774 replies to this topic

[platypus]

Wtf?!?!? I didn't write/type/say any of this stuff!!!!! Someone has falsely and fraudulently quoted me here some how. These statements were not made by me!

You seem to think it's more ok to bash atheists than other groups of people - why is that? Also, don't write bigoted things and then later say that you were not "serious" as such behaviour makes it impossible to take your posts seriously.

[mikeinnaples]

Drus, I am not trying to bait you or fight with you, but I want you to understand that if you were to replace 'atheists' in some of your comments with 'jews','blacks',etc. and repeat them, most people would think you were racist or anti-semetic ...and rightfully so.

It was as if you said: Anyhow, I stand by my opinion that judaism may be a mild form of sociopathy, which is not healthy, and which in turn may lend credence to the possibility that jews may at least have serious issues with both the expression and acceptance of selfless love (selfless love is at the heart of Christian philosophy btw). Judging from everything i've ever read and/or know about jews, an ideology that is so completely materialist and solipsist in nature will naturally have problems reconciling itself with Love, this is undeniable.



Or as if you'd said: Anyhow, I stand by my opinion that blacks have a mild form of sociopathy, which is not healthy, and which in turn may lend credence to the possibility that blacks may at least have serious issues with both the expression and acceptance of selfless love (selfless love is at the heart of White philosophy btw). Judging from everything i've ever read and/or know about blacks, a race that is so completely materialist and solipsist in nature will naturally have problems reconciling itself with Love, this is undeniable.

Wtf?!?!? I didn't write/type/say any of this stuff!!!!! Someone has falsely and fraudulently quoted me here some how. These statements were not made by me!

Hopefully now you can see my point. I took out the word 'atheist' in your statements and switched it out with blacks and jews. I did it to make a point about your comments. Pretty freaking offensive and bigoted isnt it? You seem to think it is abhorable to direct statements like that towards blacks or jews, but it is perfectly ok to direct them towards atheists.

You are directing bigoted and hateful comments towards a group of people that are different than you. It doesnt matter if that group of people is black, jewish, or atheist. This isn't very christian or buddhist like behavior. This also is not an example of love towards your fellow human.

Edited by Shannon Vyff, 26 October 2011 - 05:02 PM.

[mikeinnaples]

What a bad experience. I have had some bad times as well, just responded differently.

I responded to your previous post and questions. Just read it again and perhaps you will understand it. I don’t know you but assumed you would know what I was talking about when comparing human love and how it is for a theist like me to love and be loved by God.

Not all people are capable or do love. That is not silly and indeed is sad. Examples are endless. I do not find it suprising to find some people do not love each other or God.

Actually it was a wonderful and eye opening experience. I finally lifted the veil of belief in false gods and saw reality for the first time. It taught me a much wider and larger respect for life, in all form. I value every day I have. Food tastes better, the sun is brighter, love is warmer, and everything is so much more real. I suppose after my experiences, I could just as easily say that people that believe in gods are incapable of real love for thier fellow humans because they divert so much of it towards superstitious beliefs and fairy tales instead of towards other people and life in general ...but that would just be silly of me, now wouldnt it?

[mikeinnaples]

Wtf?!?!? I didn't write/type/say any of this stuff!!!!! Someone has falsely and fraudulently quoted me here some how. These statements were not made by me!

You seem to think it's more ok to bash atheists than other groups of people - why is that? Also, don't write bigoted things and then later say that you were not "serious" as such behaviour makes it impossible to take your posts seriously.

I know you noted his reaction when I took his very words and replace atheist with black and jewish and repeated it. I find it sad that some people only take issue with deplorable behavior towards our fellow humans when it it socially inacceptable to behave that way. Sadly this sort of thing is common and I see it every day in society. What happened to simply not behaving or acting a certain way -because it is wrong-?

[drus]

Mike, delete your post(s) with the fraudulent quotes. I did not say those things.

[mikeinnaples]

Mike, delete your post(s) with the fraudulent quotes. I did not say those things.

I know you didnt say those things about those two groups and I made it very clear that you didnt, but you absolutely did about atheists. I even point blank said that I switched out the word atheist with black and jewish (completely in context) to make a point that your comments were bigoted and hateful. I will be happy to delete my posts if you remove the bigoted remarks you made in the first place towards atheists. Fair?

Here are your original words:

Anyhow, I stand by my opinion that atheism may be a mild form of sociopathy, which is not healthy, and which in turn may lend credence to the possibility that atheists may at least have serious issues with both the expression and acceptance of selfless love (selfless love is at the heart of Christian philosophy btw). Judging from everything i've ever read and/or know about atheism, an ideology that is so completely materialist and solipsist in nature will naturally have problems reconciling itself with Love, this is undeniable.

Anyways, it looks like I drove my point home regarding your hypocrisy.


Edit: Actually, I would be unable to remove them myself anyways because of the changes in the forum. Perhaps we should ask a moderator to remove your bigoted statements and my examples showing you why they are bigoted using your very own words. Of course, I am not sure it is entirely fair to remove any of our comments because they are perfectly in context with this forum subject... but I am game either way.

Edited by mikeinnaples, 25 October 2011 - 12:44 PM.

[mikeinnaples]

On a side note, religious AND political discussions can get quite heated. We need to keep that in mind going forward because the discussion can be enlightening regardless of your race, religion, or culture. We need to strive to keep hateful comments and generalizations out of posts ESPECIALLY in these type of discussions and instead strive for understanding and respect. I too have been guilty of it in the past, so don't think I am specifically pointing fingers. Nobody is infallible, especially not me.

[drus]

Mike, i didn't deliberately, falsely, and slanderously misquote you (change the very words you typed and then try to pass them off as yours) on an open public forum. I made a generalized statement about an idea, not a person or a race of people, and i even openly acknowledged i may be wrong. There is a world of difference between what you did and what i did. Also, atheism is a choice, there is a fundamental difference between a person's racial ethnicity (something they cannot control, which is naturally a beautiful and good thing) and the ideology/philosophy they choose to live by (something they can control and is open to debate). You and platypus don't seem to have a problem bashing religious people and their beliefs, but the minute someone starts raising reasonable and intelligent arguments against atheism/materialism, you guys start yelling 'bigot'. I have not said anything that could be interpreted as being any worse than what you guys throw at believers.

[drus]

Wtf?!?!? I didn't write/type/say any of this stuff!!!!! Someone has falsely and fraudulently quoted me here some how. These statements were not made by me!

You seem to think it's more ok to bash atheists than other groups of people - why is that? Also, don't write bigoted things and then later say that you were not "serious" as such behaviour makes it impossible to take your posts seriously.

I don't think it's okay to bash any particular group of 'people', nor have i done that, i'm simply disagreeing with an idea. I've even acknowledged i may be wrong, you won't even do that much. You seem to think it's okay to bash (religious) people who aren't atheist - why is that? I frankly don't care whether you take my posts seriously or not. My comments are not bigoted, you need to re-read my posts, and this time do it with your eyes open...but then i guess it's okay for your buddy to start rewriting my posts for me huh? geeezus H

[mikeinnaples]

Mike, i didn't deliberately, falsely, and slanderously misquote you (change the very words you typed and then try to pass them off as yours) on an open public forum. I made a generalized statement about an idea, not a person or a race of people, and i even openly acknowledged i may be wrong. There is a world of difference between what you did and what i did. Also, atheism is a choice, there is a fundamental difference between a person's racial ethnicity (something they cannot control, which is naturally a beautiful and good thing) and the ideology/philosophy they choose to live by (something they can control and is open to debate). You and platypus don't seem to have a problem bashing religious people and their beliefs, but the minute someone starts raising reasonable and intelligent arguments against atheism/materialism, you guys start yelling 'bigot'. I have not said anything that could be interpreted as being any worse than what you guys throw at believers.

I absolutely did NOT deliberately, falsely, or slanderously misquote you. I made it perfectly clear that I switched the word atheist out with another words to make a point several times, so you saying that I tried to pass them off as what you said is more than a little silly. I can quote myself each and every time I did so if you like and repost for you since you seemed to miss it several times. Not to worry though, I doubt anyone else following this discussion missed it, so I wouldnt be to concerned about people thinking you are a racist anti-semite.

So let me get this straight, your are saying that it is not ok to persecute someone for thier race but it is ok to persecute someone for their ideology/philosophy? So you feel like it is ok to make anti-semetic, anti-muslim, anti-atheistic, ect. comments and/or treat people differently because of this? Sorry, but I have to disagree with you 100%. There is nothing morally grounded or 'right' about making broad sweeping generalizations against a group of people. As a christian and more importantly, someone who claims to have buddhist philosophy, you should know this already.

You do raise an interesting point though about some of the things I have said. I will have to reflect upon that a bit. I don't believe I am biased towards any religion and I dont treat people differently because of it. I certainly dont believe that <insert random religion> practitioners are crazy or insane or sociopathic, though I reserve the right to make those sort of comments about some extremist/radical elements in a few religions. I suppose when I say something like people are delusional for believing in mythical creatures and false gods, you may have a valid point. I just cant wrap my head around this completely. Is it bigoted to make that comment about everyone that believes in mythological creatures or is it only bigoted if I direct it towards a singular group of people with those beliefs? Hmm...

[mikeinnaples]

but then i guess it's okay for your buddy to start rewriting my posts for me huh? geeezus H

tsk.... tsk.

1. I didnt rewrite your post. I used your post as an example of why I felt it was bigoted. I clearly made that evident, so stop crying wolf.

2. Don't assume we are buddies just because we share common ground regarding your comments. That is silly.

Edited by mikeinnaples, 25 October 2011 - 01:53 PM.

[mikeinnaples]

I don't think it's okay to bash any particular group of 'people', nor have i done that, i'm simply disagreeing with an idea.

Actually you absolutely HAVE done that. I took offense to it when you did and stated so from the beginning. You aren't disagreeing with an idea when you call an entire group of people sociopaths for thier beliefs. Why do you keep trying to justify your comments?


This is your comment 100% in its original form.

Anyhow, I stand by my opinion that atheism may be a mild form of sociopathy, which is not healthy, and which in turn may lend credence to the possibility that atheists may at least have serious issues with both the expression and acceptance of selfless love (selfless love is at the heart of Christian philosophy btw). Judging from everything i've ever read and/or know about atheism, an ideology that is so completely materialist and solipsist in nature will naturally have problems reconciling itself with Love, this is undeniable.

Why is it morally ok to direct it at atheists, but the second I substitute atheism for the jewish religion, you get offended and up in arms about it. How can you morally justify that it is bigoted if directed at jews but is not bigoted if directed towards atheists. This my friend is hypocrisy and wrong, and you should damn well know it given the beliefs you profess to have.

I mean hell, I KNOW it and I am an evil, misguided soul that is incapable of love and is sociopathic because I dont believe in your god. Shouldn't you know it too?

Edited by mikeinnaples, 25 October 2011 - 02:04 PM.

[mikeinnaples]

I suspect we should probably agree to disagree at this point because we went from useful and interesting discussion to pointless bickering back and forth that is drawing away from the spirit of the topic. Apologies all around for participating in derailing the thread.

[drus]

Mike, i didn't deliberately, falsely, and slanderously misquote you (change the very words you typed and then try to pass them off as yours) on an open public forum. I made a generalized statement about an idea, not a person or a race of people, and i even openly acknowledged i may be wrong. There is a world of difference between what you did and what i did. Also, atheism is a choice, there is a fundamental difference between a person's racial ethnicity (something they cannot control, which is naturally a beautiful and good thing) and the ideology/philosophy they choose to live by (something they can control and is open to debate). You and platypus don't seem to have a problem bashing religious people and their beliefs, but the minute someone starts raising reasonable and intelligent arguments against atheism/materialism, you guys start yelling 'bigot'. I have not said anything that could be interpreted as being any worse than what you guys throw at believers.

I absolutely did NOT deliberately, falsely, or slanderously misquote you. I made it perfectly clear that I switched the word atheist out with another words to make a point several times, so you saying that I tried to pass them off as what you said is more than a little silly. I can quote myself each and every time I did so if you like and repost for you since you seemed to miss it several times. Not to worry though, I doubt anyone else following this discussion missed it, so I wouldnt be to concerned about people thinking you are a racist anti-semite.

So let me get this straight, your are saying that it is not ok to persecute someone for thier race but it is ok to persecute someone for their ideology/philosophy? So you feel like it is ok to make anti-semetic, anti-muslim, anti-atheistic, ect. comments and/or treat people differently because of this? Sorry, but I have to disagree with you 100%. There is nothing morally grounded or 'right' about making broad sweeping generalizations against a group of people. As a christian and more importantly, someone who claims to have buddhist philosophy, you should know this already.

You do raise an interesting point though about some of the things I have said. I will have to reflect upon that a bit. I don't believe I am biased towards any religion and I dont treat people differently because of it. I certainly dont believe that <insert random religion> practitioners are crazy or insane or sociopathic, though I reserve the right to make those sort of comments about some extremist/radical elements in a few religions. I suppose when I say something like people are delusional for believing in mythical creatures and false gods, you may have a valid point. I just cant wrap my head around this completely. Is it bigoted to make that comment about everyone that believes in mythological creatures or is it only bigoted if I direct it towards a singular group of people with those beliefs? Hmm...

Someone who reads your post will think i actually said those things if they don't continue reading or at least go back and check my posts. You changed my words and passed it off as a quote. If i had not responded would you have left things as they were, for people to read your post with those BS quotes? That would've been very despicable.

What/why are you not understanding? I'm not saying it's okay to persecute people. I simply pointed out the difference between atheism and race, it's a grossly disingenuous analogy, and you know it. I'm not even persecuting atheism anyway, i merely stated, coming from a reasoned positioned, that since atheism is so closely related to materialism and egoism that it may lend itself to mild forms of sociopathy/narcissism, and reasonably so. That is a reasoned position/opinion, it's not hatred or persecution. I'm not saying that all atheists will necessarily have this problem. In fact at one point i asked that we stop using the term 'atheist'/'atheism' and start using 'materialist/materialism'. How did that point get lost?

I agree with you when it comes to religious extremism, i view atheism as a form of extremism. You raise a good point in your last few sentences. I don't want to fight with you, Mike, i would just appreciate it if in the future you do not change my words around in any posts or quotes.

[mikeinnaples]

Someone who reads your post will think i actually said those things if they don't continue reading or at least go back and check my posts. You changed my words and passed it off as a quote. If i had not responded would you have left things as they were, for people to read your post with those BS quotes? That would've been very despicable.

*sigh* this isnt going to stop is it?

This is what I prefaced it with exactly verbatim. In fact I am quoting myself from that very post you are up in arms about. Please don't rewrite history, especially when it is right there for everyone to see.

Drus, I am not trying to bait you or fight with you, but I want you to understand that if you were to replace 'atheists' in some of your comments with 'jews','blacks',etc. and repeat them, most people would think you were racist or anti-semetic ...and rightfully so.

Regarding this rest:

What/why are you not understanding? I'm not saying it's okay to persecute people. I simply pointed out the difference between atheism and race, it's a grossly disingenuous analogy, and you know it.

I purposefully removed race on my further comments and used jewish instead, yet you completely ignore this because the analogy is dead on. I am point bank asking you if your comments are ok when directed towards jews? Why are you avoiding answering that?

I'm not even persecuting atheism anyway, i merely stated, coming from a reasoned positioned, that since atheism is so closely related to materialism and egoism that it may lend itself to mild forms of sociopathy/narcissism, and reasonably so. That is a reasoned position/opinion, it's not hatred or persecution. I'm not saying that all atheists will necessarily have this problem. In fact at one point i asked that we stop using the term 'atheist'/'atheism' and start using 'materialist/materialism'. How did that point get lost?

I agree with you when it comes to religious extremism, i view atheism as a form of extremism. You raise a good point in your last few sentences. I don't want to fight with you, Mike, i would just appreciate it if in the future you do not change my words around in any posts or quotes.

Actually your entire premise is dead wrong. There is nothing materialistic or egotistical about not believing in a god. There is nothing reasonable about your statement, anymore than there is if you had in fact directed it against jews or a *gasp* race. I can't control my lack of faith in a god anymore than my neighbor can control the fact that he is black, yet you seem to think it is a mental illness to be atheist. Do you think homosexual couple that lives a few floors above me have a mental illness too? You are completely unaware as to why your statements are bigoted and why I take offense to them and that is pretty alarming.

As far as atheism being religious extremism, that is as silly as me saying christianity is religious extremism. Speaking of egoism ..... geesh.

Do we really need to keep going around and around? *sigh*

Edited by mikeinnaples, 25 October 2011 - 03:38 PM.

[drus]

Someone who reads your post will think i actually said those things if they don't continue reading or at least go back and check my posts. You changed my words and passed it off as a quote. If i had not responded would you have left things as they were, for people to read your post with those BS quotes? That would've been very despicable.

*sigh* this isnt going to stop is it?

This is what I prefaced it with exactly verbatim. In fact I am quoting myself from that very post you are up in arms about. Please don't rewrite history, especially when it is right there for everyone to see.

Drus, I am not trying to bait you or fight with you, but I want you to understand that if you were to replace 'atheists' in some of your comments with 'jews','blacks',etc. and repeat them, most people would think you were racist or anti-semetic ...and rightfully so.

Regarding this rest:

What/why are you not understanding? I'm not saying it's okay to persecute people. I simply pointed out the difference between atheism and race, it's a grossly disingenuous analogy, and you know it.

I purposefully removed race on my further comments and used jewish instead, yet you completely ignore this because the analogy is dead on. I am point bank asking you if your comments are ok when directed towards jews? Why are you avoiding answering that?

I'm not even persecuting atheism anyway, i merely stated, coming from a reasoned positioned, that since atheism is so closely related to materialism and egoism that it may lend itself to mild forms of sociopathy/narcissism, and reasonably so. That is a reasoned position/opinion, it's not hatred or persecution. I'm not saying that all atheists will necessarily have this problem. In fact at one point i asked that we stop using the term 'atheist'/'atheism' and start using 'materialist/materialism'. How did that point get lost?

I agree with you when it comes to religious extremism, i view atheism as a form of extremism. You raise a good point in your last few sentences. I don't want to fight with you, Mike, i would just appreciate it if in the future you do not change my words around in any posts or quotes.

Actually your entire premise is dead wrong. There is nothing materialistic or egotistical about not believing in a god. There is nothing reasonable about your statement, anymore than there is if you had in fact directed it against jews or a *gasp* race. I can't control my lack of faith in a god anymore than my neighbor can control the fact that he is black, yet you seem to think it is a mental illness to be atheist. Do you think homosexual couple that lives a few floors above me have a mental illness too? You are completely unaware as to why your statements are bigoted and why I take offense to them and that is pretty alarming.

As far as atheism being religious extremism, that is as silly as me saying christianity is religious extremism. Speaking of egoism ..... geesh.

Do we really need to keep going around and around? *sigh*

Helllllloh....you're the one re-writing things! If i didn't say it, don't quote me as saying it, plain and simple, i don't care what you preface it with. The fact that you don't see that as wrong is what is alarming.

Again with the anti-semitic baiting - i'm not avoiding anything, i already answered you on this, i am NOT anti-semitic! It's not a question of my comments being okay with some and not with others, my comments don't even apply to Jewish people or Judaism since we're talking about atheism.....Jewish people believe in God.

Pure atheism in the western-scientific sense is based on materialism, i'm not even going to argue this with you, it's fact. I never said atheism was 'religious' extremism, i said i personally view it as a form of extremism, period. Geezus, now you're playing the homosexual card too?!

Let's just let it go. I'm done, conversation over.

[platypus]

Mike, i didn't deliberately, falsely, and slanderously misquote you (change the very words you typed and then try to pass them off as yours) on an open public forum. I made a generalized statement about an idea, not a person or a race of people, and i even openly acknowledged i may be wrong. There is a world of difference between what you did and what i did. Also, atheism is a choice, there is a fundamental difference between a person's racial ethnicity (something they cannot control, which is naturally a beautiful and good thing) and the ideology/philosophy they choose to live by (something they can control and is open to debate). You and platypus don't seem to have a problem bashing religious people and their beliefs, but the minute someone starts raising reasonable and intelligent arguments against atheism/materialism, you guys start yelling 'bigot'. I have not said anything that could be interpreted as being any worse than what you guys throw at believers.

Changing single words like that to flag bigoted texts has been a known practice on the internets at least since 1992. Are you new or how is it possible that you encounter it the first time? I recommend that you apologize & withdraw your atheist-bashing hate-speech, maybe the moderators will help us.

[mikeinnaples]

Helllllloh....you're the one re-writing things! If i didn't say it, don't quote me as saying it, plain and simple, i don't care what you preface it with. The fact that you don't see that as wrong is what is alarming.

Again with the anti-semitic baiting - i'm not avoiding anything, i already answered you on this, i am NOT anti-semitic! It's not a question of my comments being okay with some and not with others, my comments don't even apply to Jewish people or Judaism since we're talking about atheism.....Jewish people believe in God.

Pure atheism in the western-scientific sense is based on materialism, i'm not even going to argue this with you, it's fact. I never said atheism was 'religious' extremism, i said i personally view it as a form of extremism, period. Geezus, now you're playing the homosexual card too?!

Let's just let it go. I'm done, conversation over.

*sigh*

I never said you were anti-semetic or anti-homosexual.

Might I suggest that you set aside your emotions and read the entire chain of conversation again from the beginning. When you read it again pay extra special attention to the points that I am trying to make and the context in which I am posting. You are simply missing nearly everything across the board and doing so repeatedly.

And yes, as written you inferred atheism was religious extremism. This is your post. If you meant it differently, then you should have explained yourself better.

I agree with you when it comes to religious extremism, i view atheism as a form of extremism.

Edited by mikeinnaples, 25 October 2011 - 05:57 PM.

[mikeinnaples]

Changing single words like that to flag bigoted texts has been a known practice on the internets at least since 1992. Are you new or how is it possible that you encounter it the first time? I recommend that you apologize & withdraw your atheist-bashing hate-speech, maybe the moderators will help us.

I can't honestly figure out if every single point I am trying to make is actually going over his head or if he is just trolling / feigning / playing stupid. I thought my points were quite clear, but it is quickly becoming evident that this is a pointless conversation when someone either refuses or is incapable of understanding and addressing the point you are attempting to make.

[shadowhawk]

What a bad experience. I have had some bad times as well, just responded differently.

I responded to your previous post and questions. Just read it again and perhaps you will understand it. I don’t know you but assumed you would know what I was talking about when comparing human love and how it is for a theist like me to love and be loved by God.

Not all people are capable or do love. That is not silly and indeed is sad. Examples are endless. I do not find it suprising to find some people do not love each other or God.

Actually it was a wonderful and eye opening experience. I finally lifted the veil of belief in false gods and saw reality for the first time. It taught me a much wider and larger respect for life, in all form. I value every day I have. Food tastes better, the sun is brighter, love is warmer, and everything is so much more real. I suppose after my experiences, I could just as easily say that people that believe in gods are incapable of real love for thier fellow humans because they divert so much of it towards superstitious beliefs and fairy tales instead of towards other people and life in general ...but that would just be silly of me, now wouldnt it?

I don’t want to further damage your experience of God, so this is not an argument, just an observation.

1. You are exactly where you wish and happy. You are right, you did this without God. Reminds me of Kierkegaard s “Sickness Unto Death.”
http://www.amazon.co...s/dp/0691020280



2. Your opine that people who believe in God not being capable of love is delusional. For someone who clams themselves rational, this isn’t.

3 Calling names such as “superstitiouis,” and “fairey tales,” is just a weak non argument which I suspect makes up much of your complaint against theism. Tired old name calling.

4 Are your comments silly? You said it.

[mikeinnaples]

2. Your opine that people who believe in God not being capable of love is delusional. For someone who clams themselves rational, this isn’t.

Time out ...in context, it was quite obvious I stated that to show how ludicrous the original statement was. It was MEANT to be irrational to show the irrationality of the original claim that atheists are incapable of love.

4 Are your comments silly? You said it.

See above. Of course it was silly, i meant it to be. Just like the original statement I was directing it towards was silly. Was that not clear enough in context of the conversations going back and forth?


Edit: I am not wasting time watching video responses, even if they werent blocked by our firewall. Care to give me a summary of it so I can respond to #1?

Edited by mikeinnaples, 25 October 2011 - 07:59 PM.

[mikeinnaples]

3 Calling names such as “superstitiouis,” and “fairey tales,” is just a weak non argument which I suspect makes up much of your complaint against theism. Tired old name calling.

Actually, this wasn't name calling in context of what you quoted. I believe that religions are supersitious beliefs and I believe that gods are fairy tale creatures. How else would you like me to word it so you don't find it offensive? I would be happy to give it a try.

As far as the 'weak non argument' goes, how do I prove that religion isn't a supersition and god isn't a fairy tale creature. I would absolutely LOVE for it all to be true, but in all my years as a christian, not once did I ever have an evidence that it was. The fact is, you cannot prove the existence of a god through evidence, anymore than I can disprove the existence of god for lack of evidence. All I have is my personal experience, and that is years spent worshipping a god that never made himself/herself/itself known to me. That is all the evidence that I have and based on it, I cannot rationally make myself believe in a god.

Edited by mikeinnaples, 25 October 2011 - 08:08 PM.

[shadowhawk]

mikeinnaples

Time out ...in context, it was quite obvious I stated that to show how ludicrous the original statement was. It was MEANT to be irrational to show the irrationality of the original claim that atheists are incapable of love.

What is the original statement?
You gave me your atheist testimony and recounted your happy experience sprinkled with a bunch of childish name calling against theists. I didn’t say atheists are incapable of love, ever. I was an atheist and loved. You love to put words into others mouths and then put them down.

You don't let people clarify their positions so you can cram your pejoratives down there mouths. Don't want to look at videos? Don't.

[shadowhawk]

3 Calling names such as “superstitiouis,” and “fairey tales,” is just a weak non argument which I suspect makes up much of your complaint against theism. Tired old name calling.

Actually, this wasn't name calling in context of what you quoted. I believe that religions are supersitious beliefs and I believe that gods are fairy tale creatures. How else would you like me to word it so you don't find it offensive? I would be happy to give it a try.

As far as the 'weak non argument' goes, how do I prove that religion isn't a supersition and god isn't a fairy tale creature. I would absolutely LOVE for it all to be true, but in all my years as a christian, not once did I ever have an evidence that it was. The fact is, you cannot prove the existence of a god through evidence, anymore than I can disprove the existence of god for lack of evidence. All I have is my personal experience, and that is years spent worshipping a god that never made himself/herself/itself known to me. That is all the evidence that I have and based on it, I cannot rationally make myself believe in a god.

Right... “ wasn’t name calling.” Still doing it!

What would you accept as evidence or proof?

All you have is your personal unproved experience? I know you don’t look at videos but here is one that is on this very subject. Short, come on it won’t hurt you. You claim you can’t rationally make yourself believe in God. Can you rationally make yourself not believe in God or are you irrational?

[platypus]

All you have is your personal unproved experience? I know you don’t look at videos but here is one that is on this very subject. Short, come on it won’t hurt you. You claim you can’t rationally make yourself believe in God. Can you rationally make yourself not believe in God or are you irrational?

That video is still stuck with the idea that one has to "prove" absolutely that gods do or don't exist, which may well be impossible (depends if the gods are hiding or not). From a probabilistic viewpoint there plenty of negative evidence about gods - i.e. there's no phenomena that require gods as their explanation -> strong probabilistic evidence for the non-existence (or non-visibility) of gods.

[mikeinnaples]

What is the original statement?
You gave me your atheist testimony and recounted your happy experience sprinkled with a bunch of childish name calling against theists. I didn’t say atheists are incapable of love, ever. I was an atheist and loved. You love to put words into others mouths and then put them down.

*sigh*

You didnt say it, Drus did. That is who I was responding to. There seems to be mixing up of comments and replies going on and I am not quite sure where it got lost. I even point blank quoted his comment several times, so I am honestly lost as to why you think that I was saying that 'you' said this.

Honestly, from my perspective saying religions are supersitious beliefs is no more childish than you saying god is real without proof. You say religion is real belief ....I say it is superstitious. You say god exists and I say god is mythological. It is neither childish nor name calling.

[mikeinnaples]

3 Calling names such as “superstitiouis,” and “fairey tales,” is just a weak non argument which I suspect makes up much of your complaint against theism. Tired old name calling.

Actually, this wasn't name calling in context of what you quoted. I believe that religions are supersitious beliefs and I believe that gods are fairy tale creatures. How else would you like me to word it so you don't find it offensive? I would be happy to give it a try.

As far as the 'weak non argument' goes, how do I prove that religion isn't a supersition and god isn't a fairy tale creature. I would absolutely LOVE for it all to be true, but in all my years as a christian, not once did I ever have an evidence that it was. The fact is, you cannot prove the existence of a god through evidence, anymore than I can disprove the existence of god for lack of evidence. All I have is my personal experience, and that is years spent worshipping a god that never made himself/herself/itself known to me. That is all the evidence that I have and based on it, I cannot rationally make myself believe in a god.

Right... “ wasn’t name calling.” Still doing it!

What would you accept as evidence or proof?

All you have is your personal unproved experience? I know you don’t look at videos but here is one that is on this very subject. Short, come on it won’t hurt you. You claim you can’t rationally make yourself believe in God. Can you rationally make yourself not believe in God or are you irrational?

I asked you how you would like me to reword my beliefs so you don't find it offensive. See the bold text above. You seem to be unwilling to do so. At this point I simply have to believe you are simply baiting. Saying that I believe religions are superstitious beliefs isnt name calling any more than you saying that god is real. We are just opposite sides of a coin.

Regarding evidence or proof, I already responded to you a few pages back on that. Feel free to reread it at your leisure.

"Personal unproved experience" .... How can my own experience be unproven to me? Regarding your video, I couldnt watch it even if I wanted to from work, so I am not sure what you expect? I am certain I mentioned that already. If you want me to respond to the content, you will quite simply have to provide me a summary.

If you look through all my posts you will see that I claim that I cant rationally make myself believe in something without evidence of its existence. I also state that there is absolutely no way for me to prove to 'you' that a god doesnt exist any more than 'you' can prove to me that a god does. From my perspective, I can rationalize belief in a 'god' as much as I can rationalize belief in 'santa claus'. I can't scientifically prove that santa doesn't exist or 100% rule out the possibility, but growing up and never actually seeing santa or having him come down my chimney or give me presents or directly influence me in any way, as a rational person I cannot have faith in his existence. Therefor I do not believe in santa.... nor can I believe in a god.

[shadowhawk]

What is the original statement?
You gave me your atheist testimony and recounted your happy experience sprinkled with a bunch of childish name calling against theists. I didn’t say atheists are incapable of love, ever. I was an atheist and loved. You love to put words into others mouths and then put them down.

*sigh*

You didnt say it, Drus did. That is who I was responding to. There seems to be mixing up of comments and replies going on and I am not quite sure where it got lost. I even point blank quoted his comment several times, so I am honestly lost as to why you think that I was saying that 'you' said this.

Honestly, from my perspective saying religions are supersitious beliefs is no more childish than you saying god is real without proof. You say religion is real belief ....I say it is superstitious. You say god exists and I say god is mythological. It is neither childish nor name calling.

Excuse me. You weren't addressing me! OK.

[mikeinnaples]

What is the original statement?
You gave me your atheist testimony and recounted your happy experience sprinkled with a bunch of childish name calling against theists. I didn’t say atheists are incapable of love, ever. I was an atheist and loved. You love to put words into others mouths and then put them down.

*sigh*

You didnt say it, Drus did. That is who I was responding to. There seems to be mixing up of comments and replies going on and I am not quite sure where it got lost. I even point blank quoted his comment several times, so I am honestly lost as to why you think that I was saying that 'you' said this.

Honestly, from my perspective saying religions are supersitious beliefs is no more childish than you saying god is real without proof. You say religion is real belief ....I say it is superstitious. You say god exists and I say god is mythological. It is neither childish nor name calling.

Excuse me. You weren't addressing me! OK.

Not sure what the laughing emoticon was for? or where just laughing at yourself for missing it? Either way I am requoting it for your benefit.

I never said an atheist couldn't experience beauty, i said they could never know true love (as i defined it in a few posts back), they may receive it, but they are incapable of giving it. Anyone can experience beauty because it is relative, love however is not.

[Shannon Vyff]

I absolutely did NOT deliberately, falsely, or slanderously misquote you. I made it perfectly clear that I switched the word atheist out with another words to make a point several times, so you saying that I tried to pass them off as what you said is more than a little silly.

It can be considered so when you directly change the words within their quote, while still leaving the time stamp on and their name and the visual indication that it is a full quote.

I've changed the older posts to make it more clear.

Please also see our user guidelines: http://www.longecity...18#imm_bya_art2