I’m just curious if they would considering they do not believe in an afterlife…so every minute must be precious to them…for example…would an atheist take a bullet for you…push you outta the way of a speeding car…
I’m as confused as a baby in a topless bar
How many people have you saved so far?
He might or might not, depending on the circumstances. He would certainly move a thread to Great Debates for you.
Change Your Password, Please and don’t use HTML, as it has been disabled
Oh, Manhattan. Just shut up. No, really, just shut up.
This board’s got Manny Manny Manny on the fanny fanny fanny. Your atheist philosophy is 180 degrees contrary to the philosphy espoused by 85 percent of Americans. And on and on and on…
On OP:
I have more than once placed myself in dangerous situations for another’s benefit. Not once did I have to stop and consider whether my atheism should be a factor in determining my actions. Do you find life less precious because you believe in an afterlife? If so, why do you continue living?
Off OP:
Lib, must you carry grudges from one thread to another? It is not an endearing quality. I believe that that is why the administrator’s created the PIT, so that arguments would not need to be carried over across threads in the other forums.
The best lack all conviction
The worst are full of passionate intensity.
*
You mean those in the manner of the one I parodied?
Um, Lib, did you forget to take some pills or was that a joke?
Jay, it depends on the atheist and it depends on the person. I may not be the ravening devil envisioned by some, but I help my friends, and I’d damn sure try to get a kid out of traffic.
And I believe android’s point was “You’re not an atheist, how many lives have you saved? None? Then you’re not exactly a fount of purity. You don’t really have the moral high ground on this one.”
Did I get it right, android?
I sold my soul to Satan for a dollar. I got it in the mail.
Jay, one of the most touching posts I have seen on this board follows:
The poster and I have exchanged friendly, and occasionally not-so-friendly, potshots at each other on my tendency to bring my faith into many topics. He is, you see, an atheist. And I believe his offer to be totally in accord with his principles.
Not to mention John Corrado’s atheist friend, who was certainly not in a foxhole because he thought it was a good spot for a vacation. If not giving, he was at least risking his life for others.
Polycarp has it right. When an atheist risks life and limb, it is done with the belief that there will be no afterlife, no rebirth, just oblivion. We view life as a unique experience and treat it as such. When I risk my life, I risk everything!
Slythe, though you need not accept it, you have a valid species of Pascal’s Wager going here, since the alternative IMHO is judgment by Someone who is on record as saying, “Greater love hath no man than this, that he lay down his life for his friends.”
Peace, brother! 
Just great. An atheist proving Pascal’s Wager.
Next Topic:Is There A Valid Reason For An Atheist To Kill Himself?
There is no valid species of Pascal’s Wager. What theists who propose it seem unable to move beyond is the assumption that the choice is between their God or no God.
The best lack all conviction
The worst are full of passionate intensity.
*
And if God is not genitive?
Nope: It comes directly after The Ethical Basis for a Homosexual Space-Time Continuum, as Examined from a Libertarian Viewpoint
All our ponies do multiple tricks, albeit repeatedly! 
I only know two things;
I know what I need to know
And
I know what I want to know
Mangeorge, 2000
Missed this before:
Were you pardying a post on this thread? If not, then why did you place your parody on this thread?
Honest questions, do you have an honest answer?
On OP:
Hmmmm – anyone seen jayburner around? Perhaps he laid down his life for an atheist.
The best lack all conviction
The worst are full of passionate intensity.
*
I certainly hope so. Of course, it need not be an atheist. It could be a Christian. Or a Buddhist. Or a cocker spaniel. Or a fruit fly. Just so long as he did it.
I have a hobby. I have the world’s largest collection of seashells. I keep it scattered on beaches all over the world. Maybe you’ve seen some of it.
this is no parody question…just trying to get the straight dope
Spiritus
I know that generally you make a point of my ignoring questions, despite that they might be redundant, rhetorical, or ridiculous, and of course, generally, I don’t press you to answer questions you skip over, but this time, I really am curious.
You said:
And I asked:
I think it matters whether the frame of reference is God-centric or nature-centric. If God is not anybody’s God, i.e. He is not genitive, then Pascal’s Wager holds.
Lib, please continue to accuse me of your faults. It amuses me, somehow. I generally do not answer questions I view as rhetorical. Do you?
Since you make it clear you were serious about “what if God is not genetive?” Let me remind you of Pascal’s Wager. Implicit in teh formulation of the wager is that benefits derive from the belief in God, should that belief be “correct”. Conceptions of God, of course, are myriad, as are the behaviors expected from each of those conceptions. To “win” the wager, it is necessary to select the accurate conception from among the field.
Now, you may object to the possesive formulation, but if you abandon it then you deny the wager. If God is not not anybody’s God, what are the consequences for Pascal? Well, since God does not match any og teh myriad of human conceptions of God, then no human can have an accurapte conception. Therefore no human “correctly” believes. In this case, either everybody loses the wager, or God does not require accurate belief in order to bestow the “benefits”. So, there is no penalty for being wrong. In either case, Pascal’s Wager collapses.
The best lack all conviction
The worst are full of passionate intensity.
*