Posts by NewChapter

31

Did Sab get banned?

by Christ Alone in

jw
friends

i sure hope not.

if you're still around, please let us know that you're ok. you kinda worried me in your last thread.

hope you're ok, bro....

NewChapter

I've been talking to Sab on my board. I think he'll be okay.

452

Faith... and Trust: The Same Things?

by AGuest in

in a discussion with some other dear ones, the question was asked as to what such ones put their faith in.

in response to one comment that"one can't function without faith," another disagreed, stating ones can, that "many do so every day... the ones who have trust" (in things like the sun rising in the east versus the west).

that trust extended to "faith" based "on nature and the natural order of things.

NewChapter

Maybe you believe as you do, Aguest, because your reading comprehension is low. Is that okay for me to say?

97

Pat Condell on Aggressive Atheism

by cantleave in

this is pretty much how i feel.......who disagrees with this?.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=yjo4duhmrzk&noredirect=1.

NewChapter

I don't know if 'believing' in science is really the correct sentiment. We accept the method as the most effective one we have, and that yields the most answers, but we also know that we don't know what we don't know. Many things are subject to change (be falsified) but each step gets us closer. It seems every time science answers a question, a thousand other questions need to be asked.

97

Pat Condell on Aggressive Atheism

by cantleave in

this is pretty much how i feel.......who disagrees with this?.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=yjo4duhmrzk&noredirect=1.

NewChapter

Being a believer necessitates a complex world view. Merely not believing in God does not. While atheism is singular in unbelief, belief (especially Christianity) is a complex set of beliefs. If one believes in God, then he uses that belief to explain a host of complex and age old questions. Merely not believing in God necessitates no such thing.

True. Being an atheist doesn't require many things. However it does free us up to look for real answer to the complex, age-old questions, as we are unlikely to settle on the god explanation. This has worked out pretty good for everyone.

97

Pat Condell on Aggressive Atheism

by cantleave in

this is pretty much how i feel.......who disagrees with this?.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=yjo4duhmrzk&noredirect=1.

NewChapter

Wait! LOL. First, there is no such thing as 'atheistic' values. Atheism does not come with a set of values. Second, I'm not about 'atheist rights' I'm about human rights. I seriously don't care, on a personal level, what you believe as long as you are not imposing it on others. I don't condone a government that would enforce atheism any more than I would condone a government that would enforce religion. That said, unless there is some atheist push-back, the Chrisitan right in this country could eventually corrupt our government so much, discard the Constitution, and encroach on human rights. It won't be enough to believe in a god, but it will have to be the 'right' god.

I am for a secular government. I don't think we should give tax breaks to churches for money they use to perpetuate their faith, although I think tax breaks may be nice for true and secular charity. Why should government support the perpetuation of a religion anyway? Feed the hungry. Okay. Noble. Get a tax break. Preach to the poor---that's your business. Tax the money.

Simply not believing in gods or fairies does not automatically translate into wanting to suppress religion. Religion somehow thinks that if it is not given political power, it is being suppressed. That if the person who disagrees with them today will be the person who jails them tomorrow. That's ridiculous. Atheists can behave poorly, but they aren't breaking any ethics of atheism. Atheism doesn't have a set of ethics. They can behave very well, but they are not upholding the ethics of atheism. But a person CAN shoot a little girl in the face, stone a homosexual, blow up a clinic, shoot an abortion doctor, dumb down the kids, and absolutely be upholding their ethical code.

42

Secularism/Nonreligious/Agnostics/Atheist

by jam in

jw
friends

scholars lump these groups togather because they all.

purport to not be interested in religion or spirituality.. but one observed notes; "sociolgist point out that there.

are no truly "secular" societies..."nonreligious" people....are.

NewChapter

Yes, Dear. Did you read any of my response?

If you want bumper sticker answers, go with creation. If you want to understand complexity, read my post and then go educate yourself.

97

Pat Condell on Aggressive Atheism

by cantleave in

this is pretty much how i feel.......who disagrees with this?.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=yjo4duhmrzk&noredirect=1.

NewChapter

Nice, Botch. Except atheists aren't parasites. So bad analogy.

97

Pat Condell on Aggressive Atheism

by cantleave in

this is pretty much how i feel.......who disagrees with this?.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=yjo4duhmrzk&noredirect=1.

NewChapter

a close paralell between atheistic (or anti-religious

That would be saying that atheistic is anti-religious. That is not necessarily true. I don't think we should tell others what to believe or that they can't be part of a religion---unless of course they have the power to deny other people's human rights---then it is an issue. Rather than say you can't be a Muslim anymore, I as an atheist would say, you can't shoot little girls in the face anymore, or deny them education, or execute homosexuals. If you PERSONALLY don't want to act on your homosexuality, or don't want to go to school, then don't. But you cannot prevent others.

452

Faith... and Trust: The Same Things?

by AGuest in

in a discussion with some other dear ones, the question was asked as to what such ones put their faith in.

in response to one comment that"one can't function without faith," another disagreed, stating ones can, that "many do so every day... the ones who have trust" (in things like the sun rising in the east versus the west).

that trust extended to "faith" based "on nature and the natural order of things.

NewChapter

Back at you, Cofty

97

Pat Condell on Aggressive Atheism

by cantleave in

this is pretty much how i feel.......who disagrees with this?.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=yjo4duhmrzk&noredirect=1.

NewChapter

I think we agree on most of the points here - except for the great distinction that you seem to be reserving the right to ENFORCE your atheist/secular standards on other societies which have not yet (and in fact may never) naturally adopt them.

I didn't say anything about enforce (nice switch again, btw). We started with 'contamination' which led to 'structuring' and now 'enforcement'.

No. I say we keep talking, educating, sharing. Change comes from the inside. However, if we can take measures to immediately stop people from shooting young girls in the face for going to school, then yes, perhaps some enforcement might be in line---if it were possible. But I don't think it is, so let's continue contaminating until that is no longer okay in the eyes of many.

This is the Libertarian argument---that laws don't change hearts, so don't force people. Well I say that if it takes a law to make sure that a certain race can get employment at fair pay, then I don't expect that certain race to wait around for hearts to be changed---if there is a way around it. I don't think young girls should be patient as they get shot in the face, while waiting for hearts to change. We can certainly apply a certain amount of pressure that would not really be enforcement. We can construct things in such a way that allowing for human rights will benefit them more than not doing so. But we can't pass laws in their countries---this is no reason to give up all together.