Posts by EdenOne

284

I'm an ABSENTHEIST. Are you also?

by EdenOne in

it just dawned on me.

the existence of god can't be proved, neither is there evidence of god's inexistence.

so, i'm neither theist neither atheist.

EdenOne

Because, as you so relentlessly claim, we should always adhere to reality, stick to the evidence, and be prepared to back up spectacular claims with facts. The claim that deities don't exist is at least as spectacular as the claim that they exist. Big claims demand overwhelming evidence, as you always say. Theists can never find evidence that will sufficiently satisfy unbelievers, and atheists cannot provide evidence of the inexistence of a deity that will convince theists. Since you so like Ocam's Razor, the simplest, verifiable claim that can be made about God (or any deity that you chose to elect) isn't that it doesn't exist; simply that it is absent.

Eden

284

I'm an ABSENTHEIST. Are you also?

by EdenOne in

it just dawned on me.

the existence of god can't be proved, neither is there evidence of god's inexistence.

so, i'm neither theist neither atheist.

EdenOne

Nonsense. If I say that a boogeyman couldn't be found in my bedroom, am I claiming that the boogeyman exists? Or am I making the simplest, verifiable claim about the boogeyman? But if I'd say "the boogeyman isn't in my bedroom because it doesn't exist", then I have the burden to present evidence that such entity can't be found in any corner of the universe, and in all dimentions known to physics. See my point?

Eden

284

I'm an ABSENTHEIST. Are you also?

by EdenOne in

it just dawned on me.

the existence of god can't be proved, neither is there evidence of god's inexistence.

so, i'm neither theist neither atheist.

EdenOne

My claim is simple: the only thing that can be said about a deity or deities is that their absence is a verifiable fact. By saying this I'm not asserting God's existence and there's no necessity to define said deity or deities. Don't put claims that I'm not making in my mouth.

Eden

284

I'm an ABSENTHEIST. Are you also?

by EdenOne in

it just dawned on me.

the existence of god can't be proved, neither is there evidence of god's inexistence.

so, i'm neither theist neither atheist.

EdenOne

Nope, not the same thing. My proposition adheres to reality, yours doesn't - it merely relies on a probability.

Eden

284

I'm an ABSENTHEIST. Are you also?

by EdenOne in

it just dawned on me.

the existence of god can't be proved, neither is there evidence of god's inexistence.

so, i'm neither theist neither atheist.

EdenOne

Cofty, God's absence doesn't allow me to make any statements about God. Except that he's absent, which is a verifiable fact.

Eden

284

I'm an ABSENTHEIST. Are you also?

by EdenOne in

it just dawned on me.

the existence of god can't be proved, neither is there evidence of god's inexistence.

so, i'm neither theist neither atheist.

EdenOne

No, this is not a belief in a God that is absent. It's a belief that the only thing that can be said about God is that God is absent.

Eden

284

I'm an ABSENTHEIST. Are you also?

by EdenOne in

it just dawned on me.

the existence of god can't be proved, neither is there evidence of god's inexistence.

so, i'm neither theist neither atheist.

EdenOne

Cofty, by definition there's no evidence of anything's inexistence, God's or otherwise. Yahweh or Thor or the Big Unicorn in the Sky. Gotta love that rabid neo-atheism, huh? However, the ABSENCE of something or someone CAN be attested. And hence, I declare myself "absentheist".

Eden

284

I'm an ABSENTHEIST. Are you also?

by EdenOne in

it just dawned on me.

the existence of god can't be proved, neither is there evidence of god's inexistence.

so, i'm neither theist neither atheist.

EdenOne

It just dawned on me. The existence of God can't be proved, neither is there evidence of God's inexistence. So, I'm neither theist neither atheist. To be an agnostic is to embrace the possibility that God may exist, without evidence to back it up and the certainity that God cannot be known. So, what evidence is there about God? In a word: his ABSENCE. So, here's my newly found belief: I'm ABSENTHEIST.

Are you one also?

Eden

9

Does anyone else find reinstated dubs can be the most hypocritical?

by William Penwell in

i have seen this over the years that some that get df'd and later reinstated can be the most hypocritical.

one case comes to find about my nephew who was df'd about 10 years ago for cupping a little feel of some dub sisters boobs.

well right away he turns to us non dubs for moral support as he is being ostracized by the dub relatives.

EdenOne

It's all about WHO you know in the Org ...

Eden

68

Help needed: Written material regarding shunning of DF'd and DA'd individuals

by EdenOne in

i would like this to become a permanent thread, because i think there are grounds - at least in europe - to take this matter up to the european court of human rights.

not sure we'll ever get there, but one must start somewhere.

objective: force, by legal means, the watchtower society and the jehovah's witnesses to stop the practice of shunning ex-jehovah's witnesses, on grounds that it constitutes a violation of human rights.. what is needed: all written material ever published by the watchtower society, especially since 1940's, concerning the practice of shunning.

EdenOne

The discourse of the Jehovah's Witnesses leadership, as published in the authoritative publications of the Watchtower Society can correctly be characterized as "hate speech".

What is "hate speech"?

From Wiki: "Hate speech is, outside the law, speech that attacks a person or group on the basis of attributes such as gender, ethnic origin, religion, race, disability, or sexual orientation. In law, hate speech is any speech, gesture or conduct, writing, or display which is forbidden because it may incite violence or prejudicial action against or by a protected individual or group, or because it disparages or intimidates a protected individual or group."

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) states that "any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law".

The European Court of Human Rights is deeply concerned with hate speech.

“... [T]olerance and respect for the equal dignity of all human beings constitute the foundations of a democratic, pluralistic society. That being so, as a matter of principle it may be considered necessary in certain democratic societies to sanction or even prevent all forms of expression which spread, incite, promote or justify hatred based on intolerance ..., provided that any ‘formalities’, ‘conditions’, ‘restrictions’ or ‘penalties’ imposed are proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued.” (Erbakan v. Turkey judgment of 6 July 2006, § 56). - European Court of Human Rights

-----

"12. The Assembly reaffirms that hate speech against persons, whether on religious grounds or otherwise, should be penalised by law in accordance with General Policy Recommendation No. 7 on national legislation to combat racism and racial discrimination produced by the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI). For speech to qualify as hate speech in this sense, it is necessary that it be directed against a person or a specific group of persons. National law should penalise statements that call for a person or a group of persons to be subjected to hatred, discrimination or violence on grounds of their religion." - Extracted from Recommendation 1805 (2007) from the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly