Theism vs. Atheism ... will it ever be settled?

UndercoverBoy wrote: Vibrationbaby wrote: As far as I'm concerned there is no guy  in a robe with a beard sitting on a cloud, I'm pretty sure that no one here thinks that God is a guy in a robe sitting on a cloud.  If I remember correctly, that image came from Zeus, and the Christian God was perceived that way to make it more accessible to the Pagans.

Well then I guess I am a pagan.

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: Mr ProgFreak wrote: Do you really think that Dillahunty thinks that he aquired the power to consecrate communion wafers?   No,but he is trying to make people believe so.

That's ridiculous ... it's blatantly obvious that he's simply fooling around. He did go to that website and got ordained, but of course he knows that no Catholic would accept that. It's called satire.

Iván wrote:   Mr ProgFreak wrote: Obviously that wasn't the point at all. The point was that Catholics get so upset when people of other denominations - or Atheists - make fun of their beliefs.   It's a most sacred belief, what do yu expect? It's an act of desecration, he's even asking people to take posetion of what we belief is God, for him to make mockery

You said yourself that those wafers aren't really consecrated in your opinion, so where's the sacrilege?

Iván wrote: Mr ProgFreak wrote: Just like Muslims get upset when you draw a picture of Mohammed. Ridiculing a religion is a victimless crime. It shouldn't matter to you.   Better talk in first person, I would never make fan of the beliefs of any person, no matte if he's a Catholic, Jewish or Moslem, but it's obvious you find it funny,.   BTW: It's not victimless, because you are insulting the beliefs of millions of persons (victims), and you dare to call me arrogant for showing respect?   I underdstand why they get upset, I will never justify  any fom of retaliation, but I understand why they feel attacked, because you are provoking them to show how superior you believe you are.

It is a victimless crime. If you feel like a victim here, you seem like a child who is crying about someone making fun of Santa Claus. Is your faith that fragile?

Iván wrote: Mr ProgFreak wrote: But instead you get upset and play the hurt feelings card. I would say that this pretty much confirms Matt, me and most of the other Atheists who point out that free speech should win over freedom of religion in the public place - religion should be respected, but not at the cost of freedom of speech or expression.   We don't play anything, some acts offend us deeply, and we are getting tired of this, desecration of religious symbols is a crime is a crime in many countries, because one thing is freedom of speech and another is freedom to insult.   Iván

You can have either freedom of speech or religious oppression here - you can't have your cake and eat it, too. Either I'm allowed to make fun of your religion, or you're allowed to forbid me to make fun of it. Personally I think it would be best if everyone was allowed to make fun of any crazy concept, while those who seriously believe it are allowed to do so undisturbed. And as soon as you enter the realm of public discussion, obviously you have to be able to tolerate some outspoken criticism. I can easily tolerate criticism, or religious people making fun of things that are important to me. They don't understand them, they're totally irrelevant to them - why shouldn't they be allowed to make fun of them, it's their right to do so.

Mr ProgFreak wrote: Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: Mr ProgFreak wrote: Do you really think that Dillahunty thinks that he aquired the power to consecrate communion wafers?   No,but he is trying to make people believe so. That's ridiculous ... it's blatantly obvious that he's simply fooling around. He did go to that website and got ordained, but of course he knows that no Catholic would accept that. It's called satire. Iván wrote:   Mr ProgFreak wrote: Obviously that wasn't the point at all. The point was that Catholics get so upset when people of other denominations - or Atheists - make fun of their beliefs.   It's a most sacred belief, what do yu expect? It's an act of desecration, he's even asking people to take posetion of what we belief is God, for him to make mockery   You said yourself that those wafers aren't really consecrated in your opinion, so where's the sacrilege? Iván wrote: Mr ProgFreak wrote: Just like Muslims get upset when you draw a picture of Mohammed. Ridiculing a religion is a victimless crime. It shouldn't matter to you.   Better talk in first person, I would never make fan of the beliefs of any person, no matte if he's a Catholic, Jewish or Moslem, but it's obvious you find it funny,.   BTW: It's not victimless, because you are insulting the beliefs of millions of persons (victims), and you dare to call me arrogant for showing respect?   I underdstand why they get upset, I will never justify  any fom of retaliation, but I understand why they feel attacked, because you are provoking them to show how superior you believe you are.   It is a victimless crime. If you feel like a victim here, you seem like a child who is crying about someone making fun of Santa Claus. Is your faith that fragile? Iván wrote: Mr ProgFreak wrote: But instead you get upset and play the hurt feelings card. I would say that this pretty much confirms Matt, me and most of the other Atheists who point out that free speech should win over freedom of religion in the public place - religion should be respected, but not at the cost of freedom of speech or expression.   We don't play anything, some acts offend us deeply, and we are getting tired of this, desecration of religious symbols is a crime is a crime in many countries, because one thing is freedom of speech and another is freedom to insult.   Iván You can have either freedom of speech or religious oppression here - you can't have your cake and eat it, too. Either I'm allowed to make fun of your religion, or you're allowed to forbid me to make fun of it. Personally I think it would be best if everyone was allowed to make fun of any crazy concept, while those who seriously believe it are allowed to do so undisturbed. And as soon as you enter the realm of public discussion, obviously you have to be able to tolerate some outspoken criticism. I can easily tolerate criticism, or religious people making fun of things that are important to me. They don't understand them, they're totally irrelevant to them - why shouldn't they be allowed to make fun of them, it's their right to do so.

  C'mon insult me baby. I'm a sucker for punishment.

There are some interesting cultural factors at work here.  I copied and pasted a dozen or so of Mike's posts (from various threads) and showed them to my wife,who has taught ESL (English as a Second Language) for 22 years.  She's had thousands of students from 27 different countries including several hundred Bundestag students from Germany.

I gave them to her without any information on gender/nationality or anything. She read through them and I asked her what she could tell me about the person who wrote them. She identified them as having been written by a German  male most likely under 40.

She said that of all the students she's had, students from Germany and the Middle East (Israel included) are by far the least likely to admit error or accept correction.  Attempts at correction are seen as invitations for argument.  On the other hand, students from South and Latin America (with the possible exception of Argentina) will go out of their way to thank the teacher for correcting them, they WANT to know when they have made an error.

I think this observation sheds some interesting light on the discourse between Mike, Ivan ad Jampa here. Cultural “brainwashing” runs every bit as deep as any religion and creates stranegly insurmountable barriers to communication and civil discourse.  Its hard to have a discussion with someone who is never wrong and refuses to apologize.

As a result I think we should abolish all cultural practices and everyone should simply become German.  Then there would be no more problems. Here's an example I found of how this could begin to be implemented.

"The European Union commissioners have announced that agreement has been reached to adopt English as the preferred language for European communications, rather than German, which was the other possibility. As part of the negotiations, Her Majesty's Government conceded that English spelling had some room for improvement and has accepted a five-year phased plan for what will be known as EuroEnglish (Euro for short).

In the first year, 's' will be used instead of the soft 'c'. Sertainly, sivil servants will resieve this news with joy. Also, the hard 'c' will be replaced with 'k.' Not only will this klear up konfusion, but typewriters kan have one less letter.
There will be growing publik enthusiasm in the sekond year, when the troublesome 'ph' will be replaced by 'f'. This will make words like 'fotograf' 20 per sent shorter.

In the third year, publik akseptanse of the new spelling kan be expekted to reach the stage where more komplikated changes are possible. Governments will enkourage the removal of double letters, which have always ben a deterent to akurate speling. Also, al wil agre that the horible mes of silent 'e's in the languag is disgrasful, and they would go.

By the fourth year, peopl wil be reseptiv to steps such as replasing 'th' by 'z' and 'w' by 'v'. During ze fifz year, ze unesesary 'o' kan be dropd from vords kontaining 'ou', and similar changes vud of kors; be aplid to ozer kombinations of leters.

After zis fifz yer, ve vil hav a reli sensibl riten styl. Zer vil b no mor trubls or difikultis and evrivun vil find it ezi tu understand ech ozer.

Ze drem vil finali kum tru."



Edited by Trademark - July 22 2010 at 11:15

Nein, only Cherman.   Zen ve vil tak ofer ze vorlt!!!!

he is Eru Ilùvatar or maybehe is Tom Bombadil

BaldFriede wrote: I am not of Christian faith, but I would not be peeved if someone ridiculed my religion. I ridicule atheists, because most of them aren't even atheists.

Of course  some people believe it is impossible to say with 100% certainty that God  does not exist, therefore one must couch ones language with silly terms like "strong atheist" and "weak atheist". I will say that I am definitely an atheist and believe that gods are a man-made construct that have long outlived their usefulness as a way of explaining the unknown. As for adherents of Pagan religions well, in my experience, they tend to be "look at me" types who crave "differentness" whilst all being the same.

Generalisations rool!

"Sorry Trade but that sounds a little un-scientifical..."

Yep it sure is but then I aint no sigh-un-teest. I are a hiley egurcaterd MOO-sishun.
Its based on a fairly small sample of somewhere around 250 students all in an academic setting.  i just thought it was interesting how quickly and clearly she pegged him.



Why not go all the way?  I just found out that Pres. Obama is a Nazi too.  It has to be true, Rush Limbaugh said on the internet and when it shows up in Wikipedia it will be incontestable fact.


Edited by Trademark - July 22 2010 at 12:06

Trademark wrote: Nein, only Cherman.   Zen ve vil tak ofer ze vorlt!!!!

Ouais, c'est ça.
Count on it.

tell it to the pope