Not a troll, it's actually pretty sad, a fat gay guy singing about how god hates fags, and its not a joke, and those are his terms not mine.
Originally posted by: Vic
BTW, I can't view the contents of conjur's link from my home comp at this time (although I'm sure it's one of his usual trolls). I'm a Linux n00b and I haven't figured out how to get shockwave to work yet.
Originally posted by: ayabe
Originally posted by: Vic
BTW, I can't view the contents of conjur's link from my home comp at this time (although I'm sure it's one of his usual trolls). I'm a Linux n00b and I haven't figured out how to get shockwave to work yet.
Not a troll, it's actually pretty sad, a fat gay guy singing about how god hates fags, and its not a joke, and those are his terms not mine.
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: Martin
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: Martin
Originally posted by: Vic Fundies represent a relatively small faction of Christians even in America, and scarcely exist at all in the rest of the world. Even more to the point, what fundies practice has been considered heresy by orthodox Christianity since the 2nd century AD Text.
About 45% of Americans believe the earth is less than 10000 years old. This is not "relatively small", its "alarmingly huge".
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/061110.html
Yeah, and you've admitted here that you believe in Advanced Alien Species. What's the difference? They got their Young Earth Creationism, you got your Grays in Area 51.
I think you're enjoying your Christmas present a bit too much.
And you think that you weren't resorting to Straw Man? Fundies is not necessarily the same as Young Earth Creation believers (or you might explain why, when you posted that to make an unfounded partisan jab, the linked article said that 58% of Democrats polled believe in Creationism).
BTW, I can't view the contents of conjur's link from my home comp at this time (although I'm sure it's one of his usual trolls). I'm a Linux n00b and I haven't figured out how to get shockwave to work yet.
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: Martin
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: Martin
Originally posted by: Vic Fundies represent a relatively small faction of Christians even in America, and scarcely exist at all in the rest of the world. Even more to the point, what fundies practice has been considered heresy by orthodox Christianity since the 2nd century AD Text.
About 45% of Americans believe the earth is less than 10000 years old. This is not "relatively small", its "alarmingly huge".
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/061110.html
Yeah, and you've admitted here that you believe in Advanced Alien Species. What's the difference? They got their Young Earth Creationism, you got your Grays in Area 51.
I think you're enjoying your Christmas present a bit too much.
And you think that you weren't resorting to Straw Man? Fundies is not necessarily the same as Young Earth Creation believers (or you might explain why, when you posted that to make an unfounded partisan jab, the linked article said that 58% of Democrats polled believe in Creationism).
BTW, I can't view the contents of conjur's link from my home comp at this time (although I'm sure it's one of his usual trolls). I'm a Linux n00b and I haven't figured out how to get shockwave to work yet.
Hey Vic, lemme know when SETI and/or its supporters start claiming (without any scientific proof whatsoever) that they've been talking to aliens. Ask the same thing of Christians, well... I think you see where I'm going with this.
Originally posted by: Vic
I love it when I step away from a thread for a couple of hours and my point is proven for me. Which, in this case, is that the "whack jobs" are a lot more than just the fundie nuts. But what could I have possibly expected from people who think that science is a belief system? (Hint: it's actually a process).
Oh BTW: atheism is by dictionary definition the active disbelief in God, not merely the lack of belief in God. Get your facts straight before you throw rocks from your glass house.
Ah, such sweet irony coming from you.Originally posted by: Vic
Huh. That is sad. I hope someday somehow he stops listening to the lies of those who would control him or destroy him and manages to come to terms with himself.Originally posted by: ayabe
Not a troll, it's actually pretty sad, a fat gay guy singing about how god hates fags, and its not a joke, and those are his terms not mine.Originally posted by: Vic
BTW, I can't view the contents of conjur's link from my home comp at this time (although I'm sure it's one of his usual trolls). I'm a Linux n00b and I haven't figured out how to get shockwave to work yet.
Hmm... how so? As you are more than well aware of, individualism is the core of my personal belief system. So there's nothing ironic about my statement there at all. I honestly hope that he learns to stop hating himself just because some nasty evil lying people tell him that he should hate himself.Originally posted by: conjur
Ah, such sweet irony coming from you.Originally posted by: Vic
Huh. That is sad. I hope someday somehow he stops listening to the lies of those who would control him or destroy him and manages to come to terms with himself.Originally posted by: ayabe
Not a troll, it's actually pretty sad, a fat gay guy singing about how god hates fags, and its not a joke, and those are his terms not mine.Originally posted by: Vic
BTW, I can't view the contents of conjur's link from my home comp at this time (although I'm sure it's one of his usual trolls). I'm a Linux n00b and I haven't figured out how to get shockwave to work yet.
Originally posted by: Nebben
Originally posted by: Vic
I love it when I step away from a thread for a couple of hours and my point is proven for me. Which, in this case, is that the "whack jobs" are a lot more than just the fundie nuts. But what could I have possibly expected from people who think that science is a belief system? (Hint: it's actually a process).
Oh BTW: atheism is by dictionary definition the active disbelief in God, not merely the lack of belief in God. Get your facts straight before you throw rocks from your glass house.
If a person is born into a culture in which nobody ever speaks of, refers to, knows about, or has ever heard of, the idea of God, and he's walking around not believing in God, what do you call him?
As for dictionary definitions, there is more than one listed in any decent dictionary. And if it's such a big deal, I'll go around explaining to people in multiple sentences that I don't believe in God, but I also don't assert that one absolutely doesn't exist.
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: Martin
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: Martin
Originally posted by: Vic Fundies represent a relatively small faction of Christians even in America, and scarcely exist at all in the rest of the world. Even more to the point, what fundies practice has been considered heresy by orthodox Christianity since the 2nd century AD Text.
About 45% of Americans believe the earth is less than 10000 years old. This is not "relatively small", its "alarmingly huge".
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/061110.html
Yeah, and you've admitted here that you believe in Advanced Alien Species. What's the difference? They got their Young Earth Creationism, you got your Grays in Area 51.
I think you're enjoying your Christmas present a bit too much.
And you think that you weren't resorting to Straw Man? Fundies is not necessarily the same as Young Earth Creation believers (or you might explain why, when you posted that to make an unfounded partisan jab, the linked article said that 58% of Democrats polled believe in Creationism).
BTW, I can't view the contents of conjur's link from my home comp at this time (although I'm sure it's one of his usual trolls). I'm a Linux n00b and I haven't figured out how to get shockwave to work yet.
Lumping those that believe in a young earth is consistent with the above definition.A usually religious movement or point of view characterized by a return to fundamental principles, by rigid adherence to those principles, and often by intolerance of other views and opposition to secularism.
Originally posted by: Vic
I admire Sagan, but he admitted he believed in AAS many times while (just like your quote here) admitting there was no evidence for it. That's a textbook definition for a faith. And what's the argument? "there are a lot of places out there, and use the word *billions*, and so on." That's not scientific (I recall one particular Cosmos episode where he fell back repeatedly on the Drake Equation, pulling various numbers out of thin air). Hell, that's the exact same logic the creationists use to justify their belief in creationism, as I already pointed out in this thread.
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: Nebben
Originally posted by: Vic
I love it when I step away from a thread for a couple of hours and my point is proven for me. Which, in this case, is that the "whack jobs" are a lot more than just the fundie nuts. But what could I have possibly expected from people who think that science is a belief system? (Hint: it's actually a process).
Oh BTW: atheism is by dictionary definition the active disbelief in God, not merely the lack of belief in God. Get your facts straight before you throw rocks from your glass house.
If a person is born into a culture in which nobody ever speaks of, refers to, knows about, or has ever heard of, the idea of God, and he's walking around not believing in God, what do you call him?
As for dictionary definitions, there is more than one listed in any decent dictionary. And if it's such a big deal, I'll go around explaining to people in multiple sentences that I don't believe in God, but I also don't assert that one absolutely doesn't exist.
Such a culture has never existed in all of recorded history. Even ancient cultures prejudicially labeled in these modern days as "polytheistic" had a belief in a one single almighty God who ruled over all the other gods.
That's generally considered to be agnosticism. The only honest belief IMO.
Originally posted by: eits
ok, i thought that this was going to be a documentary film about fundamentalist churches around the country.
instead, it was KINDA an assault against christianity and the republican party... i felt a little upset about that.
I don't think they did a good enough job separating fanatic fundamentalists/evangelical pentacostals from real christians...
what do you think?
You must be new to the intarweb. Nary a week goes by without some conversation right here on AT whose general theme is "HAHA, teh Christians are stoopid! They're not smart like us atheists." The circle jerk factor of atheists online is quite high.Originally posted by: Nebben
'Active disbelief' conveys to me a sense of urgency to run out on the street and tell everyone there's no God, which is pretty far from the actual behavior of most atheists.
Originally posted by: Nebben
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: Nebben
Originally posted by: Vic
I love it when I step away from a thread for a couple of hours and my point is proven for me. Which, in this case, is that the "whack jobs" are a lot more than just the fundie nuts. But what could I have possibly expected from people who think that science is a belief system? (Hint: it's actually a process).
Oh BTW: atheism is by dictionary definition the active disbelief in God, not merely the lack of belief in God. Get your facts straight before you throw rocks from your glass house.
If a person is born into a culture in which nobody ever speaks of, refers to, knows about, or has ever heard of, the idea of God, and he's walking around not believing in God, what do you call him?
As for dictionary definitions, there is more than one listed in any decent dictionary. And if it's such a big deal, I'll go around explaining to people in multiple sentences that I don't believe in God, but I also don't assert that one absolutely doesn't exist.
Such a culture has never existed in all of recorded history. Even ancient cultures prejudicially labeled in these modern days as "polytheistic" had a belief in a one single almighty God who ruled over all the other gods.
That's generally considered to be agnosticism. The only honest belief IMO.
Agnosticism requires knowledge of the concept of God. That would not be the correct label here.
And atheism and agnosticism do not necessarily go at odds with each other.
I'd consider atheism to be as honest a belief as they come, for me, as I don't follow or believe in any deity. If you can please explain to me how that's a problematic term, please do. And do a little more research on the word 'atheist' than looking it up in your Webster. It is very commonly defined (by atheists) as the 'absence of belief' rather than the 'active disbelief', which are not really that far from one another for most people. 'Active disbelief' conveys to me a sense of urgency to run out on the street and tell everyone there's no God, which is pretty far from the actual behavior of most atheists.
There have always been multiple definitions of words like this, and I'm pretty sure you're aware of that, since you profess to have an understanding of the idea. Please don't pretend you're winning an argument with me with something as petty as semantics.
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: Nebben
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: Nebben
Originally posted by: Vic
I love it when I step away from a thread for a couple of hours and my point is proven for me. Which, in this case, is that the "whack jobs" are a lot more than just the fundie nuts. But what could I have possibly expected from people who think that science is a belief system? (Hint: it's actually a process).
Oh BTW: atheism is by dictionary definition the active disbelief in God, not merely the lack of belief in God. Get your facts straight before you throw rocks from your glass house.
If a person is born into a culture in which nobody ever speaks of, refers to, knows about, or has ever heard of, the idea of God, and he's walking around not believing in God, what do you call him?
As for dictionary definitions, there is more than one listed in any decent dictionary. And if it's such a big deal, I'll go around explaining to people in multiple sentences that I don't believe in God, but I also don't assert that one absolutely doesn't exist.
Such a culture has never existed in all of recorded history. Even ancient cultures prejudicially labeled in these modern days as "polytheistic" had a belief in a one single almighty God who ruled over all the other gods.
That's generally considered to be agnosticism. The only honest belief IMO.
Agnosticism requires knowledge of the concept of God. That would not be the correct label here.
And atheism and agnosticism do not necessarily go at odds with each other.
I'd consider atheism to be as honest a belief as they come, for me, as I don't follow or believe in any deity. If you can please explain to me how that's a problematic term, please do. And do a little more research on the word 'atheist' than looking it up in your Webster. It is very commonly defined (by atheists) as the 'absence of belief' rather than the 'active disbelief', which are not really that far from one another for most people. 'Active disbelief' conveys to me a sense of urgency to run out on the street and tell everyone there's no God, which is pretty far from the actual behavior of most atheists.
There have always been multiple definitions of words like this, and I'm pretty sure you're aware of that, since you profess to have an understanding of the idea. Please don't pretend you're winning an argument with me with something as petty as semantics.
This is ridiculously inaccurate. That is obvious when you look at the roots of the respective words. Agnosticism comes from a gnosticism, or to be in opposition to gnosticism. Gnosticism is the belief in the supernatural. Atheism is a theism, or to be in opposition to theism, where theism is the belief in God. So obviously this hypothetical culture with no knowledge whatsoever of God would be agnostic, whereas atheism requires that the knowledge of the concept of God exist in the first place in order for one to be in opposition of such knowledge.
I don't care about your petty apologist BS. This has nothing to do with "winning" any argument or your precious ego. If you post information that is factually inaccurate, I will call you out on it. Our discussion began you said that any Christian who wasn't a fundamentalist or who didn't believe in creationism was a "half-way there Christian" who "didn't know the OT." When I pointed out that that was factually wrong and cited the 1 billion plus member Catholic church as an example, you fell back on the anecdote of your personal opinions about your brother's faith, I wish I could not care less about. Once that became painfully obvious, you began moving from tangent to tangent in order to protect your precious ego, the last of which is the little semantic trip.
I tell this to everyone here who pulls this same crap. This is not a verbal discussion. You cannot pretend that certain things you posted never occurred. Or would you like me to repost your every word from this thread?
To be honest, I've always had MORE respect for fundies than the halfway-there Christians who just go to church now and then and don't have a clue about the OT (or much from the NT, for that matter). Why? Because although I think both categories are pretty much whacked, at least the average pentecostal/fundie/other variety of fanatic sticks with their story. They may have an entirely off-base world view, but they actually do all of the things they feel they should do.
Our discussion began you said that any Christian who wasn't a fundamentalist or who didn't believe in creationism was a "half-way there Christian" who "didn't know the OT."
Originally posted by: Termagant
Many on the secular left have no idea about anything concerning modern sects of Christianity and the variations in religious fervor and belief. You see that ignorance incessantly demonstrated on this very forum.
Originally posted by: Nebben
I'm sorry, please tell me where in that post I said that? Because I very clearly did not. The 'halfway-there' bit did not refer specifically to creationism. I was contrasting fundies to Christians that don't know anything about their faith and don't change anything in their lives to reflect said faith. Which was my point: I view fundies with higher regard than your average sometimes-churchgoer that doesn't have any idea what his beliefs entail. Somehow, you pulled Catholicism out of that, which really has nothing to do with it.
You also either can't come to terms with, or are simply ignoring, the fact that a large number of atheists define their views exactly as I have in this thread. The root words are really fantastic and interesting, but that doesn't equate to the current working definition of the word as far as atheists regard it. If you'd like to invent a new word for me to use specifically, be my guest.
Originally posted by: glutenberg
Originally posted by: Nebben
I'm sorry, please tell me where in that post I said that? Because I very clearly did not. The 'halfway-there' bit did not refer specifically to creationism. I was contrasting fundies to Christians that don't know anything about their faith and don't change anything in their lives to reflect said faith. Which was my point: I view fundies with higher regard than your average sometimes-churchgoer that doesn't have any idea what his beliefs entail. Somehow, you pulled Catholicism out of that, which really has nothing to do with it.
You also either can't come to terms with, or are simply ignoring, the fact that a large number of atheists define their views exactly as I have in this thread. The root words are really fantastic and interesting, but that doesn't equate to the current working definition of the word as far as atheists regard it. If you'd like to invent a new word for me to use specifically, be my guest.
Don't bother arguing with Vic. In his mind he's always right.
Why bother? You're mind's obviously made up based on your numerous posts on the topic. By the way, were you in Jesus Camp? I think I saw you speaking in tongues and rolling on the floor uncontrollably in one of the shots.Originally posted by: Seekermeister
This seems as good of a place as any, so as one whackjob to another, I will repeat a challenge that I have posted before, and not just on this forum. Since so many of you believe that evolution is fact, and shouldn't be questioned, I'm sure that you have a basis for this belief, other than that you were simply taught so. Since you must thoroughly understand the theory, you must also understand the "evidence" that supports this theory, from all of the related fields. If that is the case, then it should be a simple task for you to outline this evidence in a fashion that even a whacko can understand. No need to explain the theory, that is common knowledge...just the facts that make this more than a scientific dogma.
Here is your opportunity to demonstrate your brillance and enlighten the poor ignorant fundies like me.
Not really, Vic has a good point. Agnostics have the only intellectually honest response to religion. We don't have enough evidence either way on the existence of God. It's the ones who believe there is no god and believe there is a god who are leaping to conclusions based on insufficient evidence.Originally posted by: Nebben
Originally posted by: glutenberg
Originally posted by: Nebben
I'm sorry, please tell me where in that post I said that? Because I very clearly did not. The 'halfway-there' bit did not refer specifically to creationism. I was contrasting fundies to Christians that don't know anything about their faith and don't change anything in their lives to reflect said faith. Which was my point: I view fundies with higher regard than your average sometimes-churchgoer that doesn't have any idea what his beliefs entail. Somehow, you pulled Catholicism out of that, which really has nothing to do with it.
You also either can't come to terms with, or are simply ignoring, the fact that a large number of atheists define their views exactly as I have in this thread. The root words are really fantastic and interesting, but that doesn't equate to the current working definition of the word as far as atheists regard it. If you'd like to invent a new word for me to use specifically, be my guest.
Don't bother arguing with Vic. In his mind he's always right.
I get that feeling.
Originally posted by: Seekermeister
This seems as good of a place as any, so as one whackjob to another, I will repeat a challenge that I have posted before, and not just on this forum. Since so many of you believe that evolution is fact, and shouldn't be questioned, I'm sure that you have a basis for this belief, other than that you were simply taught so. Since you must thoroughly understand the theory, you must also understand the "evidence" that supports this theory, from all of the related fields. If that is the case, then it should be a simple task for you to outline this evidence in a fashion that even a whacko can understand. No need to explain the theory, that is common knowledge...just the facts that make this more than a scientific dogma.
Here is your opportunity to demonstrate your brillance and enlighten the poor ignorant fundies like me.