…and which prove the evil of not subscribing to Geeper’s idiosyncratic theology, via the cum hoc and/or post hoc fallacies.
Eh, what does the CDC know… buncha government scientists that prolly went to college or some damn thing; get thee behind me!
Why do that ? Doesn’t everybody know teen suicide is on the rise ? Isn’t it *obvious *? And isn’t it simple *common sense *that it would, what with all those godless atheists being allowed to speak in public ?
Swear to Og, those italicized words ? Forget love of money. Them’s the root of all evil. Or at least all ignorance.
Can you please try to stay on topic.
Why don’t you open a new thread on your claims about evolution and atheism, and those of us knowledgeable about the matters under discussion can point out your errors, Dutchman?
I don’t think it will necessary for people who are knowledgeable about such matters to get involved. Even us morons will be able to point out those errors.
So there was one framer of the Constitution who believed that it was unconstitutional to spend federal money hiring a chaplain and on other religious causes. I did not know that. Thank you for educating me.
Nonetheless, the relevant question in this thread is whether the First Amendment was intended to limit religious expression by state and local governments. The evident doesn’t seem to suggest that Madison thought so, much less that the framers in general thought so.
Can you please try to stay on topic ?
I was going to let you slide when you were just sniping at me, but now you’re being a jerk. Knock it off immediately.
I’m baffled as to why you keep repeating this kind of nonsense after participating in so many threads.
Jesus says repeatedly in the NT that simple belief is not nearly enough, that is is through actions that people truly reflect his teachings.
Mat 25:35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’
James 2:15 If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, “Depart in peace, be warmed and filled,” but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit?
Atheists are every bit as capable of offering real practical hope in the form of acts of compassion , rather than the promise of some future reward for believeing the right thing
How is this even relevant? What the framers did do was establish a Constitution and form of government that could change in response to changing times and a changing society. We are far more diverse now than we were then and the laws have changed to reflect that.
It seems like GEEPERS is one of those who believe that atheists think that life is meaningless/worthless because you die forever, when a lot of them think that life is that much more precious, meaningful, and worthy of improvement for that exact reason!
(Not to mention that I don’t think atheism itself/alone precludes belief in an afterlife of SOME kind - just not one created by a Christian God.)
You’re welcome
Well, to be proper “a-theist,” it would have to be an afterlife not created by any god. And, yes, while it is relatively rare, there are some atheists who believe in a kind of “natural” afterlife. Sort of like the more austere forms of Buddhism. A soul, that survives death and returns to take up life in a new body, could exist under as-yet-undiscovered natural laws.
To most atheists, this is a bit of a stretch, and the heavy majority of them (us!) believe that one life is all we get.
(Scientific approaches to exploring reincarnation – like the search for Bridey Murphy – have, so far, been disappointing. The notion is so slim, it only barely qualifies as scientific at all.)
It’s not. That ship has already set sail; Everson v. Board of Education struck a bottle of wine against its hull and launched it off. Whatever the intended reach of the establishment clause, the courts have spoken and it means what it means. Continually pointing out that the text only mentions congress making no law makes something significant out of what is really just beside the point.
On the contrary, Athiests accept the real world. At least those who really think it through.
No god? That means that we are completely responsible for everything we do, or don’t do. We made this mess, we create our own problems, we create the illusion that we call The World. We cannot pray it away, we cannot absolve ourselves of responsibility by saying God (or Satan) did it. We cannot relieve ourselves of the duty to correct it by saying that it is in God’s hands or his will (and therefore we’re free to do fuck all nothing to fix anything).
The Hope is the realization that WE ALONE have the power to do both good and evil. That Justice and Mercy and Fairness do not come from outside, they do not exist in the Universe EXCEPT BY OUR HEARTS, MINDS AND HANDS. That to me is the real beauty of this world. That WE are the ones who dream, idealize and create Mercy and Justice.
The hope and truth is that Humanity isn’t dependent on something higher to create or correct us, but that this power lies within us.
And it always has.
Can I get an Amen?!!!
Dittos.
Gee, when you put it like that, the kind of faith Geepers is promoting seems kinda childish and simplistic.
Silly, even.