Atheists what is your proof?

SolusCado said:
My apologies for coming across as condescending. It was not my intent. And frankly, my responses to you have been less about your position and more about your approach. You are making claims without justifying them, and there is no discourse that can come out of that, other than - as you put it - a pissing match. I debates, one must justify their positions with logic, and I don't see you doing that.
Click to expand...


First off...Apology accepted...

Let me ask you a quick question...You mentioned "logic".

In your opinion, do you find that anyone would choose not to be a theist is logical?

if not, I don't see how you would ever find what an atheist said, to be at all logical either.

IMO, a theist finds atheism as illogical, as an atheist finds theism.

So, how could you ever hope to have a truely beneficial debate?

It just comes down to a pissing match..At least that's how I see it.
 
Oh, and BTW...I made no claims...I merely gave my opinions, as that's all one can give, when discussing religious topics...There are no facts.

The Bible is not hard evidence of anything.. Just a book, written by men.
 
This video pretty much sums it up for me. When I look up I am simply amazed but when I look right and left at my neighbors and peak into their beliefs or open a religious book, witness a religious ceremony or experience, I'm puzzled. There is sort of a disconnect. I am of the opinion that there could infact be a creator but I have no proof one way or another. Maybe one needs to change his or hers definition of creator, I realize this could be difficult but doesn't it seem logical to look up and explore/see rather then hope/pray to satisfy a feeling? Maybe those believers already have exercise their minds in this way and have come to their conclusion. I just find no logical reason to try to look beyond the Universe - not at this point anyways. It is what it is and it's certainly enough information to keep me busy for years to come.

One thing is certain - The Power struggle between believers and non-believers will remain constant.

Kennyc beat me to this:
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?p=2648899&posted=1#post2648899

Here it is again:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6w2M50_Xdk
 
Gremmie said:
First off...Apology accepted...
Let me ask you a quick question...You mentioned "logic".
In your opinion, do you find that anyone would choose not to be a theist is logical?
Click to expand...

No, not at all. Logical and illogical personality traits can be found in both theists and atheists. In my opinion, theism and atheism are both beliefs, neither one of which is significantly more or less logical than the other.

Gremmie said:
if not, I don't see how you would ever find what an atheist said, to be at all logical either.
IMO, a theist finds atheism as illogical, as an atheist finds theism.
So, how could you ever hope to have a truely beneficial debate?
It just comes down to a pissing match..At least that's how I see it.
Click to expand...

Since I believe that both theists and atheists are capable of logic (as well as a lack of logic), my intent in any conversation is to stick with logic - because, as you say - anything else comes down to a pissing match. Without logic, there is no chance for intelligent conversation, as it just boils down to people yelling their beliefs at each other. Those are conversations I have no interest in having.
 
gmilam said:
I believe the Declaration of Independance describes it as self-evident:


We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

It's rather ironic that the atheists, in support of their position, quote a document that was inspired by a theistic text ...
 
Signal said:
It's rather ironic that the atheists, in support of their position, quote a document that was inspired by a theistic text ...
Click to expand...

and as usual, you twist and take things out of context as well as being hypocritical. theism is not the only source of democratic ideas and even the bible is full of non-democratic examples as well. you are assuming that it's just theists that have them or had them.

"equal" does not mean that everyone has the same abilities, intelligence, interests, personality, looks etc. besides, the bible doesn't say all people are created equal either in the sense you understand it. if that were the case, there would not be kings and commoners.

it means that everyone is recognized as having the same basic needs and should have equal opportunity to better themselves or pursue what they wish.
 
let's sum up this slavery issue.

classroom:

instructor: by a show of hands, who thinks that slavery is neither right or wrong?

students: several hands pop up.

instructor: fine, you've just been selected for enslavement.

students: uh..um..but..(shocked expressions)

instructor: what's the problem? cat got your tongue?

students: but you see, i...uh...um...don't want to be enslaved. i didn't say it was right either.

instructor: you agreed it's neither right or wrong. then you should not have any problem with whether one is enslaved or not.

students: well...you see...uh...ah..i don't think i would enjoy it.

instructor: enslavement is not dependent on whether a slave enjoys or approves and you know that. do you think others deserve to be enslaved but not you?

students: well...uh...i think it's wrong, for me. also, those "other" slaves may deserve it because they are inferior.

instructor: what if i think you are inferior? so it was neither right or wrong when it's about someone else but it's not neither wrong or right but suddenly "wrong" when it applies to you?

students: uh...um...well...ah...yes.
 
birch said:
let's sum up this slavery issue.

classroom:

instructor: by a show of hands, who thinks that slavery is neither right or wrong?

students: several hands pop up.

instructor: fine, you've just been selected for enslavement.

students: uh..um..but..(shocked expressions)

instructor: what's the problem? cat got your tongue?

students: but you see, i...uh...um...don't want to be enslaved. i didn't say it was right either.

instructor: you agreed it's neither right or wrong. then you should not have any problem with whether one is enslaved or not.

students: well...you see...uh...ah..i don't think i would enjoy it.

instructor: enslavement is not dependent on whether a slave enjoys or approves and you know that. do you think others deserve to be enslaved but not you?

students: well...uh...i think it's wrong, for me. also, those "other" slaves may deserve it because they are inferior.

instructor: what if i think you are inferior? so it was neither right or wrong when it's about someone else but it's not neither wrong or right but suddenly "wrong" when it applies to you?

students: uh...um...well...ah...yes.
Click to expand...

All you have done is establish that it is subjectively undesirable. That has nothing to do with morality.
 
That has nothing to do with morality.
Click to expand...

it has everything to do with morality. if you had an honest bone in your body, you would know that slavery is just a form of oppression, bondage, exploitation and violation.

when it comes to morality, these are considered immoral.

unless, you want to go there and say that there is no such thing as morality.

interesting, for a professed christian.

another thing, what's so hypocritical about your views is that you state this has nothing to do with morality yet you stated that you don't condone slavery as well as follow the teachings of christ.

if it doesn't have to do with morality, why do you have a stand?

so if another were to practice slavery, it would be okay to you as long as it wasn't you who is practicing slavery. kind of like those who sit back and watch a crime taking place. very interesting. so it's a matter of personal taste, whether one practices slavery or not.

you contradict yourself and from all your posts put together, it's clear that you don't have any moral values at all. it's something you make sure to not validate with any humane reasons by citing it as from christ or god. it's rather a veiled condescension or dismissal for any legitimate reasons why morals exist.
 
Last edited:
birch said:
it has everything to do with morality. if you had an honest bone in your body, you would know that slavery is just a form of oppression, bondage, exploitation and violation.
Click to expand...

I never claimed it didn't. You have called me dishonest many times now. Don't think that because in your mind there are certain assumptions that you can engage with said assumptions without validating them. In the worlds of Philosophy, it is THAT that is dishonest.

birch said:
when it comes to morality, these are considered immoral.
unless, you want to go there and say that there is no such thing as morality.unless, you want to go there and say that there is no such thing as morality.
Click to expand...

Nothing is immoral without an agreed upon doctrine of morality, which has yet to be defined. I believe I posted something about this, to which you never responded...

birch said:
interesting, for a professed christian.
Click to expand...

Yes, you must not have read my posts. My standard for morality is the Bible. Yours is not. Which means you and I cannot have a conversation regarding morality without first defining an agreed doctrine.

birch said:
another thing, what's so hypocritical about your views is that you state this has nothing to do with morality yet you stated that you don't condone slavery as well as follow the teachings of christ.

if it doesn't have to do with morality, why do you have a stand?
Click to expand...

You are horribly confusing conversational threads here. As I stated above, I have a code of ethics as defined by Christ. In that respect, I do in fact stand against slavery. The question I am trying to get ANY atheist on this board to answer is - if you don't accept a code of ethics defined from some third party - by what doctrine, or by what standards, do you consider slavery immoral?

birch said:
so if another were to practice slavery, it would be okay to you as long as it wasn't you who is practicing slavery. kind of like those who sit back and watch a crime taking place. very interesting. so it's a matter of personal taste, whether one practices slavery or not.
Click to expand...

Frankly, you are basically just describing religious freedom. You need to make up your mind - should I impose my religious beliefs on others or not? If you wish to claim that slavery is atheistically immoral, and NOT a religious belief, then you must provide some logic to do so. Define a doctrine, explain how it is a standard of morality, and then identify how slavery is not in alignment with that standard. It really is quite simple; I could give as many examples for it as I did for slavery being acceptable. All I am trying to get you to do is complete your thought processes and recognize where your ideals and morality come from.

birch said:
you contradict yourself and from all your posts put together, it's clear that you don't have any moral values at all. it's something you make sure to not validate with any humane reasons by citing it as from christ or god. it's rather a veiled condescension or dismissal for any legitimate reasons why morals exist.
Click to expand...

Not at all - I am simply pressing you to provide those legitimate reasons. And perhaps get you to see how temporal they are. Gmilam gets it. Ultimately, your morality is subjective. Which means it can change from generation to generation, or for that matter that it can change with the will of a democratic people, which in my mind renders it useless, as people can be manipulated, misinformed, and misled. That a lot of idiots agree that something is good or bad has no real relevance for me. It is through that mechanism that countless atrocities have been legally carried out for centuries. If we ever hope to have a true Utopia, we will need a better foundation for morality than subjective feelings.
 
SolusCado said:
I never claimed it didn't. You have called me dishonest many times now. Don't think that because in your mind there are certain assumptions that you can engage with said assumptions without validating them. In the worlds of Philosophy, it is THAT that is dishonest.



Nothing is immoral without an agreed upon doctrine of morality, which has yet to be defined. I believe I posted something about this, to which you never responded...



Yes, you must not have read my posts. My standard for morality is the Bible. Yours is not. Which means you and I cannot have a conversation regarding morality without first defining an agreed doctrine.



You are horribly confusing conversational threads here. As I stated above, I have a code of ethics as defined by Christ. In that respect, I do in fact stand against slavery. The question I am trying to get ANY atheist on this board to answer is - if you don't accept a code of ethics defined from some third party - by what doctrine, or by what standards, do you consider slavery immoral?



Frankly, you are basically just describing religious freedom. You need to make up your mind - should I impose my religious beliefs on others or not? If you wish to claim that slavery is atheistically immoral, and NOT a religious belief, then you must provide some logic to do so. Define a doctrine, explain how it is a standard of morality, and then identify how slavery is not in alignment with that standard. It really is quite simple; I could give as many examples for it as I did for slavery being acceptable. All I am trying to get you to do is complete your thought processes and recognize where your ideals and morality come from.



Not at all - I am simply pressing you to provide those legitimate reasons. And perhaps get you to see how temporal they are. Gmilam gets it. Ultimately, your morality is subjective. Which means it can change from generation to generation, or for that matter that it can change with the will of a democratic people, which in my mind renders it useless, as people can be manipulated, misinformed, and misled. That a lot of idiots agree that something is good or bad has no real relevance for me. It is through that mechanism that countless atrocities have been legally carried out for centuries. If we ever hope to have a true Utopia, we will need a better foundation for morality than subjective feelings.
Click to expand...

there have been legitimate reasons posted on this thread repeatedly why slavery would be considered wrong/immoral but you are not paying attention to them or refusing to. it's you who has given no legitimate reasons for your stand, except repeating that you don't condone it but arguing that slavery is neither wrong or right just as jan ardena. it is the likes of you who could easily be swayed depending on the situation and the times. you are projecting.


you claim your morality is based on christ and don't condone slavery and yet you deviously try to condone/allow slavery even on a basis of principle by remaining suspiciously noncommital. your arguments are extremely hypocritical.

furthermore, you have repeatedly pleaded on many threads and called for fairness toward christians and how they are treated on this forum from others which is trivial in comparison yet when it comes to an issue even more serious as slavery, you dont take it seriously and basically try to condone subversively by plugging that it's nothing to do with morality.

this is not an issue of forcing your views on others, it's an issue of what your moral stand is and why. i stated that i think slavery is wrong. yet, you state that you don't condone slavery but hypocritically keep it in a nebulous state. is this a matter of it being morally wrong or is it just wrong for you? and if it is wrong for you, explain?

this is why you keep hiding behind christ or god , because you don't want to give legitimate reasons. if you gave legitimate reasons, you know that it would expose the hypocrisy of your arguments or your plug that it's not an issue of morality.

as well, because of both the old and new testament, you could easily condone slavery when it suits you. it is very dishonest how you are projecting exactly what your argument is onto me.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top