Leftist retards aka globalist sock puppets

[David Jeffrey Spetch]

Wrong.

There is some value in there.

What do you propose anyway, nothing non tyrannical I'm sure.

Such pages from such pathetic garbage work great for starting a fire Hat and I have made clear the destruction of religion for the well being and sanity of current and future generations of the life on this planet is quite obvious except to these types:

[Blackwater Lunchbreak]

Such pages from such pathetic garbage work great for starting a fire Hat and I have made clear the destruction of religion for the well being and sanity of current and future generations of the life on this planet is quite obvious except to these types:

You sound like a psychopathic idiot on this one, chum.

[Bulletbob]

Indeed.

Yes but bidwnpresident is a idiot and that wont change

[Nordberg]

With Atheism being the worst of the lot...

The absence of religion is not a religion. The atheists are not fighting religious wars and demanding people follow them and donate money to a church. They essentially leave you alone. If only Christians could do that.

[T. A. Gardner]

The absence of religion is not a religion. The atheists are not fighting religious wars and demanding people follow them and donate money to a church. They essentially leave you alone. If only Christians could do that.

Sure it is. It has its prophets like Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens, it uses their writings--among others--as the equivalent of religious texts. That is, their works are proof they are correct in their beliefs.

Atheism operates out of the same fundamental set of rules other religions do. They have a set of beliefs, such as there is no god, nothing more than we can observe as one example, and dogmatically set out to shore up support for it. Atheism worships science. It needn't have every trapping of some other religion to be one. All the fundamental basics are present.

When you take what a Christian, Muslim, or whoever, says about their religion and flip it to an Atheist point-of-view, it still sounds exactly the same. The dogma of Atheism is no different from any other religion. Atheism isn't the "absence of religion" at all. It is the absence of god playing a role in a religion.

[Concart]

The absence of religion is not a religion. The atheists are not fighting religious wars and demanding people follow them and donate money to a church. They essentially leave you alone. If only Christians could do that.

Correct. I don't believe in Santa Claus either. Lack of belief has no dogma.

[Doc Dutch]

Sure it is. It has its prophets like Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens, it uses their writings--among others--as the equivalent of religious texts. That is, their works are proof they are correct in their beliefs.

Atheism operates out of the same fundamental set of rules other religions do. They have a set of beliefs, such as there is no god, nothing more than we can observe as one example, and dogmatically set out to shore up support for it. Atheism worships science. It needn't have every trapping of some other religion to be one. All the fundamental basics are present.

When you take what a Christian, Muslim, or whoever, says about their religion and flip it to an Atheist point-of-view, it still sounds exactly the same. The dogma of Atheism is no different from any other religion. Atheism isn't the "absence of religion" at all. It is the absence of god playing a role in a religion.

Both Dawkins and Hitchens were the "Four Horsemen of New Atheism" until the staunch Marxist Hitchens choked out his life at age 62.

Oddly, I'm noticing a lot of people who die in their early 60s. It's like the Cancer Age.

Agreed Atheism is a belief in that they are certain they are correct without evidence of that correctness. The only logical position is Agnosticism.

[T. A. Gardner]

Both Dawkins and Hitchens were the "Four Horsemen of New Atheism" until the staunch Marxist Hitchens choked out his life at age 62.

Oddly, I'm noticing a lot of people who die in their early 60s. It's like the Cancer Age.

Agreed Atheism is a belief in that they are certain they are correct without evidence of that correctness. The only logical position is Agnosticism.

Exactly. Empirically, there are just four positions on religion:

Theism: A belief in a God or Gods, or something greater than yourself unseen.
Agnosticism: You're on the fence. There may or may not be a God / god and you haven't decided. You are the implacable skeptic.
Secularism: Religion is irrelevant to you. You don't care if there's a god or gods.
Atheism: A belief that there is no god or gods and there is nothing greater than yourself unseen.

Only Atheism of these is irrational. It places denial on there being more to the universe than we know. It is not the healthy skepticism of an Agnostic, but rather stubborn belief that there is and can be anything greater unseen in the universe than yourself.

[BidenPresident]

Sure it is. It has its prophets like Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens

I couldn't care less what Dawkins says. Hitchens died years ago.

[BidenPresident]

Exactly. Empirically, there are just four positions on religion:

Theism: A belief in a God or Gods, or something greater than yourself unseen.
Agnosticism: You're on the fence. There may or may not be a God / god and you haven't decided. You are the implacable skeptic.
Secularism: Religion is irrelevant to you. You don't care if there's a god or gods.
Atheism: A belief that there is no god or gods and there is nothing greater than yourself unseen.

Only Atheism of these is irrational. It places denial on there being more to the universe than we know. It is not the healthy skepticism of an Agnostic, but rather stubborn belief that there is and can be anything greater unseen in the universe than yourself.

All atheisms are not the same. Theism is usually understand as a personal God. One can also have an impersonal God.
One can be atheistic about a personal God but recognize an impersonal God.

[BidenPresident]

Atheism operates out of the same fundamental set of rules other religions do. They have a set of beliefs, such as there is no god, nothing more than we can observe as one example, and dogmatically set out to shore up support for it. Atheism worships science.

Atheism is older than Christianity. So, all of what you said is false. As far as worshipping science, you just made that up.

[T. A. Gardner]

Atheism is older than Christianity. So, all of what you said is false. As far as worshipping science, you just made that up.

This is a non sequitur in the form of a negative conclusion from an affirmative premise. Atheism's, or Christianity's, or any other religion's age has nothing to do with the premise at hand, a belief in God. The Church of Atheism certainly does worship science, as one brand of Atheism...

[BidenPresident]

This is a non sequitur in the form of a negative conclusion from an affirmative premise. Atheism's, or Christianity's, or any other religion's age has nothing to do with the premise at hand, a belief in God. The Church of Atheism certainly does worship science, as one brand of Atheism...

Then you do not know the definition of "theism." Nor do you understand what a logical fallacy is.

Your need to use "worship" is strictly a religious term and not applicable to science.

[Doc Dutch]

Exactly. Empirically, there are just four positions on religion:

Theism: A belief in a God or Gods, or something greater than yourself unseen.
Agnosticism: You're on the fence. There may or may not be a God / god and you haven't decided. You are the implacable skeptic.
Secularism: Religion is irrelevant to you. You don't care if there's a god or gods.
Atheism: A belief that there is no god or gods and there is nothing greater than yourself unseen.

Only Atheism of these is irrational. It places denial on there being more to the universe than we know. It is not the healthy skepticism of an Agnostic, but rather stubborn belief that there is and can be anything greater unseen in the universe than yourself.

Great definitions. By the definition of Secularism there are none on this forum in discussing the topic.

As for Agnostic, a better definition IMO is textbook "it can't be known" meaning it's not a matter of implacability when there is no way to prove it. If it was proved, a logical person would accept the fact. That's an Agnostic, not someone who puts their beliefs/disbeliefs ahead of fact or insufficient fact.

[Doc Dutch]

This is a non sequitur in the form of a negative conclusion from an affirmative premise. Atheism's, or Christianity's, or any other religion's age has nothing to do with the premise at hand, a belief in God. The Church of Atheism certainly does worship science, as one brand of Atheism...

Then you do not know the definition of "theism." Nor do you understand what a logical fallacy is.

Your need to use "worship" is strictly a religious term and not applicable to science.

Disagreed, Ms. B. You show your youth and inexperience everytime you exaggerate like a politician. Obviously TA does know the definition. You just don't like his opinion yet you can't contradict him with logic and less emotion.

If you just want to grow up and be a housewife/soccer mom, then go for it. If you want to make it as an adult in the business world, you need to organize your thoughts better.

In this case refute TA's post by proving your premise:

All atheisms are not the same. Theism is usually understand as a personal God. One can also have an impersonal God.
One can be atheistic about a personal God but recognize an impersonal God.

You can't because not all atheisms or any other isms are the same.

Over 330 million Americans with over 330 million versions of reality. Go for it. LOL