The Atheist Thread

IVNORD wrote: Sean Trane wrote: . >> we discussed this 18 months ago and I believe that like most catholics you strongly disapprove Vatican's radical positions on abortions and euthanasia, but if I remember well, you want the exceptions to be exceptional Sorry for the delay, just seen this ones. I'm radically against the euthanasia being that the human being is interested and may be able to allow the death of a person for greed or lust, I believe we should fight until there's no chance.   I admit the suspension of dysthanasia and this is avoiding the use of heroic messures to save a life that is no more a life (Artificial ventilation for example), in other words inaction in the case of a person that without artificial help wouldn't survive.   But IMHO no person should use active methods to end a live of a patient while the person can stay alive without external help. Iván      Ivan, You’re basically a pro-life guy who allows a couple of exceptions in the case. As prudent as you are by using condoms, what would be your position in case of a defective condom? Will you allow an abortion if the pregnancy is accidental?   If it's in my hand, I would never agree with an abortion, if I'm man enough to have sex I need to be man enough to accept the consequences of my acts, even if this are not planified.   But it's not my decision according to the laws (At least in USA, here it's illegal in most cases) but I seen cases of young couples who have sex without any precaution with the confidence that if something happens, there's always a doctor willing to make an abortion.   The life of a phoetus is not a game to play with.   Iván

Heavyfreight wrote: Well said. Whilst I would class myself as aetheist I cannot catagorically prove that there is no superior intelligence out there who has some control over our world, although I doubt it.

I believe in some Superior being or energy or something out there. Sometimes I don't know. Just one thing about this comment: the POSITIVE you can prove, NEGATIVES can NEVER be proved. You cannot prove something didn't happen. What you can prove is something DIFFERENT happened, and that negates the first. But you can't prove negatives. Ergo, nobody will never be able to prove there is no God. And two things can happen:

a)Positives can be proved. So if God someday shows us His face, well, it's proved.

b)If something ELSE is proved, then God would become an impossibility. But then again, this ELSE: wouldn't we be calling it God?

The existence or not of a superior being is out of the human brain's capabilities to process.... as is the universe, its size, and a lot more things. There's where faith comes into play.

I only know that I don't know as much I would like to know. So I let my heart do the job my brain can't perform. The problem is, that heart is not too dependable, and sometimes it says "BELIEVE", sometimes it says "DON'T".

Confussion.


    
    

Edited by The T - January 25 2007 at 16:02

Sean Trane wrote: kazansky wrote: is it possible to believe in God without believe in religion ? [IMG]smileys/smiley5.gif" align=middle> I sincerely hope it is the case. And I see no reasons why not. IMHO, I would call those people a form of agnostics As an atheist, I have absolutely no problems with the idea of a god/creator  eventually existing. But making this creator into a deity cause me to twitch uncomfortably, because this is the first step into religion. What sincerely bugs me is the "need" to worship that creator and pray to him. And what appalls me is the need to do this in public massive demonstration to show that you are one of the adorator. And what really disgust me is the need to have someone that pretends to be the intermediate , speaking and interpreting the "words" of this creator.

Well said. Whilst I would class myself as aetheist I cannot catagorically prove that there is no superior intelligence out there who has some control over our world, although I doubt it. As you say it is the need to worship and follow that is worrying. Why can people not make up their own minds about life? Why do they have to believe that there is a god controlling their life? The only answer that I can come up with is that they fear the responsibility. This leaves them open to control by those who manipulate organised religion.
    
    

Edited by Heavyfreight - January 25 2007 at 15:14

kazansky wrote: what i don't like from religion is the way they used the name of God to make everything they do seems right. Of course only some people that do such a thing IMO as long as you believe God it doesn't really matter whether you for example, go to church, mosque, etc or not, but some people would call that as a non-believer act

kazansky wrote: is it possible to believe in God without believe in religion ?

is it possible to believe in God without believe in religion ?

I'm glad that I wasn't aborted. That's about all I have to say about it...

Illegal is the same as 'Murder should be illegal, al tough I do allow you to murder if you feel guilty, ashamed and disgusted, or if the one you murder suffer!'
None of these murderers are committed in self defence, and even if they were they'd be killing an innocent murderer. So in the end, Illegal with exceptions is worse then fully illegal because it give others a bigger authority for someone else's life then they would have if it was fully illegal.

Oh! A debate, I'm good at these!

I approve abortion in every case. It's a paradox situation, really. Many people say that they approve it only if the pregnant woman in question has been raped, or if she might die thought birth. But this would be, according to their view that life starts at the beginning of pregnancy the same as killing one to save another, or to kill one to just let the raped woman go free. In ether case, it's murderer, in their own view and theory.
In my view, I believe this argument alone to be enough to suggest that abortion should ether be legal in all cases, or illegal in all cases. And out of those, even if life start at pregnancy, I believe it's only just and fair that such an act is legalized, so that each one of us can chose ourself what to do with our pregnancy.

I'm a condom user myself, but I've happily been with the same girl ever since I started being with anyone, and she has only had me, so we know our sex lives extremely well. The condom is used mainly as a safety precaution. If there's a leak, then there'll be a kid. No mater what economy we have at the moment. We've made plans to have two kid's eventually, if they came trough a leak we'd just be a bit unfortunate with their timing. This is not because of her view opposing abortion, but because we'd want the possible child.

"The Church is against abortion (Except therapeutic) I believe a mother of a sick phoetus who will unavoidably die must also  be allowed to have an abortuion as well as a victim of rape, no woman should be forced to keep a baby that will remember her of the worst moment of her life or to give her own baby to a stranger in this times of sexual exploitation of infants,  it's unfair for her and the baby"
A baby born from the misfortune of rape could easily enough be adopted away and the mother will never have to see the kid again. And who are you but a simple man or woman who oppose abortion to decide that these foetuses will be refused their possibility to draw their first breath even if it'll be their last?
It's a paradox, the only way out is to pick ether one or the other. Legal, or illegal.

Sean Trane wrote: Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: I use condom because I believe it's the responsible attitude not only to avoid unwanted children or abortion but also for my personal health.   The Church is against abortion (Except therapeutic) I believe a mother of a sick phoetus who will unavoidably die must also  be allowed to have an abortuion as well as a victim of rape, no woman should be forced to keep a baby that will remember her of the worst moment of her life or to give her own baby to a stranger in this times of sexual exploitation of infants,  it's unfair for her and the baby. >> we discussed this 18 months ago and I believe that like most catholics you strongly disapprove Vatican's radical positions on abortions and euthanasia, but if I remember well, you want the exceptions to be exceptional Iván

    Ivan,

You’re basically a pro-life guy who allows a couple of exceptions in the case. As prudent as you are by using condoms, what would be your position in case of a defective condom? Will you allow an abortion if the pregnancy is accidental?