Should have previewed. Sorry but I disagree. I have the freedom of expression too and what I’m saying here is that yes I fully believe:
theist = whackjob
Christian, pagan, muslim, jew, whatever. I think you are ALL idiots.
I just don’t say this most of the time because I’m polite. Or as polite as I can be.
I think the comparitive religion point raised by Giles is a very important one. I know the US is a vastly majority Christian country, but there are a hell of a lot of other faiths represented in that country, not all of which have creation myths that even vaguely coincide with the Christian version.
Here’s a plan for you, atheists. If you can’t beat them, join them to the point of absurdity to try to make the whole house of cards fall down. Why not get behind a Hindu pressure group in an attempt to get Hindu stickers put in science books too.
There’s a large Chinese community in the States, yes?
Then Zoroastrians, then all the African religions… and so on.
Stop trying to make yourself out to be a martyr in this. Atheists get the easy cop-out of simply blaming every problem on theists. You’re doing it right now. Stop trying to blame everything on people who have a shred more faith than you do.
While I admire your courage of your convictions, I think you’re a judgmental, egotistical, intolerant prick.
I’m an atheist who is no particular fan of organized religion, but I won’t say that all deists are idiots. I’ve known many who aren’t idiots. I’ve argued on the SDMB with some who aren’t idiots.
I think they’re WRONG, very very wrong, with potentially grave consequences. But that doesn’t mean they’re idiots.
The OP is not “blaming everything on theists”; she is raging, quite justifiably IMO, against the insertion of religious dogma into public education and against the general idiocy of believing in invisible people who live in the sky.
Ghanima, you must read this book.
You do realize you’re implying that without religion there can be no morality? Pfft.
And I echo Friedo’s sentiment.
As much as I have absolutely no use for religion, and as much as I believe that the world will be a better place once we finally move beyond it, I can’t support the idea that all theists are idiots. Too many of them are smarter than me, and if they’re idiots, what does that make me?
Similarly, you should get hold of the UK edition of this book, which contains the delightful index entry:
Get hold of the UK edition, because:
Just a quibble, but many textbooks do talk about the origins of life.
Namely, that ‘hot thin soup’ (as replicated by the spark discharge experiment) created something like
proteinoid microspheres, which in turn evolved to greater complexity.
Admittedly, last time I checked that was a hypothesis and not a theory, but just wanted to throw something else into the mix.
I agree. The difficulty here is not letting your personal biases and preferences colour your observations (commonly known as seeing what you want to or expect to see).
Dude, I belive in the theory of evolution as much as anyone. But you’re demanding people examine the facts and then you go and attribute stuff to the bible that isn’t there. The bible doesn’t say the world is flat or that the sun revolves around the moon. Those assumptions were made by philosphers of the ancient world. If you’re going to demand facts, you should hold yourself to the same standard.
No Hamlet I did not refer to what you mention (and I don’t recall how exactly I worded my objections and remarks in that thread).
But now that you bring it up:
I saw that judge declaring in an interview - in what appeared to be his office - that he makes his decisions in court following what the Ten Commandments want him to do.
While making that statement he points to a version of the Ten Commandments (representing a mini-scale reproduction of what is displayed in his very courthouse) that is behind him in his office.
Are you going to tell me that hence these Ten Commandments were not influencing him in his decisions while he had to base them in secular law only?
I heard him say it. I saw him pointing to what was the Law he said he followed: the Ten Commandments of the Christian religion. I heard him say that according to him the US law should always follow the Ten Commandments.
Are you going to say that man never existed? That he was not elected to be a Christian Judge by his Christian supporters?
One may ask : How many similarly influenced judges do you have in the USA? Those who don’t become as open and brtualy honest about the Divine Rules they follow (= don’t go as far as placing the Ten Commandments in courthouse and office and don"'t state their convictions in interviews) yet still believe and act as if they first should follow their religion and next should see how the secular laws eventually can also be of use.
And you may count on it that the case of that judge gave once again a proof of how engrained the Christian religion is in all aspects of society in the USA.
Frist get rid of the word GOD from your money, try to get a secular president who does not even mention religion - let alone the word GOD every few sentences - in his public speeches and then try to sell to the world that you have a secular nation.
Salaam. A
So now you have said it on a message board.
Wouldn’t it be better to say it to those that irritate you that much that you feel you must post about it anonymously on an anonymous message board?
I mean: what have the religious members of this particular message board done to you that you call them “ALL idiots”?
Salaam. A
I tell you what this atheist wants, and almost got in the rather secular UK (a country, by the way, Corner Case, not noted for a lack of “underlying basis for treating life and the pursuit of happiness with any respect”).
In science classes a brief disclaimer, once, at the beginning, saying “there are many different and conflicting religious beliefs about the the formation of the universe, the earth, and biological development, which you’ll learn about in your Religious Tolerance classes. However in this class we’re going to learn about things that have been observed, and how theories were built on these observations and proved or disproved as more knowledge became apparent.”
Then Religious Tolerance classes, which deal with the major 10 or so religions, the denominations thereof, their mythologies (including the creation ones), and instruction on mutual respect.
All other religion to be practiced wherever, and however, people like, in complete freedom, outside the school. Exceptions to be made for people whose religion requires worship at times during school hours, but this is to be done in a private worship area.
If parents want their sprogs to be educated religiously, let them study at religious schools, not public ones.
I don’t care that you’re religious. I just don’t want to be proselytised to, or for your denomination to influence what I can and can’t do.
From Eve’s link:
This is not relating to “moderation” in religion, as it claims. It relates to “tolerance”.
“Moderation” is on the part of the believer, not the non-believer. It means accepting that you do not have the right to tell others how to live or the willingness to kill for your religious ideology. Some religions actually practice moderation, and not many of them are “mainstream” enough to justify claiming they have a part in “blinding us to the role faith plays in perpetuating human conflict.”
Can you imagine a Quaker declaring Jihad-style warfare against anyone? Or a Unitarian-Universalist lobbying to make Secular Humanism part of a school curriculum?
I am sure that this guy has something important to say about the evils of mob mentality. I am sorry that he dilutes his point by making fallacious claims.
As a theist who is a member of the Top One Percent Society, I’d like to get a clarification on what is meant by “idiot”.
Oh, because in that one thread, and pretty much every other thread on the subject, including this one, you continue to (at this point I have to believe it’s intentionally) ignore the difference between society and the government. Your continued revelling in ignorance invalidates your positions, makes you a dishonest debator, and ruins your credibility to me.
Roy Moore was removed from the bench. His 10 Commandments were removed from the courthouse. I know that wherever you are, there are never, ever any issues that arise that are dealt with, but Roy Moore was wrong and was removed.
I don’t know. And, guess what? You don’t either. Although in your mind, you seem to be convinced that every judge out there is willing to ignore his/her oath to uphold the Constitution and act as Roy Moore. I’m sure there are judges who have religious faith, but to assume that they all put that ahead of their sworn duty is delusional.
For now that 10th time, there is a difference between society and the government. The Christian religion is certainly “engrained” in society. However, our government, concerned about that very issue, included the right to freedom of religion and the Establishment Clause in the Bill of Rights to the Constitution.
You are never going to get it, are you? No matter what I say, do, explain, cite, or argue. You simply refuse to pay any attention. It’s truly frustrating as hell to deal with you.
No you didn’t, but I was commenting on your lumping of religious people and comparing them to racists…
I didn’t comment on that, so I’ll just assume that your picking up the ranting ball and running with it.
Welcome to the bigotry club, bub. Should I just go ahead now and falsely assume that all athiests are like racists, or call them ALL whackjobs too? :rolleyes:
Nah.
Get over yourself.