The Atheist - Agnostic - Non religious thread

^ Nope, it's neither right nor wrong. It just is.

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: Sean Trane wrote:   Had to come back, two replies towards me, made me do so   Hve ignored the first part of your post becaudse you are still patronizing.    >>>>> no way, José!!!!!   These are extreme minorities  and are only gaining visibility  through internet lately  and even then, they depend of vthe Ivàns s of this world eeling them out of the darkness to try to get his point across >>> I'd say up to 95% of atheist have not heard of these organizations  and 99% of those refute these falacies,  There are no rumes in Atheism and I even shouldn't put a capital A to it)  although we could we could see some copncepts as valid, but that's it......   Please Sean you talk of extreme minorities, but at least according to Wikilpedia, the Positive Atheists are a majority.  >>> let me correct, these are extremist minorities and not well represented. But like all extremists, they are very vocal (Opus Dei anyone) and ake far more noise than their real weight suggest they should making. And please stop using Wikipedia  as a judge in these matters, because in this case, these movements entered their own scmaltzy paltzy weirdo theories and no-onr has corrected it, since no real atheist care tostoop that low as to answer them..... Note here that I speak of real atheists here, not good or bad atheists >>> that makes a whole difference   That's probably atheism's real dange or perilr..... we don't recognize anyone the right to be spokemen or even specialists in "Atheiismology " (if you'll allow this word) >>> so you got hundred of bozos that could try to make some stupid theory , only because he's out for fame and eventually fortune.....    <<<<< I'm sorry to say, but that only exists into your brains!!!!!   Do you say positive Atheists don't exist?Never heard of this, before this debate (and to be very frank, I'll not check what it means).... you are an atheists or not ....  So AFAIC, I could tell you that I'm a positive atheist, because YES, I am an atheist...........   >>> WE (and I think I can speak for the entire contigent of atheists on this site) did until now, and will most likely continue doing so.... paying attention top these fallacies wouuld only gain them credibitity, which they direly need....   Those are fallacies because you disagree, it's a very religious position like saying my god is the correct one the others are false. >>> you've got to be lucid here Ivàn (no patronizing meant), these groups are out to get attention for themselves and use Wikipedia for their own services...... because they know there is no-one to answer back and saydifferent.   as an apart: I've seen in the second issue of Classic Rock presents Prog, in the reader's corner, there is some bozo called Erik (but hiding in a different name) making a call for a PprogAndaluz article .....   Don't you see how manipulations starts..... If someone doesn't answer CR that he's full of dung and ProgAndaluz is BS, he'll sed another letter with yet another name to still make these fallacies  >>> and soon or later someone will pick this up somewhere and claim it i must be true etc......  Erik has probably attacked Wikipedia on this issue >>> please check it out and believe it, because it's WIKIPEDIA!!!!   >>> then I suggest you go back to our debate (Is God Ruining prog???) and read up your words >>> if memoryb serves, , you even associated their signs (compass and ruler) to a David star.....  You hadn't mention your grandfather back then either (orv at least I have no recollection), and were almost accusing me of of "evilry" for liking their counterbalancing role in Europe in the XIXth century. BTW, nowadays, the FM are slowly becoming mafias >>> too many people out for fortunes without ethics are joining up....   I went back, as a fact I said Civil Watchers are full of atheists, you sai Civil Watchers are Free Masons and you assume I said Free Masons are Atheists,   >>> OK, memory fails sometimes. PS: I edit the few things regarding that free masonry (it was thrwn as an aside and if we reopen this bracket, it's goingto un-manageable). Plus I must I admit I never thought you'd look it up   Atheists trust a secret logia whose real beliefs and agenda we all ignore????? For God's sake, a bow of secrecy is praised by Atheists, this is more medieval than the Inquisition and the Witch Hunt.  >>>nope, we know their use of mythology is pure BS and even for fun. Their agenda isfairly well known too, since they're some kind of busiess club. But the Free Masons were very instruimental in building Laïcity and separate Church from state. They created a helpfull counterbalance to the coservative forces/establishment in most country....... but like every succesfull cause.... it becomes the establishmpent itself....         because he's probably having political views not suiting Vatican ... I can'rt see  them expelling him for another reason....   So, if they keep the politician inside the Church is wrong, and if they sanction him, the Church is also wrong..This is a no win situation.  >>> precisely  ROTFLMAO More seriously.... Vatican is only interested in certain types of politics and only in the direction itsuits them.....     >>> Come on Ivàn, I'm not talking of internatuinal politics  (the UN seat would prompt the jews and Muslims to claim a seat as well) or even politics regarding business. I'm talking of politics like personal  rights (education, divorce, , pregnancy etc.... >>> the churches shouldn't have a say in these moral issues outside giving their advice  and basta for the rest....   I don't know other churches, but the Catholic Church only says something to their members, who have to accept if they want to be Catholics, not to the Governments.Yeah, Right!!!! >>> but everywhere when abortion laws are acceptedbecause of public demand, Vatican enters the political game.... We are not writing in the books that Evolution is only a theory as valid as Creationism, the Church has accepted evolution. >>> true that only 20 years back, there wasn't a Christian theologian that was thinking of refuting the Dinosaurs and Carbon 14...... nowadays, these creationist are claming that Erath didn't exist long without humans and clmaim Earth to be 6000 years old max.... Even the croest of bishop in the Vatican would hesitate jumping on the bandwagon..... but some have already....   They may give opinions, but that's something every person ad institution can do in a democratic country.   Iván    Hugues

Snow Dog wrote: Proof!!!

Pssh, I only believe in stuff I can taste.

StyLaZyn wrote: I didn't know this thread existed!

Just exactly how many angels COULD fit on the head of a pin?

JJLehto wrote: Just exactly how many angels COULD fit on the head of a pin?

The questionis: How many angel could make a pinhead throw a fit?

Slartibartfast wrote: Evolver wrote: JJLehto wrote: Just exactly how many angels COULD fit on the head of a pin? The questionis: How many angels could make a pinhead throw a fit? I'd have to guess a few. Wait a second, are we talking about Zippy? And now for something completely different:

The rare triple cartoon from Slartibartfast!
That deserves uber laughies!
I do love your various cartoons.

Slartibartfast wrote: Why thanks, I often get comments like "you go to the worst web sites".  By the way, anyone wanting to visit the worst web sites that I go to can right click on the graphic and check properties to see the source.

Excellent! I would love to, besides it can't be that bad. I frequent some pretty terrible websites.



Edited by JJLehto - June 09 2009 at 17:55

I went from Atheist to "oh my god, I'm 30, I'm not immortal, I'm going to die one day, I had better become a Christian in order to "live on forever" , back to the path(or non path as it is) of being an  atheist realizing one day I will cease to exist, but at least knowing I am right  and not fooling myself based on the majority of mankinds fear of death. Do I fear death? Absolutely, but I am no longer going to throw away reason, due to my fears.

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: Thanks deathrabbit, and i found some interesting data.   Most of the Catholics arrested and convicted in USA are: Young Latino inmigrants Most of them living in extreme poverty Most of them members of violent gangs A great percentage of them illegal Most of them with poor defence in a trial. Almost 90%  of Latinos are Catholics (At least by name) But you forget the real truth: Poor inmigrants, members of a violent gang will probably commit violent crimes and most surely be convicted because they aren't able to pay a decent defence. Let me put another example:   All members of Maoist Shinning Path who killed 50,000 innocent Peruvianms are atheists All members of the Kmer Rouge who killed almost a million Cambodians were atheists Then Atheists have more chances to be criminal terrorists. Of course this is BS, I'm leaving many facts behind, like that radical communists embrace Atheism for political interests. Iván

I've only gotten halfway through this thread but I wanted to reply to this qoute-able quotation.

"Radical Communists embrace atheism for political interests"

Several assumptions:

1. There are radical communists and non-radical communists (seems strange to distinguish them)
2. Shining Path members and Khymer Rouge members are communists because they and Richard Pipes says so
3. That shining path members et al can't really disbelieve in God despite being duped peasants, making them agnostics, if not dynamically anti-theist.
4. That (the real) communists can't be dynamically anti-theist or only pretend to be so to mesh with the political ideology.


As Marx says criticism of religion precedes all criticism. Marx, Lenin, Trotsky, myself, were all atheists before we were Socialists.

Socialism is, philosophically speaking, Dialectical Materialism and Historical Materialism. An atheist approach to the study of history is historical materialism, and vice versa. Dialectics is the atheist approach to Science in as much as Empiricism is not dynamic enough to move beyond idealist conceptions. Atheism can either be taken down an extremist agnostic path or an anti-theist path.

A historical materialist wouldn't debate about the existence of God by citing speculative probabilities in the vein of agnostics. Rather, the origin of God in the social structure and human history would be exposed as false. To begin with, that is...

Unfortunately, its just as easy for a Stalinist to say he is a communist as it is for Cheney to say he is a Christian

There are many double standards, but genuine socialism is an athiest philosophical system first, before it is the movement for revolution.


Edited by RoyFairbank - June 15 2009 at 15:46