Atheist!

[sr71plt]

Oh, totally. We don't argue with it, we poke at it when we should be writing...

Opps. Turns to other computer and sees that he hasn't written a single word on current manuscript in three hours. It's just too much of a fun evening around here.

 

[DeeZire]

Amicus you are becoming a folk hero. You have a lot of friends here for holding the flood of ignorance back and allowing the true intellectuals to grow. We have received a tremendous amount of PMs of thanks for baiting these trolls out in the open like this. We will not be able to answer all our fan mail but many, many people are watching and enjoying our conflict with the trolls.

OMG! wmrs2 is Scouries!

 

[sr71plt]

OMG! wmrs2 is Scouries!

I doubt Scouries could go three days without posting one of his personalized lists, though.

 

[Dragonlipz]

wmrs2, the bikini barista advises that

if ya wanna get all wet and runny with Amicus perhaps you'd get a room.....not that she'd care, in fact, she'd probably watch and rate you......Be warned, her criticism is blunt and frank. Any lack of technique on your part would result in a disqualification.....
Meantime, pucker up and smooch away you two.......I enjoy a good love scene

 

[Stella_Omega]

Opps. Turns to other computer and sees that he hasn't written a single word on current manuscript in three hours. It's just too much of a fun evening around here.

Shows up to say she's been writing.

Sorta writing. Wrote some.

 

[Stella_Omega]

OMG! wmrs2 is Scouries!

We should have known-- and so should the rest of us!

 

[amicus]

All stretched out with a cold Boodles & Lime and thought to survey the threads before turning out the lights...

I remain amazed that a little girl with a 6th grade education has a herd of trolls on her tail, yelping as they run, simply amazing.

Showing just enough knowledge of Christian Theology to bait the still believing in denial, yet having the internal fortitude to call a spade a spade, this lil gal has you up agin the wall and you don't even realize it.

The still amusing but serious portion of this is that the 'usual suspects' can not muster enough moral assurance among the whole lot to refute a single proclamation she has made.

To say that in a different way, her moral certainty has destroyed your equivocation on even the simplest of moral issues and you cannot match her spirit and emotion.

The sophisticated satirical repertoire, taken heed of by only a select few, is overshadowed by the sheer obscenity displayed in your haste to condemn that which you do not understand. You are correct to identify this as a Porn site, for you are Porn writers, even on a discussion forum.

But I already knew that.

nite all...

amicus...

 

[Stella_Omega]

The still amusing but serious portion of this is that the 'usual suspects' can not muster enough moral assurance among the whole lot to refute a single proclamation she has made.

We don't bother to refute the proclamations of people who are off their meds. It only makes them more uncomfortable, and makes them think they don't need their meds.

You are right, though-- it is a funny troll! That's why i have been poking it, I don't know about anyone else...

 

[DeeZire]

What't to refute? That God hates atheists? Putting the word "hate" next to the word "God" already refutes the validity of that god, so wmrs2 is contradicting her faith every time she posts such garbage.

Because of my ignore list, I'm guessing the "refute" thing is coming from Ami? If so, it's understandable that he would not understand a counter-argument, since everything he believes in is based on faith, regardless of any facts that might negate that faith. The fact that Ami has found a soulmate in wmrs2 says more about his lack of credibility than his pompous posts do. What's the old saying? "If we could only see ourselves as others see us."

 

[amicus]

One can conclude, rationally, that even while being, 'ignored', by the 'usual suspects', they still remain in attack mode, means that they are attacking in generalities anyone who disagrees. Such a deal.

It is not surprising. The left cannot rationally defend any of their basic premises or, 'beliefs', just as any other 'believer' in a theology, one must have faith.

As science and scientific method have proven, beyond any doubt, that a new human is created at the moment of conception, there is no possible defense for taking that human life. Thus the left can only blather about and hurl epithets in a weak effeminate hissing and clawing to defend themselves.

The progressive, left, modern social liberals and in a dual assault against faith based and rational, knowledge based premises and all the while claiming their social superiority.

It should come as no surprise again, that they remain in a tizzy, when confronted from both the 'faith' and 'reason' based arguments...they just fall apart and go into hiding.

Just where they belong.

Amicus...

 

[wmrs2]

What't to refute? That God hates atheists? Putting the word "hate" next to the word "God" already refutes the validity of that god, so wmrs2 is contradicting her faith every time she posts such garbage.

Because of my ignore list, I'm guessing the "refute" thing is coming from Ami? If so, it's understandable that he would not understand a counter-argument, since everything he believes in is based on faith, regardless of any facts that might negate that faith. The fact that Ami has found a soulmate in wmrs2 says more about his lack of credibility than his pompous posts do. What's the old saying? "If we could only see ourselves as others see us."

Dear DeeZire,

You speak of things of which you have no knowledge whatsoever. On what do you base this statement?
What't to refute? That God hates atheists? Putting the word "hate" next to the word "God" already refutes the validity of that god, so wmrs2 is contradicting her faith every time she posts such garbage.

You ignorantly condemn all my statements because we claim the Bible teaches that God hates unbelievers. Any person in the Bible that did not believe in the One God was an unbeliever or atheist. Those not schooled in the Bible might think that God loves everybody. This is not true.

Among the first two bothers, God loved Able but hated Cain. Pharaoh was hated by God in so much that God hardened the heart of Pharaoh so that pharaoh never believed in God until it was too late to save Egypt. You can read the story in Exodus of how God worked against Pharaoh time and again so that Pharaoh would be damned.

What was the sin of Pharaoh that made God hate him and many other non believers? The Apostle Paul explains this in the Epistle to the Romans: 1:20:: For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

Christians make a big deal out of self-evident truths. It was the non-acceptance of self-evident truth that motivated God to despise Pharaoh, Cain, Ahab, Baal, and many other characters in the Bible that you should know about. This type of Godly hate is explained best in Proverbs, 6th chapter. Verse 16 is the theme of this Proverb: These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him.

Two of the persons God hates are expressly named. A false witness (v.16) and he that soweth discord among brethren (v.19) are two types of people God hates, which sounds like a lot of people on this forum that think they know God but do not.

God is a God of love and uses the word hate sparingly. The theme of the Bible is expressed in John 3:16. Universal familiarity with this theme means no explanation is necessary but God’s universal love is reserved for those who believe. Unbelievers are left out of the equation of God’s love. Throughout the Bible the antithesis of love, which is hate, is reserved to the unbeliever or atheist.

We are very displeased when persons think they know God well enough to give comfort and aid to the enemies of God under the pretense that those who mention hate and God together, as you and other pretend Christians do here, that we who mention hate have done an evil thing. The Bible explains you and God’s attitude towards you in Psalms 11:5: The LORD trieth the righteous: but the wicked and him that loveth violence his soul hateth.

We do not write this rebuff to make you look ignorant but to remind you and all believers whose side you should be on in this debate over whether God does exist. The Bible does teach that if you choose God and his people, that God will love you. There is also a side of man that God hates. That is what the Bible teaches. If you do not believe the Bible then you have nothing to worry about but to me the Bible confirms my belief.

 

[sr71plt]

I'm pretty sure your fifteen minutes here are up.

 

[BentSecrets]

One can conclude, rationally, that even while being, 'ignored', by the 'usual suspects', they still remain in attack mode, means that they are attacking in generalities anyone who disagrees. Such a deal.

It is not surprising. The left cannot rationally defend any of their basic premises or, 'beliefs', just as any other 'believer' in a theology, one must have faith.

As science and scientific method have proven, beyond any doubt, that a new human is created at the moment of conception, there is no possible defense for taking that human life. Thus the left can only blather about and hurl epithets in a weak effeminate hissing and clawing to defend themselves.

The progressive, left, modern social liberals and in a dual assault against faith based and rational, knowledge based premises and all the while claiming their social superiority.

It should come as no surprise again, that they remain in a tizzy, when confronted from both the 'faith' and 'reason' based arguments...they just fall apart and go into hiding.

Just where they belong.

Amicus...

OK, now this is just silly.

1) First off, it's a fact that the hardcore Left cannot justify their positions rationally or scientifically. Bottom line, Collectivism in ANY form is evil and doesn't work. HOWEVER, this does not change the fact that the hardcore RIGHT are utterly unable to justify their positions rationally or scientifically either. The religious NONSENSE that pervades the Republican party of today is a cancer that has all but killed every last vestige of sensibility that party ever had (and they've had precious little of it). Moreover, Christianity itself, like any other religion and most other creeds, is simply more Collectivism and will never, ever work as an integrated, rational philosophy.

Conclusion of 1: Neither the extreme Left nor the extreme Right are rationally defensible AT ALL.

2) Science has in NO WAY established that a "New Human" is created at the moment of conception. That's a bunch of nonsense. A human being is a creature with a specific kind of brain activity, which a fertilized egg DOES NOT POSSESS. Neither a Zygote nor a Blastocyst nor even a Fetus are a Human Being and they DO NOT HAVE RIGHTS. We may be able to entertain Rights discussions in the SECOND trimester, when BRAIN activity has begun, but prior to that all you have is a mass of cells that amount to nothing more than muscle, meat and a little gristle.

Conclusion of 2: A Fertilized Egg IS NOT A HUMAN BEING.

Let us make this very plain: The extreme Left, who live in a blind subservience to the failed and Evil ideologies of Communism, Socialism and their derivatives, have NO CLAIM to science or rationality. NEITHER DO THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT, whose beliefs are simply MORE COLLECTIVISM and MORE MYSTICISM.

One cannot defend Right leaning Collectivism while defending Left leaning Collectivism any more than they can do the opposite. The very premise is ABSURD.

 

[sr71plt]

But just for kicks, wmrs2, please cite the Bible translation (and verse), where God's hate is used toward either Cain (putting a curse on someone isn't hating them) or the pharaoh of Mose's story (manipulating someone isn't hating them). In fact, please cite anything in the Bible where God expresses hate for a specific human being. Romans 1:20 certainly doesn't explain anything about God hating any single human being.

 

[DeeZire]

I'm pretty sure your fifteen minutes here are up.

I would agree. I liked it better when wmrs2 posted in short little blurts. There's no way I'm going to slog through hundreds of words of her nonsense. The entertainment value is negated by the tedium.

So, wmrs2, let us know when you post one of your stories. That's what we do here at the AH. If all you want to do is argue and insult, the General Board would be more your speed.

 

[amicus]

BentSecrets...I had, and announced high praise, for your statement that the free market is not an imposed system, but one arising from human individual freedom.

I also acknowledge and applaud your analogy, of both the religious right and the left, as being faith based, as indeed they are, with one accepting that title, the other not.

Let me offer you a third alternative, one which, like the free market, also arises from human individual freedom. Objective morality.

As with the market place, which reflects human freedom and choice, objective morality rejects faith and seeks for moral and objective truths in human actions.

It is nothing new, it has been the province of Philosophy forever, seeking a means to identify an ethical code for human behavior.

Here is a rational basis: without sentient human life, there is no concept of ethics or morals, non sentient animals do not consider whether to eat their cubs, it is the way of nature.

Sentient humans began to understand the nature of human actions by learning the 'absolute' truths of reality. You don't put your hand in fire, you don't put your face under water. Those things are not beneficial to human life; and they didn't need rocket science to figure that out.

Your issue, and it seems to be a highly emotional one, is abortion, the pre meditated act to halt the growth of the fetus.

You, and many others, claim it is your 'right' to dispose of this fetus, basically for any reason you, 'choose'.

I oppose that on intellectual grounds; I am an atheist and my morality is not faith based, it has a firm foundation, an absolute foundation, gained through an understanding of reality.

I am not going to attempt to persuade or influence you to reject faith and welcome reason, that is a choice only you can make.

Since you have shown a proclivity towards rational thinking, as I mentioned earlier, I have hope that you will re examine your fundamental moral premises and deal with reality in a rational manner.

Amicus...

 

[wmrs2]

But just for kicks, wmrs2, please cite the Bible translation (and verse), where God's hate is used toward either Cain (putting a curse on someone isn't hating them) or the pharaoh of Mose's story (manipulating someone isn't hating them). In fact, please cite anything in the Bible where God expresses hate for a specific human being. Romans 1:20 certainly doesn't explain anything about God hating any single human being.

If you have a Bible, seek out this information for yourself. You have been provided enough citations that should be able to help you begin your search.If you are not concerned enough to investigate how God hates unbelievers, it is of little concern to us. Our response to you was not for your benefit but it was for others who seek for truth and happen to read the arguments presented on this thread about atheists.

You are not voicing your contempt towards us but you are attacking a logical system of reasoning about God. If you have an opinion on what we say, voice how you differ. Why should we waste our 15 minutes citing verses in the Bible that you do not consider important? Here is what the Apostle Paul said about great authors like you:

(2Thes:211): And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
12: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

It is enough that people who read this post will know that you are ignorant of the things in the Bible. If you choose not to read the Bible, there is no great sin in that but to make conclusions like there are no self-evident truths and no God based on the Bible, is intellectually dishonest. That is what you are, dishonest. You are a RABD and all can see your true colors especially from behind.

You seem to have the opinion that you can be, do anything or say anything and God will still love you. That would be part of your delusion. It is part of your delusion that you resist reasoning if it does not come from your fellow trolls. It is part of that heart hardening thing.

Without any ascribed code of law, the errors in your reasoning are visible to all who read these threads. Perhaps, those who are true scholars will recognize your dog dung as more B.S. The characteristics of a professional author do not translate to the professional that really knows how to read and write.

How dare you ask another person to defend their point of view when you make no attempt to support any thesis statements you make! My, my, what a fool you appear to be.

 

[wmrs2]

We should have known-- and so should the rest of us!

We don't bother to refute the proclamations of people who are off their meds. It only makes them more uncomfortable, and makes them think they don't need their meds.

You are right, though-- it is a funny troll! That's why i have been poking it, I don't know about anyone else...

From your statements, it is obvious that you are the leader of the pack of RABD. Speaking of meds, there is a very interesting thread on the forum about depression and other mental disorders. You are aware that many of your friends are posting there and admit they are in need of medication. It is to their credit that they seek medication to help them cope with life. It makes one wonder how they feel about medication and if they appreciate your contempt for what they feel they must do? Is your pack going to be thinning out as you attack every person that is on meds?

Having worked in the mental health profession, it is clear to me that any woman/man/it or whatever you are that beats her husband just to get off is very confused about life. Your confusion about life values come through as an oppositional defiant disorder. Your sexual dysfunction is a symptom of a teenage conduct disorder. Your projections you make about others reminds us of the attack of a sick woman going harshly through the change of life. Now, who needs the meds?

We recommend that you spend some time on the thread about depression and personality disorders. It is a good thread and it will do you good. Take the whole pack with you as birds of a feather flock together we are told. Now, go home and beat your husband.

 

[BentSecrets]

BentSecrets...I had, and announced high praise, for your statement that the free market is not an imposed system, but one arising from human individual freedom.

I also acknowledge and applaud your analogy, of both the religious right and the left, as being faith based, as indeed they are, with one accepting that title, the other not.

Let me offer you a third alternative, one which, like the free market, also arises from human individual freedom. Objective morality.

As with the market place, which reflects human freedom and choice, objective morality rejects faith and seeks for moral and objective truths in human actions.

It is nothing new, it has been the province of Philosophy forever, seeking a means to identify an ethical code for human behavior.

Here is a rational basis: without sentient human life, there is no concept of ethics or morals, non sentient animals do not consider whether to eat their cubs, it is the way of nature.

Sentient humans began to understand the nature of human actions by learning the 'absolute' truths of reality. You don't put your hand in fire, you don't put your face under water. Those things are not beneficial to human life; and they didn't need rocket science to figure that out.

Your issue, and it seems to be a highly emotional one, is abortion, the pre meditated act to halt the growth of the fetus.

You, and many others, claim it is your 'right' to dispose of this fetus, basically for any reason you, 'choose'.

I oppose that on intellectual grounds; I am an atheist and my morality is not faith based, it has a firm foundation, an absolute foundation, gained through an understanding of reality.

I am not going to attempt to persuade or influence you to reject faith and welcome reason, that is a choice only you can make.

Since you have shown a proclivity towards rational thinking, as I mentioned earlier, I have hope that you will re examine your fundamental moral premises and deal with reality in a rational manner.

Amicus...

My moral premises are quite firm, and rooted solely in the rational pursuit of what is true, no matter what that is.

That said, a fertilized egg, a blastocyst, a zygote, even a fetus, *IS NOT* a human being. A human being has a functioning brain, and the reason he has rights *at all* is a function of the fact that he is a being capable of REASON and that his prospering requires that he use that reason to the best of his capability.

A fertilized egg has ZERO capacity to Reason.

A Blastocyst has ZERO capacity to Reason.

A Zygote has ZERO capacity to Reason.

A Fetus has ZERO capacity to Reason.

An *Infant* has LIMITED capacity for Reason, though his is untrained and undeveloped, hence he is the property of his parents, held in trust *for himself* for the time when he comes into a full measure of his own reason.

Any argument that a Human Being is created at the moment of conception is rooted solely on faith in abject rejection of scientific measurement or philosophical consideration whatsoever.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Oh, wrmie, dear-- I don't attack anyone who is on their meds-- but I know how irrational people can sometimes be when they are off their meds. You are a good example. Look at you, scattering random accusations hither and yon! Solemnly diagnosing disorders you've obviously grabbed off of google! Calling yourself "we"!

And evidently you think the people you harangue are where you are... "go home and beat your husband" you say. Where do you suppose I might be? Inside your computer's glowing screen?

 

[sr71plt]

I'm pretty sure wmrs2 is busy going through a concordance looking for the connection of God and hate--and not finding much of anything to post about.

 

[sr71plt]

If you have a Bible, seek out this information for yourself.

I have a whole stack of Bibles and a larger stack of Bible commentaries--all sitting on the floor next to me, as I'm in the midst of writing a commissioned Bible study--and I find no references to God hating any human being in the Bible. God used a whole lot of weak people for God's purposes, but I find no reference to God hating those people. Obviously you haven't either, or you would cite direct references to God hating human beings--which you haven't done.

My biggest problem with what you post here is the danger that readers mistake you for an actual Christian.

 

[TheeGoatPig]

Unreadable wall of text

Why did you come here in the first place? What are you still doing coming back? Don't you have anything better to do with your time?

No, I don't have anything better to do with my time. But at least I can fess up to the fact that I am indeed wasting my time.

 

[amicus]

BentSecrets:

Any argument that a Human Being is created at the moment of conception is rooted solely on faith in abject rejection of scientific measurement or philosophical consideration whatsoever..."

~~~

Well...the old saying...'you can lead a horse to water...', applies to you as well.

Since I have posited that I have no faith and that my stand is science based and you simply confront that...there really is no place for this conversation to go.

regards...


amicus...

 

[Stella_Omega]

Simply saying "Science says so" is a faith-based statement that disregards the most basic principle of science discussion; Empiricism. Show your proofs, name your citations.

I have never seen you make a statement that defines any basis for your thought; "It is self-evident that..." is one of the most unscientific phrases in the English language.