Are theists afraid of atheists?

MW they think blacks are black because they are cursed by god.

Ever seen the ruling elite? It is a faith founded by a slimy white con man (literally that was his profession) for slimy white com men.
 
Carico said:
Wrong again. We actually have 4 different gospel writers. ;) we also have different authors for most of the books in the bible. So you need to do your research so you'll be speaking from knowledge rather than ignorance.
Click to expand...
The "one source" being the bible - do try to keep up.

Sorry but looking at a rock or bones and imagining what they are isn't called fact but fantasy. So you are wrong again.
Click to expand...
Nope, since they are all consistent with each other.

So let me get this straight: Anything that can be documented in history is not called evidence and anything that cannot be documented in history is called evidence. Is that correct? :bugeye: If so, then neither logic nor good contact with reality seem to be your strong points. :rolleyes:[/quote]
If that's how you read my comment then you're showing extremely poor understanding of anything, let alone logic or contact with reality.
The bible is NOT verified as historically factual.

So you ARE afraid of Christians, proving my post true.
Click to expand...
How do you work that out?

So what part of our beliefs can hurt you physically or emotionally? Loving you enough to care where you spend eternity, or turning the other cheek?
Click to expand...
How about: denying/ contradicting the findings of science on no evidence, not allowing free thought, condemning people for having different beliefs/ life styles/ sexual preferences?
 
swarm said:
MW they think blacks are black because they are cursed by god.

Ever seen the ruling elite? It is a faith founded by a slimy white con man (literally that was his profession) for slimy white com men.
Click to expand...
*************
M*W: Yes, I've heard that, but in my experience, it was more about the fear the young woman had of atheists... apparently, from what she had been taught. Had I been in her position, and a client told me they were atheist, it wouldn't have phases me in the least. Of if they told me they were christian, jewish or FLDS, it wouldn't have phased me.
 
swarm said:
Yes, she did say "I believe that no gods exist. I would consider that it is a belief, but certainly not a religion" and I thought it worth mentioning that a lack of belief in gods doesn't imply one needs to believe no gods exist because I feel making the matter a point of belief is unsound. Belief is irrelevant.
Click to expand...
Well, it's odd you said it to me, since I said
According to Phlogistan you should be called an anti-theist because you believe there is no God or are no gods. This is different from a mere lack. I would include you in the category 'atheists' but it seems a number of atheists consider this incorrect. In fact Phlogistan said there are very few who make the 'error' you are making.
Click to expand...
where I contrast my position with Phlogistan's and say that I would include her in the category atheists. IOW one can simply lack a belief in god(s) or one can believe there is no are no God(s). Either stance is atheistic.
While I feel she is taking atheism beyond the point where it is effortlessly defensible without adding anything of importance to the stance, her self labeling as an atheist is entirely reasonable.
Click to expand...
As do I. Which is why I said that I would include her in that category in the post you responded to. I think these thoughts of yours are better directed at someone else.
 
Medicine*Woman said:
*************
M*W: When and where have I ever needed anyone else on this forum to justify my opinions? I'm not on any campaign. I have my rights to my opinions and beliefs, and I have a right to express them. If you don't like what I have to say, you can report me. Lori, you sound paranoid. BTW, what does being on a campaign and being co-dependent have to do with anything? What are you afraid of?
Click to expand...

mw, i have heard you congratulate people for agreeing with you. i said WOW.
 
JDawg said:
Really? I wonder what passages they could have derived that message from. But then again, sometimes religious folks are stupid, and just make it up themselves.
Click to expand...


I have heard of this. It requires someone reading alot into Cain's being marked. It also requires someone to forget that Cain's descendants died in the flood, if one wants to go the Fundy route. It's pretty illogical, even for Genesis, to come up with Cain was marked as black. I have fun pointing out to people who are into this whole idea... Maybe he was marked white. Strange color for a guy near the equator...:eek:
 
We're so off-topic now, I'm not sure the steering works anymore. My final answer to the thread title-No. I don't want your reasons for why you think we should be, I don't care what reasons you have we shouldn't be. Assuming something as true and asking why is foolishness. That's like starting a thread,"Beastiality?" and asking "When will you stop raping your dog anally?" Ick. These threads of yours tire me, MW. Start one where you have a fair, sincere question, and leave out the "holier-than-thou" attitude.
 
Mr. Hamtastic said:
We're so off-topic now, I'm not sure the steering works anymore. My final answer to the thread title-No. I don't want your reasons for why you think we should be, I don't care what reasons you have we shouldn't be. Assuming something as true and asking why is foolishness. That's like starting a thread,"Beastiality?" and asking "When will you stop raping your dog anally?" Ick. These threads of yours tire me, MW. Start one where you have a fair, sincere question, and leave out the "holier-than-thou" attitude.
Click to expand...

*hallelujah chorus*
 
Mr. Hamtastic said:
We're so off-topic now, I'm not sure the steering works anymore. My final answer to the thread title-No. I don't want your reasons for why you think we should be, I don't care what reasons you have we shouldn't be. Assuming something as true and asking why is foolishness. That's like starting a thread,"Beastiality?" and asking "When will you stop raping your dog anally?" Ick. These threads of yours tire me, MW. Start one where you have a fair, sincere question, and leave out the "holier-than-thou" attitude.
Click to expand...

To be fair, Hambone, it's an honest question. With the way theists try to pressure the courts and the government to bow to their every command, and especially their long history of litigation against evolution, it's worth wondering if there is something more to this. If you don't like the question, fine. Don't answer it.
 
JDawg said:
To be fair, Hambone, it's an honest question. With the way theists try to pressure the courts and the government to bow to their every command, and especially their long history of litigation against evolution, it's worth wondering if there is something more to this. If you don't like the question, fine. Don't answer it.
Click to expand...

i don't think lobbying is a result of a belief in god, just a corruption. *chuckle*
 
JDawg said:
To be fair, Hambone, it's an honest question. With the way theists try to pressure the courts and the government to bow to their every command, and especially their long history of litigation against evolution, it's worth wondering if there is something more to this. If you don't like the question, fine. Don't answer it.
Click to expand...

Honest question my foot. If I start a thread and ask,"Should atheists be allowed to raise young?" it would be just as stupid. Here's why:

1. MW is stereotyping atheists
2. MW is stereotyping theists
3. MW is suggesting that theists are less than Atheists
4. MW is suggesting that atheists are suffering religious prejudice

I don't care about the rest of the thread. These 4 things are just from the topic question. Care to look at MW's history of 'thoughtful' postings? This thread should die a horrible embarrassing death. Questions like the one you are suggesting are different. Do you want to discuss bleed-through from church to state? We can go over to politics for that, maybe ethics. Do you want to suggest that atheists are trodden upon by theists? Start a new thread. I'm a theist, if I fear things, I usually face them and try to kill them. I'm not going to go kill anyone, luckily, so I am not afraid of atheists. GAWD!:mad:
 
Mr. Hamtastic said:
Honest question my foot. If I start a thread and ask,"Should atheists be allowed to raise young?" it would be just as stupid. Here's why:

1. MW is stereotyping atheists
2. MW is stereotyping theists
3. MW is suggesting that theists are less than Atheists
4. MW is suggesting that atheists are suffering religious prejudice

I don't care about the rest of the thread. These 4 things are just from the topic question. Care to look at MW's history of 'thoughtful' postings? This thread should die a horrible embarrassing death. Questions like the one you are suggesting are different. Do you want to discuss bleed-through from church to state? We can go over to politics for that, maybe ethics. Do you want to suggest that atheists are trodden upon by theists? Start a new thread. I'm a theist, if I fear things, I usually face them and try to kill them. I'm not going to go kill anyone, luckily, so I am not afraid of atheists. GAWD!:mad:
Click to expand...

Are you sure this isn't just a knee-jerk reaction to the phrasing of the question?

Well, regardless, I guess it's settled.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top