No. It’s probably people who like the music, the community, the women, the stories, and stuff.
You forgot the buffet. The people at the Chinese church I attended during part of my youth took the duty of bringing food for between Sunday school and worship service very seriously.
To say there is no god is just as bad as saying there is one (and that he’ll fry your butt for eternity because you weren’t a christian). I suppose I define atheism as an absolutist belief that there is no higher power. Which is why I’m an agnostic.
religious people give more dollars and volunteer hours to charity the atheists
Several studies show that religious people give more dollars and volunteer more hours to charity than do nonbelievers. These results tap into something real. Sociologists have found that tribal identity increases altruism toward other members of the tribe.
http://www.christianaggression.org/item_display.php?type=ARTICLES&id=1240366641
I believe the same thing, more or less. An atheist isn’t making statements of fact, unless acting as an independent scientist (who then has to show evidence).
The theist will accept ancient scripture, or charismatic cult leaders, as mind forming fact. An atheist will not. I don’t claim there is no god,just that the apparent evidence that the leaders of the church today aren’t fucking your kids in the butt and making you apologize and pay for it is not compelling.
Steady with the language. Family forum and all that. I detest the organised churches as much as you do, but that was out of place in here.
feel the light: I believe you can survive a 15 foot drop on your unicycle. I have the burden of proof. So must I push you and your unicycle off the rock? Lure you into it?
Hey, watch your language! I don’t see anything “bad” about either, really.
/vulgar rant(DO NOT CLICK OR HIGHLIGHT TEXT UNLESS YOU WANT TO BE OFFENDED)
“Oh language! My vagina is all full of sand! Wahhhh! Someone said butt fucking and it made my pussy bleed!”
Listen to yourselves. Sometimes I forget that this is the most pansy ass forum on the internet. If mom and dad don’t want little Timmy to read vulgarities, keep him off the internet. If lil’ Timmy was educated to learn to disregard foul language when he sees/hears it, he’d probably never start using it.
Read the warning at the top of this page(EXTREMELY NSFW) if you want to understand how things work on the web a little better.
This place would be a lot better if everyone lightened up, instead of ass ramming one another every time someone curses.
Oooooo.
Catboy swore!!!
Sayeth he who understandeth not the ways of web filters.
If by “a lot better” you mean “no kiddies can browse it because it’s blocked by filters” then you may be on to something. But at that point it won’t be the libertarian utopia Gilby intends it to be. It’ll just be Billy and Harper going back and forth all day.
…
not cool.bmp (418 KB)
In my opinion, atheism is nearly impossible to define.
Simply put, an atheist is said to be one that doesn’t believe in god.
The problem then becomes, how do you define god.
This is where the argument begins, and never ends.
For there are as many definitions for what god is, as there are for what god isn’t.
In the end, an atheist is simply one that doesn’t share your concept of what god is.
A broader definition of atheism is simply the absence of belief that any deities exist. Atheists tend to lean towards skepticism regarding supernatural claims, citing a lack of empirical evidence. Common rationales for not believing in any deity include the problem of evil, the argument from inconsistent revelations, and the argument from nonbelief.
Other arguments for atheism range from the philosophical to the social to the historical. Although some atheists tend toward secular philosophies such as humanism, rationalism, and naturalism, there is no one ideology or set of behaviors to which all atheists adhere. In Western culture, atheists are frequently assumed to be exclusively irreligious or unspiritual.
-Wikipedia
As you can see, the Wiki article you has no citations for any of its claims, therefore no one with an empirical orientation could put any stock in it.
there is no evidence that belief in supernatural claims has any relation to either Persons of Faith or Persons of Little or No Faith
I’m writing a book on atheism. I pray to god it’s a best seller!
(Hey Billy boy, where are your citations…other than traffic, lol! :))
Good point. Replace “bad” with “religious” and that’s more the point I’m trying to make. Both claim to know the truth, without any valid evidence.
Gotcha! Ahahahaha! Sucker!
:p;):):)
Sayeth he who assumes much and knows little.
There are very few users on this forum being filtered by parental controls, with the exception of those who view this website from a public computer(work/school etc.), and those users can deal with it, they probably shouldn’t be goofing off while at school/work anyway!
Replace “religious” with “Republican”
I don’t need citations.
In science/empiricism, there is an assumption that there are no “ghosts” “atoms” “electrons” “quarks” “Loch Ness Monster” until their existence is demonstrated.
It’s called “null hypothesis testing.”
So I reiterate: Whoever makes the claim has the burden of proof, not the one saying “I don’t believe, but I might be persuaded if you can show me concrete evidence of your claim.”