in various forms";
>> Apparently none of the atheists can name anything that is fun?
> Your assumption is illogical
you snipped my argument, I made no assumption, therefore
it can't be an illogical one.
> because what is fun for one person may not be fun for someone else.
Irrelevant you feeble atheist tool, as NONE OF THEM CLAIMED
*ANYTHING* was fun in atheism!!!!! B^D
Can't you even READ what they said, you lying atheist FRAUD: B^D
"I'm not sure, exactly, that I'd call *atheism* fun, per se."
And you try and bullshit us that is a description of FUN?
That it's a question of 'EYE of the BEHOLDER..'? pffffft! BULLSHIT!
So, they ALL SAY THE SAME.. NOTHING about ATHEISM is fun! B^]
Just because you didn't get the RESULTS you wanted does not mean
you can FUDGE THE DATA.. that just shows the atheist contempt
for REAL science and logic! B^]
Now you just REPEAT the same BULLSHIT "question/claim in various forms"
> Each person defines fun in accordance
> with their personality, values, interests, and desires (and very
> likely many other factors).
That's a red herring.. no one is questioning some atheists 'definition
of fun' they just CAN'T FIND ANYTHING about atheism that IS fun!
>> You are all such a dour, dismal, despairing lot.. which is
>> why EVERY atheist regime is INFAMOUS for its dull grey dismal
>> conformity and monotony....
>>
>> They all talk in the NEGATIVE, defining themselves as NOT Religion.
>>
>> "Not being.. " this or that ABOUT RELIGION!
>>
>> They DEFINE themselves in terms of their Dopplegangers,
>> not able to find a SINGLE THING in ATHEISM ITSELF
>> which is fun;
>>
>>
>>> My atheism is simply a lack of belief in deities.
>>
>> And clearly such a trivial, useless and impotent
>> non-belief in something is NOT FUN
>>
>> TO have any fun you would have to go..
>>
>>> Beyond atheism,
>>
>> Bingo
>>
>>> I have materialism and humanism and sometimes I find that fun. :)
But thats not atheism, is it!? ..Nothing about atheism is fun, to you.
>> So leave out the Atheism and you have not lost any marginal utility
>> or fun, in life!
>>
>> Precisely! atheism is useless and worthless..the irrelevant, impotent
>> ineffectual sub-branch of empty Nihilism...
>> it adds NOTHING to the good things in life.. sex, science, good
>> food, art, music, friendships, philosophy..compassion, love..
>>
> Additionally, the first paragraph of my message clarifies "fun or
> profoundly satisfying"as the suggested criteria.
Yawn... you are really trying too hard.. none of them had
ANYTHING of significance to say about ATHEISM.. it was all
"Atheism let me eat pork and drink.." Well no, lots of NON atheists
do that! And it's NOT fun from ATHEISM.
"Atheism means I don't have religion.." tautology.. still NO FUN
(It doesn't really
> matter though because satisfaction often qualifies as a subtle form of
> fun.)
Oh fer fucks sake...
go play with yourself you boring illogical twonk!
--
Ex- Atheist, now Prophet, Richard Dawkins claims a "superpowerful
intelligent and moral energy" entity, "like God", is plausible and
could have 'evolved' somewhere in the Universe "by an explicable
scientific progression of incremental evolution", (which no
atheist can explain). B^D
# "After two hours of conversation, Professor Dawkins walks far afield.
# He talks of the possibility that we might co-evolve with computers, a
# silicon destiny. And he’s intrigued by the playful, even soul-stirring
# writings of Freeman Dyson, the theoretical physicist.
#
# 'In one essay, Professor Dyson casts millions of speculative years
# into the future. Our galaxy is dying and humans have evolved into
# something like bolts of superpowerful intelligent and moral energy.
#
# Doesn’t that description sound an awful lot like God?
#
# "Certainly," Professor Dawkins replies. "It’s highly plausible that
# in the universe there are God-like creatures."
#
# He raises his hand, just in case a reader thinks he’s gone around a
# religious bend. "It’s very important to understand that these Gods
# came into being by an explicable scientific progression of
# incremental evolution."'
#
# Could they be immortal? The professor shrugs.
#
# “Probably not.” He smiles and adds, “But I
# wouldn’t want to be too dogmatic about that.”"
So, which atheist is going to explain the inexplicable,
unscientific, BELIEF in "these {atheist] Gods", with no proof
whatsoever, and show us the evidence of how, and where, God evolved?
> On 1/31/2012 12:29 AM, Fidem Turbare, atheist goddess wrote:
>> On Jan 30, 10:59 pm, fasgnadh<fasgn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> On 31/01/2012 9:53 AM, DanielSan wrote:
>>>> On 1/30/2012 2:25 PM, Fidem Turbare, atheist goddess wrote:
>>>>> If you could present a short statement that reflects how or why
>>>>> atheism is fun or profoundly satisfying, what might that statement
>>>>> be? I'll start in the realm of the infinite pursuit of knowledge
>>>>> acquisition:
>>>>> If you challenge my ideas, and present to me my errors, then, upon the
>>>>> honour of my character, constructively I shall build.
>>>> I'm not sure, exactly, that I'd call *atheism* fun, per se.
No it isn't, It looks as if ALL of the atheist responses, like this
one, can't find ANYTHING about *atheism* which is FUN! 8^o
> I find traveling fun. I find amusement parks fun. I find Halloween fun.
> I find the Half-Life series of video games fun. I sometimes find
> debating politics and religion fun. I find what I'm working on to learn
> for my dream career fun.
But none of them are atheism.. they have NOTHING to do with the
question "how or why atheism is fun"
You have already answered that, and told us IT ISN'T.
Too late to try and weasel Word your way out now! B^]
No it isn't, It looks as if ALL of the atheist responses, like this
one, can't find ANYTHING about *atheism* which is FUN! 8^o
>> Apparently none of the atheists can name anything that is fun
>> ABOUT ATHEISM?
>>
>> You are all such a dour, dismal, despairing lot.. which is
>> why EVERY atheist regime is INFAMOUS for its dull grey dismal
>> conformity and monotony....
>>
>> They all talk in the NEGATIVE, defining themselves as NOT Religion.
>>
>> "Not being.. " this or that ABOUT RELIGION!
>>
>> They DEFINE themselves in terms of their Dopplegangers,
>> not able to find a SINGLE THING in ATHEISM ITSELF
>> which is fun;
>>
>>
>>> My atheism is simply a lack of belief in deities.
>>
>> And clearly such a trivial, useless and impotent
>> non-belief in something is NOT FUN
>>
>> TO have any fun you would have to go..
>>
>>> Beyond atheism,
>>
>> Bingo
>>
>>> I have materialism and humanism and sometimes I find that fun.
But thats not atheism, is it!? ..Nothing about atheism is fun, to you.
>> So, leave out the Atheism and you have not lost any marginal utility
>> or fun, in life!
>>
>> Precisely! atheism is useless and worthless..the irrelevant, impotent
>> ineffectual sub-branch of empty Nihilism...
>> it adds NOTHING to the good things in life.. sex, science, good
>> food, art, music, friendships, philosophy..compassion, love..
>>
> I find many things fun.
But you couldn't name one thing about ATHEISM which WAS fun!
Q.E.D.
> fasgnadh has, once again, completely
destroyed your attempt to pretend this argument
was about *YOU HAVING FUN*.. it isn't, it wasn't ever
about that, you pathetic lying fraud!
You were asked "how or why ATHEISM is fun" and you couldn't
name ONE thing about atheism that was fun, you whimpered:
"I'm not sure, exactly, that I'd call *atheism* fun, per se"
and now you have
> idiotically distorted and misrepresented what was said.
Yup, you lying atheist shitpig! B^]
--
Ex- Atheist, now Prophet, Richard Dawkins claims a "superpowerful
intelligent and moral energy" entity, "like God", is plausible and
could have 'evolved' somewhere in the Universe "by an explicable
scientific progression of incremental evolution", (which no
atheist can explain). B^D
# "After two hours of conversation, Professor Dawkins walks far afield.
# He talks of the possibility that we might co-evolve with computers, a
# silicon destiny. And he’s intrigued by the playful, even soul-stirring
# writings of Freeman Dyson, the theoretical physicist.
#
# 'In one essay, Professor Dyson casts millions of speculative years
# into the future. Our galaxy is dying and humans have evolved into
# something like bolts of superpowerful intelligent and moral energy.
#
# Doesn’t that description sound an awful lot like God?
#
# "Certainly," Professor Dawkins replies. "It’s highly plausible that
# in the universe there are God-like creatures."
#
# He raises his hand, just in case a reader thinks he’s gone around a
# religious bend. "It’s very important to understand that these Gods
# came into being by an explicable scientific progression of
# incremental evolution."'
#
# Could they be immortal? The professor shrugs.
#
# “Probably not.” He smiles and adds, “But I
# wouldn’t want to be too dogmatic about that.”"
So, which atheist is going to explain the inexplicable,
unscientific, BELIEF in "these {atheist] Gods", with no proof
whatsoever, and show us the evidence of how, and where, God evolved?
Discussion subject changed to "Intellectual challenge: Why is it No fun to be an atheist? -, Atheists can't find ANYTHING Fun about atheism! BWAAAAHAHAHAAAAA" by fasgnadh
> On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 14:25:10 -0800, Fidem Turbare, atheist goddess wrote:
>> If you could present a short statement that reflects how or why
>> atheism is fun or profoundly satisfying, what might that statement
>> be? I'll start in the realm of the infinite pursuit of knowledge
>> acquisition:
>> If you challenge my ideas, and present to me my errors, then, upon the
>> honour of my character, constructively I shall build.
> I find atheism to be satisfying because it eliminates the supernatural
Clearly it doesn't:
Ex- Atheist, now Prophet, Richard Dawkins claims a "superpowerful
intelligent and moral energy" entity, "like God", is plausible and
could have 'evolved' somewhere in the Universe "by an explicable
scientific progression of incremental evolution", (which no
atheist can explain). B^D
# "After two hours of conversation, Professor Dawkins walks far afield.
# He talks of the possibility that we might co-evolve with computers, a
# silicon destiny. And he’s intrigued by the playful, even soul-stirring
# writings of Freeman Dyson, the theoretical physicist.
#
# 'In one essay, Professor Dyson casts millions of speculative years
# into the future. Our galaxy is dying and humans have evolved into
# something like bolts of superpowerful intelligent and moral energy.
#
# Doesn’t that description sound an awful lot like God?
#
# "Certainly," Professor Dawkins replies. "It’s highly plausible that
# in the universe there are God-like creatures."
#
# He raises his hand, just in case a reader thinks he’s gone around a
# religious bend. "It’s very important to understand that these Gods
# came into being by an explicable scientific progression of
# incremental evolution."'
#
# Could they be immortal? The professor shrugs.
#
# “Probably not.” He smiles and adds, “But I
# wouldn’t want to be too dogmatic about that.”"
So, which atheist is going to explain the inexplicable,
unscientific, BELIEF in "these {atheist] Gods", with no proof
whatsoever, and show us the evidence of how, and where, God evolved
>
> I understand why the supernatural would be welcome.
Sure atheists bang on endlessly about the Supernatural, Zombies,
Prophet Dawkins and his evolved Gods... pffft!
--
Ex- Atheist, now Prophet, Richard Dawkins claims a "superpowerful
intelligent and moral energy" entity, "like God", is plausible and
could have 'evolved' somewhere in the Universe "by an explicable
scientific progression of incremental evolution", (which no
atheist can explain). B^D
# "After two hours of conversation, Professor Dawkins walks far afield.
# He talks of the possibility that we might co-evolve with computers, a
# silicon destiny. And he’s intrigued by the playful, even soul-stirring
# writings of Freeman Dyson, the theoretical physicist.
#
# 'In one essay, Professor Dyson casts millions of speculative years
# into the future. Our galaxy is dying and humans have evolved into
# something like bolts of superpowerful intelligent and moral energy.
#
# Doesn’t that description sound an awful lot like God?
#
# "Certainly," Professor Dawkins replies. "It’s highly plausible that
# in the universe there are God-like creatures."
#
# He raises his hand, just in case a reader thinks he’s gone around a
# religious bend. "It’s very important to understand that these Gods
# came into being by an explicable scientific progression of
# incremental evolution."'
#
# Could they be immortal? The professor shrugs.
#
# “Probably not.” He smiles and adds, “But I
# wouldn’t want to be too dogmatic about that.”"
So, which atheist is going to explain the inexplicable,
unscientific, BELIEF in "these {atheist] Gods", with no proof
whatsoever, and show us the evidence of how, and where, God evolved?
On 31/01/2012 11:17 AM, Fidem Turbare, atheist goddess wrote:
> MarkA found no fun in atheism:
>> On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 14:25:10 -0800, Fidem Turbare, atheist goddess wrote:
>>> If you could present a short statement that reflects how or why
>>> atheism is fun or profoundly satisfying, what might that statement
>>> be? I'll start in the realm of the infinite pursuit of knowledge
>>> acquisition:
>>> If you challenge my ideas, and present to me my errors, then, upon the
>>> honour of my character, constructively I shall build.
>> I find atheism to be satisfying because it eliminates the supernatural
Clearly it doesn't:
Ex- Atheist, now Prophet, Richard Dawkins claims a "superpowerful
intelligent and moral energy" entity, "like God", is plausible and
could have 'evolved' somewhere in the Universe "by an explicable
scientific progression of incremental evolution", (which no
atheist can explain). B^D
# "After two hours of conversation, Professor Dawkins walks far afield.
# He talks of the possibility that we might co-evolve with computers, a
# silicon destiny. And he’s intrigued by the playful, even soul-stirring
# writings of Freeman Dyson, the theoretical physicist.
#
# 'In one essay, Professor Dyson casts millions of speculative years
# into the future. Our galaxy is dying and humans have evolved into
# something like bolts of superpowerful intelligent and moral energy.
#
# Doesn’t that description sound an awful lot like God?
#
# "Certainly," Professor Dawkins replies. "It’s highly plausible that
# in the universe there are God-like creatures."
#
# He raises his hand, just in case a reader thinks he’s gone around a
# religious bend. "It’s very important to understand that these Gods
# came into being by an explicable scientific progression of
# incremental evolution."'
#
# Could they be immortal? The professor shrugs.
#
# “Probably not.” He smiles and adds, “But I
# wouldn’t want to be too dogmatic about that.”"
So, which atheist is going to explain the inexplicable,
unscientific, BELIEF in "these {atheist] Gods", with no proof
whatsoever, and show us the evidence of how, and where, God evolved
> I understand why the supernatural would be welcome.
Sure atheists bang on endlessly about the Supernatural, Zombies,
Prophet Dawkins and his evolved Gods... pffft!
> You've touched on the systematic abuse of assumption
> that is used to distort.
Thanks, I've also exposed complete hypocrisy and lies.
> Although these distortions are useful as temporary
> alternatives to voids in one's knowledge,
Not really, "Zombies" is childish nonsense.. grow up.
> it seems that people who are not comfortable
> with the feeling of "not knowing"
become atheists, instead of accepting NOT knowing
and being AGNOSTICS...and
> take great comfort in the permanent use of these assumptions
> -- I suspect the exploiters and oppressors know this well.
I'm sure you can speak for them.
> Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
Just like Prophet Dawkin's, you atheists are great FAKERS;
--
Ex- Atheist, now Prophet, Richard Dawkins claims a "superpowerful
intelligent and moral energy" entity, "like God", is plausible and
could have 'evolved' somewhere in the Universe "by an explicable
scientific progression of incremental evolution", (which no
atheist can explain). B^D
# "After two hours of conversation, Professor Dawkins walks far afield.
# He talks of the possibility that we might co-evolve with computers, a
# silicon destiny. And he’s intrigued by the playful, even soul-stirring
# writings of Freeman Dyson, the theoretical physicist.
#
# 'In one essay, Professor Dyson casts millions of speculative years
# into the future. Our galaxy is dying and humans have evolved into
# something like bolts of superpowerful intelligent and moral energy.
#
# Doesn’t that description sound an awful lot like God?
#
# "Certainly," Professor Dawkins replies. "It’s highly plausible that
# in the universe there are God-like creatures."
#
# He raises his hand, just in case a reader thinks he’s gone around a
# religious bend. "It’s very important to understand that these Gods
# came into being by an explicable scientific progression of
# incremental evolution."'
#
# Could they be immortal? The professor shrugs.
#
# “Probably not.” He smiles and adds, “But I
# wouldn’t want to be too dogmatic about that.”"
So, which atheist is going to explain the inexplicable,
unscientific, BELIEF in "these {atheist] Gods", with no proof
whatsoever, and show us the evidence of how, and where, God evolved?
>>> If you could present a short statement that reflects how or why
>>> atheism is fun or profoundly satisfying, what might that statement
>>> be? I'll start in the realm of the infinite pursuit of knowledge
>>> acquisition:
>>> If you challenge my ideas, and present to me my errors, then, upon the
>>> honour of my character, constructively I shall build.
> aa #2278 Never mind "proof." Where is your evidence?
> BAAWA Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief Heckler
> Fidei defensor (Hon. Antipodean)
Where's the fun in Brutal Atheist Animals Without Agape - BAAWA?;
# From: Steve Knight <sknigh...@cox.net>
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism
# Subject: A.A. BAAWA - FAQ
# Message-ID: <p8mrb5lvaf0cj5bp1e4jbmlsqebu9j9...@4ax.com>
# Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 02:46:34 -0700
#
# We kill theists and shit down their throats and
# not in a girly way.
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA
Not satisfied with murder, Steve favours GENOCIDE
# From: Steve Knight <sknigh...@cox.net>
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.religion.islam
# Subject: Re: Islam: the perfect religion and way of life for all
# Message-ID: <8t6ve5hs41qn3a2rv57fjcg60tufoa4...@4ax.com>
# Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2009 18:58:18 -0800
#
# On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 21:22:32 +0200, "Katrina"
#
# >Islam: the perfect religion and way of life for all
#
# It is the most foul, disgusting filth on Earth.
# The sooner we nuke you fuckers, the better.
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA
--
Ex- Atheist, now Prophet, Richard Dawkins claims a "superpowerful
intelligent and moral energy" entity, "like God", is plausible and
could have 'evolved' somewhere in the Universe "by an explicable
scientific progression of incremental evolution", (which no
atheist can explain). B^D
# "After two hours of conversation, Professor Dawkins walks far afield.
# He talks of the possibility that we might co-evolve with computers, a
# silicon destiny. And he’s intrigued by the playful, even soul-stirring
# writings of Freeman Dyson, the theoretical physicist.
#
# 'In one essay, Professor Dyson casts millions of speculative years
# into the future. Our galaxy is dying and humans have evolved into
# something like bolts of superpowerful intelligent and moral energy.
#
# Doesn’t that description sound an awful lot like God?
#
# "Certainly," Professor Dawkins replies. "It’s highly plausible that
# in the universe there are God-like creatures."
#
# He raises his hand, just in case a reader thinks he’s gone around a
# religious bend. "It’s very important to understand that these Gods
# came into being by an explicable scientific progression of
# incremental evolution."'
#
# Could they be immortal? The professor shrugs.
#
# “Probably not.” He smiles and adds, “But I
# wouldn’t want to be too dogmatic about that.”"
So, which atheist is going to explain the inexplicable,
unscientific, BELIEF in "these {atheist] Gods", with no proof
whatsoever, and show us the evidence of how, and where, God evolved?
> On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 14:25:10 -0800 (PST), "Fidem Turbare, atheist goddess"<fidem.turb...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> If you could present a short statement that reflects how or why
>> atheism is fun or profoundly satisfying, what might that statement
>> be?
None of them have been honest...
This is what gets the BAAWA atheist thug's rocks off;
# From: Steve Knight <sknigh...@cox.net>
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism
# Subject: A.A. BAAWA - FAQ
# Message-ID: <p8mrb5lvaf0cj5bp1e4jbmlsqebu9j9...@4ax.com>
# Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 02:46:34 -0700
#
# We kill theists and shit down their throats and
# not in a girly way.
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA
Not satisfied with murder, Steve favours GENOCIDE
# From: Steve Knight <sknigh...@cox.net>
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.religion.islam
# Subject: Re: Islam: the perfect religion and way of life for all
# Message-ID: <8t6ve5hs41qn3a2rv57fjcg60tufoa4...@4ax.com>
# Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2009 18:58:18 -0800
#
# On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 21:22:32 +0200, "Katrina"
#
# >Islam: the perfect religion and way of life for all
#
# It is the most foul, disgusting filth on Earth.
# The sooner we nuke you fuckers, the better.
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA
It's not unusual.. that you have few friends,
nor that they are not deceived, few mature adults
are sucked in by atheists.
> But it's not any fun.
of course not, you poor little possum, but why be happy
when you have the smug self-satisfaction of atheist hubris?
B^D
--
Ex- Atheist, now Prophet, Richard Dawkins claims a "superpowerful
intelligent and moral energy" entity, "like God", is plausible and
could have 'evolved' somewhere in the Universe "by an explicable
scientific progression of incremental evolution", (which no
atheist can explain). B^D
# "After two hours of conversation, Professor Dawkins walks far afield.
# He talks of the possibility that we might co-evolve with computers, a
# silicon destiny. And he’s intrigued by the playful, even soul-stirring
# writings of Freeman Dyson, the theoretical physicist.
#
# 'In one essay, Professor Dyson casts millions of speculative years
# into the future. Our galaxy is dying and humans have evolved into
# something like bolts of superpowerful intelligent and moral energy.
#
# Doesn’t that description sound an awful lot like God?
#
# "Certainly," Professor Dawkins replies. "It’s highly plausible that
# in the universe there are God-like creatures."
#
# He raises his hand, just in case a reader thinks he’s gone around a
# religious bend. "It’s very important to understand that these Gods
# came into being by an explicable scientific progression of
# incremental evolution."'
#
# Could they be immortal? The professor shrugs.
#
# “Probably not.” He smiles and adds, “But I
# wouldn’t want to be too dogmatic about that.”"
So, which atheist is going to explain the inexplicable,
unscientific, BELIEF in "these {atheist] Gods", with no proof
whatsoever, and show us the evidence of how, and where, God evolved?
Discussion subject changed to "Intellectual challenge: Why is it No fun to be an atheist? - Atheists can't find ANYTHING Fun about atheism! BWAAAAHAHAHAAAAA" by Errol
Discussion subject changed to "Intellectual challenge: Why is it No fun to be an atheist? -, Atheists can't find ANYTHING Fun about atheism! BWAAAAHAHAHAAAAA" by fasgnadh
>>> If you could present a short statement that reflects how or why
>>> atheism is fun or profoundly satisfying, what might that statement
>>> be? I'll start in the realm of the infinite pursuit of knowledge
>>> acquisition:
>>> If you challenge my ideas, and present to me my errors, then, upon the
>>> honour of my character, constructively I shall build.
> aa #2278 Never mind "proof." Where is your evidence?
> BAAWA Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief Heckler
> Fidei defensor (Hon. Antipodean)
Where's the fun in Brutal Atheist Animals Without Agape - BAAWA?;
# From: Steve Knight <sknigh...@cox.net>
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism
# Subject: A.A. BAAWA - FAQ
# Message-ID: <p8mrb5lvaf0cj5bp1e4jbmlsqebu9j9...@4ax.com>
# Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 02:46:34 -0700
#
# We kill theists and shit down their throats and
# not in a girly way.
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA
Not satisfied with murder, Steve favours GENOCIDE
# From: Steve Knight <sknigh...@cox.net>
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.religion.islam
# Subject: Re: Islam: the perfect religion and way of life for all
# Message-ID: <8t6ve5hs41qn3a2rv57fjcg60tufoa4...@4ax.com>
# Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2009 18:58:18 -0800
#
# On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 21:22:32 +0200, "Katrina"
#
# >Islam: the perfect religion and way of life for all
#
# It is the most foul, disgusting filth on Earth.
# The sooner we nuke you fuckers, the better.
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA
--
Ex- Atheist, now Prophet, Richard Dawkins claims a "superpowerful
intelligent and moral energy" entity, "like God", is plausible and
could have 'evolved' somewhere in the Universe "by an explicable
scientific progression of incremental evolution", (which no
atheist can explain). B^D
# "After two hours of conversation, Professor Dawkins walks far afield.
# He talks of the possibility that we might co-evolve with computers, a
# silicon destiny. And he’s intrigued by the playful, even soul-stirring
# writings of Freeman Dyson, the theoretical physicist.
#
# 'In one essay, Professor Dyson casts millions of speculative years
# into the future. Our galaxy is dying and humans have evolved into
# something like bolts of superpowerful intelligent and moral energy.
#
# Doesn’t that description sound an awful lot like God?
#
# "Certainly," Professor Dawkins replies. "It’s highly plausible that
# in the universe there are God-like creatures."
#
# He raises his hand, just in case a reader thinks he’s gone around a
# religious bend. "It’s very important to understand that these Gods
# came into being by an explicable scientific progression of
# incremental evolution."'
#
# Could they be immortal? The professor shrugs.
#
# “Probably not.” He smiles and adds, “But I
# wouldn’t want to be too dogmatic about that.”"
So, which atheist is going to explain the inexplicable,
unscientific, BELIEF in "these {atheist] Gods", with no proof
whatsoever, and show us the evidence of how, and where, God evolved?
> On 31/01/2012 1:57 PM, Don Martin wrote:
> > Doc Smartass wrote:
> >> "Fidem Turbare, atheist goddess" wrote:
> >>> If you could present a short statement that reflects how or why
> >>> atheism is fun or profoundly satisfying, what might that statement
> >>> be? I'll start in the realm of the infinite pursuit of knowledge
> >>> acquisition:
> >>> If you challenge my ideas, and present to me my errors, then, upon the
> >>> honour of my character, constructively I shall build.
> Hail Eris! On Jan 31, 4:28 am, fasgnadh wrote:
>> On 31/01/2012 1:57 PM, Don Martin wrote:
>> > Doc Smartass wrote:
>> >> "Fidem Turbare, atheist goddess" wrote:
>> >>> If you could present a short statement that reflects how or why
>> >>> atheism is fun or profoundly satisfying, what might that
>> >>> statement be? I'll start in the realm of the infinite pursuit of
>> >>> knowledge acquisition:
>> >>> If you challenge my ideas, and present to me my errors, then,
>> >>> upon th > e
>> >>> honour of my character, constructively I shall build.
>> > aa #2278 Never mind "proof." Where is your evidence?
>> > BAAWA Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief Heckler
>> > Fidei defensor (Hon. Antipodean)
>> Where's the fun in Brutal Atheist Animals Without Agape - BAAWA?;
> Thanks for all the campaigning, d00d. You are a cinch to win at least
> a couple awards...
Wow--frognads actually replied to me! *swoon*
I feel so bad for having him killfiled :(~~~~
-- Doc Smartass, BAAWA Knight of Heckling aa # 1939
Discussion subject changed to "Intellectual challenge: Why is it No fun to be an atheist? - Atheists can't find ANYTHING Fun about atheism! BWAAAAHAHAHAAAAA" by Paul David Wright
> On 31/01/2012 9:53 AM, DanielSan wrote:
>> On 1/30/2012 2:25 PM, Fidem Turbare, atheist goddess wrote:
>>> If you could present a short statement that reflects how or why
>>> atheism is fun or profoundly satisfying, what might that statement
>>> be? I'll start in the realm of the infinite pursuit of knowledge
>>> acquisition:
>>> If you challenge my ideas, and present to me my errors, then, upon
>>> the honour of my character, constructively I shall build.
>> I'm not sure, exactly, that I'd call *atheism* fun, per se.
> Apparently none of the atheists can name anything that is fun?
Apperently you cannot stop lying, Failednuts.
Your twisted, insane, hysterical hatred of us does you no favors.
> On 31/01/2012 8:02 PM, DanielSan wrote:
>> On 1/31/2012 12:29 AM, Fidem Turbare, atheist goddess wrote:
>>> On Jan 30, 10:59 pm, fasgnadh<fasgn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> On 31/01/2012 9:53 AM, DanielSan wrote:
>>>>> On 1/30/2012 2:25 PM, Fidem Turbare, atheist goddess wrote:
>>>>>> If you could present a short statement that reflects how or why
>>>>>> atheism is fun or profoundly satisfying, what might that
>>>>>> statement be? I'll start in the realm of the infinite pursuit of
>>>>>> knowledge acquisition:
>>>>>> If you challenge my ideas, and present to me my errors, then,
>>>>>> upon the honour of my character, constructively I shall build.
>>>>> I'm not sure, exactly, that I'd call *atheism* fun, per se.
> No it isn't, It looks as if ALL of the atheist responses, like this
> one, can't find ANYTHING about *atheism* which is FUN! 8^o
Looks more like your red hot, snearing, hysterical hatred has blinded you to the point of insanity, Failednuts.
> Fidem Turbare, trys to twist the atheist admission: NO FUN in
> ATHEISM : >> On Jan 30, 10:59 pm, fasgnadh<fasgn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> On 31/01/2012 9:53 AM, DanielSan wrote:
>>>> On 1/30/2012 2:25 PM, Fidem Turbare, atheist goddess wrote:
>>>>> If you could present a short statement that reflects how or why
>>>>> atheism is fun or profoundly satisfying, what might that statement
>>>>> be? I'll start in the realm of the infinite pursuit of knowledge
>>>>> acquisition:
>>>>> If you challenge my ideas, and present to me my errors, then, upon
>>>>> the honour of my character, constructively I shall build.
> Liar you snipped and misrepresented my argument!
You don't have an argument beyond "I hate atheists. They suck. They must be destroyed."
Discussion subject changed to "Intellectual challenge: Why is it No fun to be an atheist? -, Atheists can't find ANYTHING Fun about atheism! BWAAAAHAHAHAAAAA" by Paul David Wright
> On 31/01/2012 11:17 AM, Fidem Turbare, atheist goddess wrote:
>> MarkA found no fun in atheism:
>>> On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 14:25:10 -0800, Fidem Turbare, atheist goddess
>>> wrote:
>>>> If you could present a short statement that reflects how or why
>>>> atheism is fun or profoundly satisfying, what might that statement
>>>> be? I'll start in the realm of the infinite pursuit of knowledge
>>>> acquisition:
>>>> If you challenge my ideas, and present to me my errors, then, upon
>>>> the honour of my character, constructively I shall build.
>>> I find atheism to be satisfying because it eliminates the
>>> supernatural
> MarkA found no fun in atheism:
>> On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 14:25:10 -0800, Fidem Turbare, atheist goddess
>> wrote:
>>> If you could present a short statement that reflects how or why
>>> atheism is fun or profoundly satisfying, what might that statement
>>> be? I'll start in the realm of the infinite pursuit of knowledge
>>> acquisition:
>>> If you challenge my ideas, and present to me my errors, then, upon
>>> the honour of my character, constructively I shall build.
>> I find atheism to be satisfying because it eliminates the
>> supernatural
> Clearly it doesn't:
Repeating yer lies will not make them facts, bigot.
> On 31/01/2012 1:57 PM, Don Martin wrote:
>> Doc Smartass<FortbrickG...@yahoobrick.com> wrote:
>>> "Fidem Turbare, atheist goddess"<fidem.turb...@gmail.com> wrote in
>>> news:553e783b-6839-43cd-9e45-c0a050b7a679
@ov1g2000pbb.googlegroups.co
>>> m:
>>>> If you could present a short statement that reflects how or why
>>>> atheism is fun or profoundly satisfying, what might that statement
>>>> be? I'll start in the realm of the infinite pursuit of knowledge
>>>> acquisition:
>>>> If you challenge my ideas, and present to me my errors, then, upon
>>>> the honour of my character, constructively I shall build.
Discussion subject changed to "Intellectual challenge: Why is it No fun to be an atheist? , - Two more Atheists can't find ANYTHING Fun about atheism! BWAAAAHAHAHAAAAA" by Paul David Wright
> On 31/01/2012 10:57 AM, Tronscend wrote:
>> "Don Martin"<drdonmar...@comcast.net> skrev i melding
>> news:5l9ei7dj1a5t9jlblkfuuvak17a3j3ecog@4ax.com...
>>> On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 14:25:10 -0800 (PST), "Fidem Turbare, atheist
>>> goddess" <fidem.turb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> If you could present a short statement that reflects how or why
>>>> atheism is fun or profoundly satisfying, what might that statement
>>>> be? I'll start in the realm of the infinite pursuit of knowledge
>>>> acquisition:
>>> My atheism is satisfying to me in that it frees me from guilt
> >> based on "sins"
> Another negative definition which ascribes the absence of guilt
> to atheism, whereas others, such as agnostics, like myself, and
> many religious don't feel guilt
Another lie by the guy who lets his overwhelming, hysterical and murderous hatred for unbelievers blind him.
Discussion subject changed to "Intellectual challenge: Why is it No fun to be an atheist? -, Atheists can't find ANYTHING Fun about atheism! BWAAAAHAHAHAAAAA" by Paul David Wright
Discussion subject changed to "Subject: Re: Intellectual challenge: Why is it No fun to be an atheist? - Atheists can't find ANYTHING Fun about atheism! BWAAAAHAHAHAAAAA" by Paul David Wright
From: Paul David Wright <pauldavidwri...@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2012 01:55:59 +0000 (UTC)
Local: Tues, Jan 31 2012 8:55 pm
Subject: Re: Subject: Re: Intellectual challenge: Why is it No fun to be an atheist? - Atheists can't find ANYTHING Fun about atheism! BWAAAAHAHAHAAAAA
> sbalneav also can't find any fun in atheism:
>> On 12-01-30 04:25 PM, Fidem Turbare, atheist goddess wrote:
>>> If you could present a short statement that reflects how or why
>>> atheism is fun or profoundly satisfying, what might that statement
>>> be?
>> Atheism's only satisfying in so much as you're not having to expend
>> a lot of effort
> true, it can't take much energy to say
> "I don't believe in.. x"
You'll never understand our position until you release your overwhelming, murderous, hysterical hatred of us from your puny system, Failednuts.
Discussion subject changed to "Intellectual challenge: Why is it No fun to be an atheist? - Atheists can't find ANYTHING Fun about atheism! BWAAAAHAHAHAAAAA" by Paul David Wright
> On 31/01/2012 3:40 PM, Olrik wrote:
>> Le 2012-01-30 17:25, Fidem Turbare, atheist goddess a écrit :
>>> If you could present a short statement that reflects how or why
>>> atheism is fun or profoundly satisfying, what might that statement
>>> be? I'll start in the realm of the infinite pursuit of knowledge
>>> acquisition:
>>> If you challenge my ideas, and present to me my errors, then, upon
>>> the honour of my character, constructively I shall build.
>> Well, it's not "atheism" per se,
> No it isn't,
Yes, it is, Failednuts.
Sorry we're not saying what you want to hear, but that's life, asshole.
> On 31/01/2012 5:51 PM, fasgnadh wrote:
>> On 31/01/2012 3:40 PM, Olrik wrote:
>>> Le 2012-01-30 17:25, Fidem Turbare, atheist goddess a écrit :
>>>> If you could present a short statement that reflects how or why
>>>> atheism is fun or profoundly satisfying, what might that statement
>>>> be? I'll start in the realm of the infinite pursuit of knowledge
>>>> acquisition:
>>>> If you challenge my ideas, and present to me my errors, then, upon the
>>>> honour of my character, constructively I shall build.
>>> Well, it's not "atheism" per se,
>> No it isn't, It looks as if ALL of the atheist responses, like this
>> one, can't find ANYTHING about *atheism* which is FUN! 8^o
>> They all talk in the NEGATIVE defining themselves as NOT Religion.
>> "Not being.. " this or that ABOUT RELIGION!
>> They DEFINE themselves in terms of their Dopplegangers,
>> not able to find a SINGLE THING in ATHEISM ITSELF
>> which is fun;
>>> But not being shackled by religious dogmas
>> That's like a woman, asked what's great about being a woman
>> replying " Er, um... Not being a MAN" !!?!
>> Then he goes on to describe 'liberty' as consuming
>> three things, which people who are NOT atheists
>> can also enjoy, including various religious folk:
>> > brings liberty,
>> The idea that atheism brings liberty is not merely a joke,
>> but a patent ABSURDITY given that NO ATHEIST REGIME IN HISTORY
>> EVERY BROUGHT LIBERTY!!!! B^p
>> And you can see why not when you see how this IDIOT atheist
>> DEFINES Liberty:
>> > which I might define thusly:
>>> Sex,
>> All religions celebrate procreation,
>> Hindus make it an artform, the Karma Sutra, you ignorant twonk
>> > pork, wine.
>> The most numerous religion on the planet, Christians,
>> enjoy bacon at breakfast and as for wine, you ridiculous tool,
>> IT's THEIR SACRED SACRAMENT!
>>>> Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
>> As distinct from Prophet Dawkin's claim that atheist "Gods came
>> into being....";
>> [ Isn't it fun to try and explain Atheist Dogma while people
>> are laughing at you: BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAA ]
Even other atheists are laughing at you: B^]
> hahhaha
> Is it fun believing in the flying spaghetti monster?
I give up, tell us?
> hahahaha
> It's even more fun laughing at you god botherers
I don't think I bother God, I'm an agnostic.
Nice rant, pity you based it all on your
idiotic, illogical and plain wrong assumption
that if I criticise atheism, then I must be a theist! B^D
Nope, you must be a moron.
> other things I like about atheism
> no hell
I don't have a hell and I'm not an atheist.
> no heaven
"heaven is my baby's smile"
> no angry god wanting me to kill my progeny
I don't have an angry God and I'm not an atheist.
> no angels to nuke my town
Angels never nuked my town, and atheism had
nothing to do with it.
> no trying to impress my neighbours at church with my piousness
I don't try to impress my neighbours, don't go to church
and am certainly not pius, you stupid fuckwit..
and atheism had nothing to do with it!
> no having to believe in superstition and fairy stories (like the red
> sea parting for moses)
Most people who don't believe in fairy stories are NOT atheists
> tell us about the fun you have in church drinking the blood of christ
Wow, do you look stupid, Dumbo.. I don't attend church and
have never drunk blood...
Nice rant you got going there! You appear to be a fucking LUNATIC! B^D
And nothing you claimed to enjoy depends on being an atheist,
because others, not atheist, enjoy the same NEGATIVELY DEFINED advantages of NOT experiencing something.
Atheism is definitely no fun for you poor desperate atheist tools,
struggling to find something, ANYTHING to say about being atheists!
B^D
Dawkins is having fun.. he's milked all you atheist suckers
for Book Sales, and now he's going over to the theist side
for the BIGGER MARKET: BWAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAHAAAAA!
--
Ex- Atheist, now Prophet, Richard Dawkins claims a "superpowerful
intelligent and moral energy" entity, "like God", is plausible and
could have 'evolved' somewhere in the Universe "by an explicable
scientific progression of incremental evolution", (which no
atheist can explain). B^D
# "After two hours of conversation, Professor Dawkins walks far afield.
# He talks of the possibility that we might co-evolve with computers, a
# silicon destiny. And he’s intrigued by the playful, even soul-stirring
# writings of Freeman Dyson, the theoretical physicist.
#
# 'In one essay, Professor Dyson casts millions of speculative years
# into the future. Our galaxy is dying and humans have evolved into
# something like bolts of superpowerful intelligent and moral energy.
#
# Doesn’t that description sound an awful lot like God?
#
# "Certainly," Professor Dawkins replies. "It’s highly plausible that
# in the universe there are God-like creatures."
#
# He raises his hand, just in case a reader thinks he’s gone around a
# religious bend. "It’s very important to understand that these Gods
# came into being by an explicable scientific progression of
# incremental evolution."'
#
# Could they be immortal? The professor shrugs.
#
# “Probably not.” He smiles and adds, “But I
# wouldn’t want to be too dogmatic about that.”"
So, which atheist is going to explain the inexplicable,
unscientific, BELIEF in "these {atheist] Gods", with no proof
whatsoever, and show us the evidence of how, and where, God evolved?
