There is no proof that I am an invisible pink unicorn agnostic. But then again there is no proof that I am not. LOL
Richard Dawkins espouses Militant Atheism: "Mock them, Ridicule them." Attack Religious People with Insults!
by MagicMItchJensen 65 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
Doltologist
Truthseeker100
I believe agnosticism is the only position that a true scientists can take.
In everyday life, we are constantly faced with situations for which there is no proof one way or the other. In such situations, we make a decision based on 'common sense' and/or logic.
It says in the babble that god created heaven and Earth in 6 days and, was so knackered, that he had to rest on the seventh day. So, we have this ever so powerful sky wizard that can create whole universes and yet needs a rest now and then. Does that sound believable to you?
It says in the babble that god created day and night on day 2 I think? Two days later, on day 4?, god created the Sun and the stars. So, we have a god that is so powerful that he can create night and day and yet doesn't understand light because he doesn't create the Sun until two days later. Does that sound believable to you?
It say in the babble that god created Man. Well, Man, as a biological entity, works, sort of, but the design ain't great.Let's put it this way, DNA wasn't one of god's greatest inventions. Does that sound believable to you?
I could go on but, on the balance of probability, god ain't looking a good bet.
Agnostics claim that there isn't any proof one way or the other that god exists. That's true. There isn't. However, based on common sense and on the balance of probability, there's more proof against god than there is for him existing.
For me, the only sensible position to take is Atheism. It's certainly the most likely and the most probable.
Dawkins. in one of his Youtube vids, though extremely reluctantly, states that he believes that the chances of god existing is less than 1%. I got the feeling from the vid that he only puts the odds this high is because he can't actually prove that god doesn't exist.
Yet, the majority of US citizens believe in god as do the majority of a so-called godless Europe.
-
GrreatTeacher
No one is asking anyone to believe in atheism because Dawkins said so. It's a conclusion many have come to after considering much evidence from many sources.
Dawkins doesn't do anything for you? Great! You've still got to do your homework; what evidence do you have for a god?
-
Doltologist
GreatTeacher
No one is asking anyone to believe in atheism because Dawkins said so. It's a conclusion many have come to after considering much evidence from many sources.
Many are ignoring the evidence and believing in god anyways.
Dawkins doesn't do anything for you? Great! You've still got to do your homework; what evidence do you have for a god?
Even after 2,000 years, there's still no evidence. Wake up to reality people.
-
truthseeker100
Agnostics claim that there isn't any proof one way or the other that god exists. That's true. There isn't. However, based on common sense and on the balance of probability, there's more proof against god existing than there is for him.
Be careful with the common sense thing. There are many on this site who were talked into believing in God and Satan and the bible, based on common sense, who today don't believe a word of it.
I believe that a preponderance of the evidence tends to make me lean towards atheism as well and I respect your belief in atheism but I keep my mind open until it's proven one way or the other.
I don't believe that if it was ever proven there was some kind of a god it would be nothing like what we could ever imagine or have imagined, but it is only a belief.
-
GrreatTeacher
Good point, truthseeker. What's common sense to one person might not necessarily be so for another. -
Doltologist
Truthseeker100
Be careful with the common sense thing. There are many on this site who were talked into believing in God and Satan and the bible, based on common sense, who today don't believe a word of it.
The two underlined and emboldened words are mutually exclusive.
... but I keep my mind open until it's proven one way or the other.
I have an open mind too - but not so open that my brain has fallen out.
-
MagicMItchJensen
I think there are a lot of Christians who can't forget all the atrocities and blood spilled through regimes claiming to have gotten rid of God. We hear about the "Millions of people burned at the stake or hung during the Witch Trials". I had someone who was a atheist telling me how the Puritans were responsible or killing "tens of thousands of people", if only 150 people were in prison and less than 40 were killed, where did the additional numbers come from?
The second area that troubles me, if the totals are carried in to Europe, that add to 200,000 to 300,000 depending on your sources you used. If 250,000 were killed during the Inquisition, as one author noted that's 250,000/ 300 years. The numbers on the Crusades don't add up to 100s of Millions, where are all these numbers coming from? The Crusades and Inquisitions don't add up to 100 Million, where are these numbers from? The Children's Crusade's was the worst by far, and still I can't find sources showing the massive numbers given by people.
It bothers the atheist when people try to bring in Mao, Pol Pot, Stalin and many more Regimes consolidating power under their godless Communistic Regimes. More people were killed under these regimes than Religious Regimes according to different sources.
How are we suppose to look at the 67 million to 75 million (Russians).
China had it's own share, it's about 50 to 65 million to, the United States Senate had a report done and they estimated near 65 million in China.
Cambodia killed off 1/3 of it's population, how are Christians and religious people suppose to forgive the groups that allowed Mad Men like these to take control and kill more people in the name of "Godlessness' than Religion of Christ did in 2000 years?
Most professional Philosophers are now agreeing if your bringing forward the claim "God does not exist", this requires proof by you too. Arguments do demand each party share a burden, why people are not picking up on this, I don't understand why both sides are not understanding each has a responsibility. Your the one making the statement "God does not exist, therefore you do have the burden of proof to make sure your audience is provided proof or best reasons why it's true.
http://www.strangenotions.com/who-has-the-burden-of-proof-when-discussing-god/
One thing to take note of, many atheist debaters are getting away from 'the problem of evil" because that assumes there is evil"
Here's a interesting article, Christians are upset at all the deaths that happened under the name of "No God", it's hard for them to forget too. Dawkins is upset about the deaths by false Christians, we get upset when people kill and follow leaders that teach "God is dead!"
http://www.catholiceducation.org/en/controversy/answering-atheists/answering-atheists-arguments.html
-
Ruby456
I don't think Richard Dawkins wants us to take him too literally. watch how he insults religion and see the difference. Plus would he do it to people who have recently been abused by religion? would he pound them with insults? one person constantly pounding people with derogatory comments about their religion is bullying imo
edit: re the internet in general: there is growing public awareness about the bad consequences of bullying on the internet. It is only a matter of time before this sort of thing is not considered an exercise of free speech and more and more laws will be enacted to curb it.
-
Phizzy
I don't agree with insulting an individual, but I do agree with exposing how silly and ill-informed their views may be. A fine line has to be drawn.
It is all a matter of how you express your non-belief. It can be done in a kindly and gentle way, and I happen to feel this is the best way.
When I first discovered this estimable Site, I was shown in a kindly way by Poster "Caedes" that I knew nothing about Evolution. If he had ridiculed me for my ignorance, would I have stayed here, and would I have continued my journey out of the Cult? Maybe not.
I usually say something along the lines of " I do not share your beliefs, I have decided to lead an Evidence Based life, so I simply do not have faith or belief without evidence".
It's funny, but no believer so far has tried to provide me with a shred of evidence.