Intelligent people cannot be 'believers'

[amicus]

Just heard that phrase on a cable news channel in a debate about religion in government.

The phrase ended by saying, "Well I am smart and intelligent and I am a believer..." Both interviewer and interviewee hastened to qualify themselves as believers in God.

Over the years, with Television Evangelists being defrocked in public, the Catholic Priests ongoing scandal, the Secular Humanists basically avoiding religion and the recent Liberal fear of Fundamnental Christians seeking a larger role in Government and education...something is happening...

Perhaps for the first time in world history, outside Marxism, there truly is a debate about the function of 'faith', religion, in society.

Perhaps the division of thought on the middle east and Islam as compared to Christianity also plays a role.

Just read part of the Joe Wordsworth thread on Wicca et al and had the thought of just how silly religion really is in the 21st century.

I would puport that no one who claims to be an 'intellectual' with reason, truth and logic as the basis of that claim, can at the same time embrace a faith based on belief.

The two are mutually exclusive and diamtrically opposed. You can be one or the other, but not both at the same time.

There is no God.

As they say on West Wing, "What's next?"

 

[Couture]

The concept of an afterlife and an answer for all the bad things that go on in the world is nice.

And while I do think it is possible for an intelligent and truly curious person to believe, I think it is very hard for them to believe very well.

They doubt. They must doubt. And no matter how much they try to believe, forcing themselves through some Pythagorian construct; it is at its heart . . . superstition.

 

[minsue]

What's the matter, Amicus? Was there not quite enough vitriol on the pagan threads for you that you had to start this one?

 

[bearlee]

Just read part of the Joe Wordsworth thread on Wicca et al and had the thought of just how silly religion really is in the 21st century.

I would puport that no one who claims to be an 'intellectual' with reason, truth and logic as the basis of that claim, can at the same time embrace a faith based on belief.

The two are mutually exclusive and diamtrically opposed. You can be one or the other, but not both at the same time.

There is no God.

As they say on West Wing, "What's next?"

Not sure what's next but these are statements of belief(faith if you want). Serious note, I don't agree with you but it doesn't matter. There's no answer for everyone. People of faith believe for that reason alone. It's a neverending debate but again, I don't believe the two are mutually exclusive. Interesting topic I suppose that could go on and on and cover hundreds of pages here and the final answer is: Whatever anyone believes to be true is true, whether it's arrived at intellectually through reason and logic, faith or a combination of those.

 

[Lucifer_Carroll]

What's the matter, Amicus? Was there not quite enough vitriol on the pagan threads for you that you had to start this one?

Pipe down Goose, I want to see ami and Joe's lover's spat. It should be quite a bit of fun.

 

[Couture]

Pipe down Goose, I want to see ami and Joe's lover's spat. It should be quite a bit of fun.

And answer the age old question of what happens when an immovable object meets an immovable object.

 

[Edward Teach]

Everyone is a believer.

 

[minsue]

Pipe down Goose, I want to see ami and Joe's lover's spat. It should be quite a bit of fun.

*shaking head*

Far be it from me to get in the way of a good time.

Carry on.

 

[jtmalone70]

**********

 

[amicus]

"Vitriol" Caustic...hmmm, not a word I often use, but suitable, I suppose.

I think perhaps it was because of the 'vitriol' in that thread that I mentioned it.

When matters of import are decided on faith and belief, and not reason and reality, it often leads to insoluable differences and thus to murder and mayhem.

and...'bearlee' "...Whatever anyone believes to be true is true, whether it's arrived at intellectually through reason and logic, faith or a combination of those...."

you are so wrong my friend, that I will not even begin a comment, but thank you for your input.

Also on the news this evening, a complaint that many chain stores across the nation have dropped, "Merry Christmas" as an advertising logo and have switched to Seasons Greetings and Happy Holidays as a replacement.

The reason given, "In a mutli-cultured society such as ours we do not wish to offend non Christians..."

Goodbye yellow brick road and Santa Clause...and oh yes, it has become standard practice that children are not permitted to sit on Santa's lap anymore, but rather sit next to 'Santa' as they verbalize their wish lists...

sighs....thanks Bob Dylan, "The times they are a'changin'..."


amicus the intolerable...

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

Not going to happen. Nothing to be gained in arguing with him, we already know this.

And I'd rather it wasn't referred to as "lover's spat" or whatever. It sort of trivializes and condescends all parties.

 

[amicus]

Edward Teach and JTMalone....


"Everyone is a believer..."


"...You seem to state that as an empirical fact.
My guess is, it's little more than another faith-based opinion."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


No, to both of you...but...we have been down this path before.

Suffice it to say that there is an 'objective reality' and that the mind of man can comprehend existence without using the emotional faith based ignorance of blind acceptance.


amicus...

 

[Couture]

Not going to happen. Nothing to be gained in arguing with him, we already know this.

And I'd rather it wasn't referred to as "lover's spat" or whatever. It sort of trivializes and condescends all parties.

You are such a homophobe, it is unbelievable.

 

[amicus]

Perhaps Joe has acquired the affliction by mutual association, that of being unable to make an absolute statement concerning anything....although he came close with that last statement.

Somehow, Joe, they innately know that your basic position of requiring logic and reason in your presentations will eventually lead you down the path of objective reality, wherein I reside.

They are just chainpulling....get over it...

 

[thebullet]

Amicus said:
I would puport that no one who claims to be an 'intellectual' with reason, truth and logic as the basis of that claim, can at the same time embrace a faith based on belief.

My Fuckin' God, Amicus! Are you and I going to find something to agree on? It must be time for the Rapture!

Although I'm not ready to claim that ALL people of faith are fuckin' idiots, I will willingly agree that about 30% of the American people qualify as either idiots or sheep.

A recent poll showed that 30% of Americans believe in the Rapture. They believe that Christ will return in our lifetime. They believe that when that happens, all people who believe in this incredible line of bullshit will immediately soar into heaven (without their clothes, so at least heaven might be fun). They will sit in heaven and watch all those evil non-believers be accosted by plagues of locusts and frogs and whatever other obnoxious shit that Jesus Christ can think to do to us sinners. (Geez, as I remember reading the Bible, Christ was nicer than that. But what the fuck do I know?)

This is a major reason that the Bush Administration doesn't give a damn about the environment. They actually believe that

A) God will provide, as in the 'loaves and fishes' story - we don't have to conserve, we don't have to limit the population, because whatever we need, God will provide. Actually I'm looking forward to it if God provides a cure for gout.
-and-
B) The total destruction of the environment will mark the beginning of the Rapture. We should abuse the environment as much as possible to hurry the beginning of the Rapture.

I'm not making this up! During the Reagon Administration, James Watt, the Secretary of the Interior, testified in front of the U S Senate that he is looking forward to the destruction of every tree, since that will signal the return of Jesus Christ.

And now wackos like Watt run every phase of American goverment. The war in Iraq was undertaken at least in part to fullfill the proficy about fighting the evil empire on the Euphrates River. And the unconditional support of Israel given by this administration (and by neo-cons and fundamentalist Christian fantatics) is also in response to this alleged proficy.

The amusing part of this (if there is one) is that after all this support for Israel, once the Rapture begins, all of those damn Jews in Israel will be destroyed unless they already haven't accepted the Crazed Jesus Christ as their personal savior.

Is this a great country or what???

 

[BlackShanglan]

"There is no God."

You seem to state that as an empirical fact.
My guess is, it's little more than another faith-based opinion.

I agree. The most that can be said is that there is an absence of conclusive evidence. Belief and disbelief make about as much sense. In the absence of measurable data, gut instinct is all any of us have.

Shanglan

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

Originally posted by Couture
You are such a homophobe, it is unbelievable.

... I just don't want to be brought up here in a trivial manner, nobody wants their opinions trivialized--even if argued with. So, you want to just pitch out that I'm a "homophobe"?

Fuck you.

 

[Couture]

I've never seen anyone get up in arms for being in a lovers spat with another man, who you've never met and is probably hundreds of miles away.

 

[Edward Teach]

Edward Teach and JTMalone....


"Everyone is a believer..."


"...You seem to state that as an empirical fact.
My guess is, it's little more than another faith-based opinion."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


No, to both of you...but...we have been down this path before.

Suffice it to say that there is an 'objective reality' and that the mind of man can comprehend existence without using the emotional faith based ignorance of blind acceptance.


amicus...

Are you alive Ami or do you simply believe you are alive?

LOL

 

[minsue]

I've never seen anyone get up in arms for being in a lovers spat with another man, who you've never met and is probably hundreds of miles away.

In this particular case, Couture, he's right. It would be condescending whether the participants were of the same sex or not. (though the fact that Joe and Amicus are both raging founts of intolerance on the topic does make it hard not to crack a smile.)

 

[amicus]

BlackShanglan...

you said...."...The most that can be said is that there is an absence of conclusive evidence...."


A telling point my friend. Consider: A rational person discovering a lack of conclusive evidence to support a theory, must put the concept aside until such rational, provable evidence is discovered.

As a caveat I would add: That if the theory in question contradicts any other 'known' truth, then the theory must be dismissed out of hand.

As all forms of religion contradict reality, then all forms of religion and the basic assumptions therein, must be dismissed.

You will sleep better knowing there is no God to swoop down and remove your genitalia just because you fondled.

amicus...

(you may smile...I will never know....)

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

Originally posted by Couture
I've never seen anyone get up in arms for being in a lovers spat with another man, who you've never met and is probably hundreds of miles away.

I'm sure you haven't.... what you have seen is someone ask that his potential arguing with someone else, especially someone as opinionated as amicus, not be regarded as a "spat" because he feels it sort of condescends the endeavor entirely. And then get labeled a "homophobe" for it.

 

[Edward Teach]

I'm not a homophobe, I like it when Ami flirts with me. Hell, I think I may be getting hard just thinking about it.

Ed

 

[Lucifer_Carroll]

Are you alive Ami or do you simply believe you are alive?

LOL

That debate is actually a fun one. I used to love that one before Matrix made it old hat. Is reality real or just an illusion? In what ways can we prove that existence does in fact exist beyond all shadows of doubt? Is everything possible, nothing possible? Stoner philosophy without the weed. Sigh, you're making me all nostalgic.

 

[amicus]

Edward Teach...


"I am, therefore I think..."

Descartes got it backwards



amicussable...