Atheist!

[Liar]

People who love liberty should not tolerate the erosion of their national philosophy, which has a thesis statement to oppose atheistic USSR: In God We Trust.

Wasn't that a propagandistic post construction? Political manipulation to create a bogeyman in order to control a largely Christian constituency.

 

[oggbashan]

This statement comes to us at a perfect time. It enables us to view exactly what I have been saying. A world view of a world without God would work to eliminate Unalienable Rights. According to oggbashan he thinks the Declaration of Independence has a lot to answer for. Many an evil despot has sought to replace our unalienable rights with a law of their own. Americans have always been able to defeat this perverted logic, but at a great cost of life.

Self-evident is a nonsense to every despot and enemy of democracy. That is what is really being said here.

Your logic is as flawed here as it has been throughout this thread. I was referring to the emphasis it gave to self-evident which is a rhetorical term, not a term of logic.

The Declaration of Independence was an attempt to justify rebellion. In some senses it was completely unnecessary because the UK had already stated that it was in a state of war, and had in fact been at war with the Thirteen Colonies for over a year. It is ironic that some of the Thirteen Colonies' Declaration of Independence was based on the Bill of Rights from England's Glorious Revolution of 1688 that justified deposing a King and replacing him with William and Mary - totally unconstitutional - but it worked.

Both the Bill of Rights, the Declaration of Independence and the much earlier Magna Carta were successful attempts to justify the unjustifiable - revolution against the constitutional government of the time. As such, they are masterpieces of rhetoric and NOT examplars of logic.

As James Clavell put it in his novel Shogun:

"Nothing justifies rebellion."

"Unless you win."

Og

 

[wmrs2]

Wasn't that a propagandistic post construction? Political manipulation to create a bogeyman in order to control a largely Christian constituency.

No it was not. People simply need to see there are two points of view. You have something against a Christian constituency?

 

[wmrs2]

Your logic is as flawed here as it has been throughout this thread. I was referring to the emphasis it gave to self-evident which is a rhetorical term, not a term of logic.

The Declaration of Independence was an attempt to justify rebellion. In some senses it was completely unnecessary because the UK had already stated that it was in a state of war, and had in fact been at war with the Thirteen Colonies for over a year. It is ironic that some of the Thirteen Colonies' Declaration of Independence was based on the Bill of Rights from England's Glorious Revolution of 1688 that justified deposing a King and replacing him with William and Mary - totally unconstitutional - but it worked.

Both the Bill of Rights, the Declaration of Independence and the much earlier Magna Carta were successful attempts to justify the unjustifiable - revolution against the constitutional government of the time. As such, they are masterpieces of rhetoric and NOT examplars of logic.

As James Clavell put it in his novel Shogun:

"Nothing justifies rebellion."

"Unless you win."

Og

I see no lesson in logic here. You failed to point out how my logic was flawed. Should we throw out the Bill of Rights and the Constitution of the USA? I don't want to put words in your mouth so I ask you, do you not like these documents?

 

[wmrs2]

I always say there's a big difference between lower-case "truth" which means "a statement that agrees with reality and is verifiable by facts"

and Truth with a capital "T" which means "That which I will believe no matter what the facts are," often synomymous with "religion."

And you have to prove god exists, not the other way around.

Why would anybody have to prove God exist? Over 90% of the people are satisfied with what they think about God's existence. many are non religious. Only those who are threatened by God's existence.bother to assert that God does not exist. Some atheist never ask this question.

 

[Liar]

No it was not. People simply need to see there are two points of view. You have something against a Christian constituency?

No. I have something against politicians manipulating their constituency with propaganda.

Which it was, to start invoking God everywehwre and everywhere. It was a propaganda tool, creating an antithesis in order to make Christian Americans fear the "godless" Russians (most of whom were in fact orthodox christians, but hey, let's not mention that part).

 

[Liar]

Why would anybody have to prove God exist? Over 90% of the people are satisfied with what they think about God's existence. many are non religious. Only those who are threatened by God's existence.bother to assert that God does not exist. Some atheist never ask this question.

You don't have to prove that God exists. Unless you start doing things that affects me, based on the assumption that God exists.

 

[sadangel]

Your nurse will be along with your rubber spoon, in just a few more minutes.

<snerk> Stella. I really like you!

 

[fieryjen]

Why would anybody have to prove God exist? Over 90% of the people are satisfied with what they think about God's existence. many are non religious. Only those who are threatened by God's existence.bother to assert that God does not exist. Some atheist never ask this question.

Logic by majority. Novel concept you got there.

You look almost cute enough to distract from your idiocy when you're defending that upside down little world in your head. And no, that's not an insult, that's an absolute truth and 90% of the people here are satisfied thinking that about you.

 

[sr71plt]

From your world view, should every American repudiate the Constitution and the Bill of Rights? See, this discussion is about the importance of one's world view and your world view does mean something. People who love liberty should not tolerate the erosion of their national philosophy, which has a thesis statement to oppose atheistic USSR: In God We Trust. I like it. Let's keep it.

Umm, no. I believe in strict separation of church and state though (actually from the side of the state keeping its mitts off my religion and I in return won't try to force my religion on other Americans). I'm pretty sure I'm right there with Thomas Jefferson and George Washington and James Madison and James Monroe and John Adams and Patrick Henry on that one.

 

[sr71plt]

Wasn't that a propagandistic post construction? Political manipulation to create a bogeyman in order to control a largely Christian constituency.

Considerably. And I cringe and hear a rumble of displeasure from Monticello Mountain every time I hear it spoken.

 

[jomar]

This is much better jomar as you did not call me a single name. But you did challenge my ideas, which is good. Thank you.

I do not accept that the existence of God is based on faith. I do not know who does this either. God exist whether people have faith in him or not.Therefore, no signs based on faith are meaningful in this argument. ...

You're welcome. But that pretty much shuts off any further discussion, doesn't it.

I am not interested in rephrasing anything.

The quote below is what I was referring to that you are not interested in rephrasing. I just find it ironic in light of the conversation.

Do you think God is worried about the atheist that does not believe God is? No way. It's a take it or leave it deal. If you want to believe in nothing and have no proof of nothing, live that way but that is not the logical way to live nor is it intellectually acceptable.

I would like to be able to express my thoughts better. I am improving but am not doing too bad for a sixth grade education. I have been known to read some. That is where most of my ideas come. I hope you did not find any of this insulting. That would not be my intent.

Taking you at your word, one doesn't have to be educated to be smart. No hard feelings whatsoever.

 

[Stella_Omega]

You don't have to prove that God exists. Unless you start doing things that affects me, based on the assumption that God exists.

My point was logical; if one makes an extraordinary claim, one must prove that claim. The existence of a bearded Skydaddy is pretty extraordinary.

I don't make the claim god doesn't exist; I reject your claim that a god does exist.


Where's a picture of this critter, Fieryjen? I'll forgive a lot of dumb, if it comes in a cute package.

 

[sr71plt]

My point was logical; if one makes an extraordinary claim, one must prove that claim. The existence of a bearded Skydaddy is pretty extraordinary.

I don't make the claim god doesn't exist; I reject your claim that a god does exist.

I'm with Liar on this one. I don't have to prove there is a God to you or anyone else for me to believe in one, I don't think--unless I'm proselytizing you and can only win you over with "proof" you recognize as such. I clearly see belief in a God as faith based that doesn't require proof to you in any terms.

I don't accept you evangelizing me in the name of atheism any more than I accept mwrs2 evangelizing you in his/her/its concept of Christianity.

 

[fieryjen]

My point was logical; if one makes an extraordinary claim, one must prove that claim. The existence of a bearded Skydaddy is pretty extraordinary.

I don't make the claim god doesn't exist; I reject your claim that a god does exist.


Where's a picture of this critter, Fieryjen? I'll forgive a lot of dumb, if it comes in a cute package.

Whoops. I should have expressed myself better. I meant in the sense of looking at him being so dumb it's almost cute.

I'll forgive a lot of dumb too under certain circumstances, but I draw the line a good deal higher than logical philosopher dude here could reach even if he were a pole vaulting champion.

 

[wmrs2]

Umm, no. I believe in strict separation of church and state though (actually from the side of the state keeping its mitts off my religion and I in return won't try to force my religion on other Americans). I'm pretty sure I'm right there with Thomas Jefferson and George Washington and James Madison and James Monroe and John Adams and Patrick Henry on that one.

My. my. is somebody trying to force their religion on you? I certainly agree that you should cling to your own religion. What I like to do is to clarify religious positions and allow persons to decide. It is good to voice your opinion on forums like this one, where everyone from the left really tolerates diversity of thought.

 

[sr71plt]

My. my. is somebody trying to force their religion on you?

Not since it looked like 3113 was headed in that direction. My response to Stella was because of what she said YOU had to do. (Do try to keep up.)

 

[wmrs2]

No. I have something against politicians manipulating their constituency with propaganda.

Which it was, to start invoking God everywehwre and everywhere. It was a propaganda tool, creating an antithesis in order to make Christian Americans fear the "godless" Russians (most of whom were in fact orthodox christians, but hey, let's not mention that part).

Come out, come out, wherever you are! I have been waiting on you too. You have finally shown your true colors. You prefer the propaganda of the Russians, do you, to the propaganda of the Christians in America?

Look! I am just one person and according the score keeper, I have the whole forum against me. What in the hell are you people so scared of? Stand up and reason like men. Don't stoop to the level or communist propaganda. It does not work too well in America.

 

[wmrs2]

You don't have to prove that God exists. Unless you start doing things that affects me, based on the assumption that God exists.

O key, if it will make you feel safer and ease your fears, I will not allow my religion to upset your premises for living.

 

[Guest]

I will not allow your religion to upset my premise for living.

 

[wmrs2]

Logic by majority. Novel concept you got there.

You look almost cute enough to distract from your idiocy when you're defending that upside down little world in your head. And no, that's not an insult, that's an absolute truth and 90% of the people here are satisfied thinking that about you.

Well, I have already been told that 90% of this forum disagrees with me even if 90% of the Americans agree with me. I know you are thinking that most Americans are stupid anyway. I could do a lot of work with that idiocy, to use your word and gentle spirit.

 

[Guest]

Well, I have already been told that 90% of this forum disagrees with me even if 90% of the Americans agree with me. I know you are thinking that most Americans are stupid anyway. I could do a lot of work with that idiocy, to use your word and gentle spirit.

Sources, please?

90% of Americans agree?

You're slinging bullshit.

 

[wmrs2]

Considerably. And I cringe and hear a rumble of displeasure from Monticello Mountain every time I hear it spoken.

Good logic. That is exactly what the atheist in the old USSR used to think. Although there are no good examples of the state forcing religion on anybody in the USA, go ahead and cringe and live in fear of these terrible religious people in America.

 

[Guest]

Again, I repeat - sources?

This is a Authors' Hangout forum.

If you can't back up your statements with documented facts we're not all that interested.

 

[Stella_Omega]

You will find some excellent arguments, wms2, at The craigslist atheism forum.
If what you want is agreement with all of your inane pronunciations, you can try the religion forum. You will have to register an account.

meanwhile, have some safe-for-work porn!