The Mormon Gulag

[Mitt Romneys sideburns]

technically, such things could exist. all combinations are possible within the genome. more creatures than we can imagine probably exist throughout the universe.
But i'm not sure they DO exist... and i'm not sure they DON'T exist.
I just know they don't exist here on earth at this present time.

Being that we know little about out universe, which is evidence by the amount we learn everyday through our observations.... I'd say anyone who definitely says there isn't a god/higher power/divine/force/something bigger than us out there is being dishonest with themselves.
No possible way for you to know for certain if you haven't seen it.

Pluto(the quasi-planet) exist, but had you asked Peter the Apostle, he'd told you there could be no such thing.. and if there was... then why can't he see it?

Again, you are hung up on the notion of absolute certainty. Its completely useless.

Its ridiculous for me to have to say I must be agnostic about everything. The time for believing in things is when there is evidence to justify such belief. I dont need to call myself agnostic about unicorns and pixies and transformers and the Lords of Kobol.

Your Pluto and Peter analogy fails pretty hard. Nobody would have asked Peter if he believed in Pluto unless they had know about it and observed it themselves. otherwise how would they have even know about Pluto in order to ask him about it? And then they could have let him look through the telescope and see it for himself.

 

[torchbearer]

Again, you are hung up on the notion of absolute certainty. Its completely useless.

Its ridiculous for me to have to say I must be agnostic about everything. The time for believing in things is when there is evidence to justify such belief. I dont need to call myself agnostic about unicorns and pixies and transformers and the Lords of Kobol.

Your Pluto and Peter analogy fails pretty hard. Nobody would have asked Peter if he believed in Pluto unless they had know about it and observed it themselves. otherwise how would they have even know about Pluto in order to ask him about it? And then they could have let him look through the telescope and see it for himself.

You don't have to be agnostic about everything... just things you can't prove as fact.
What is fact?
THings you can sense. (see, hear, touch, feel, taste, smell)
That is you body reacting to a stimulus around you. You know its there.
Then for things you can't sense... you should hold the possibility for it to be so...
This will leave you open to learn new things with no hurdles... and give you a creative edge against those people who say "it can't be so".
Newton was agnostic. Copernicus was agnostic, Kepler was agnostic. WHy? because they never accepted the knowledge of that day as the only facts.

You have to first admit you don't know, before you will seek the understanding to know.

 

[Mitt Romneys sideburns]

You don't have to be agnostic about everything... just things you can't prove as fact.
What is fact?
THings you can sense. (see, hear, touch, feel, taste, smell)
That is you body reacting to a stimulus around you. You know its there.
Then for things you can't sense... you should hold the possibility for it to be so...
This will leave you open to learn new things with no hurdles... and give you a creative edge against those people who say "it can't be so".
Newton was agnostic. Copernicus was agnostic, Kepler was agnostic. WHy? because they never excepted the knowledge of that day as the only facts.

You have to first admit you don't know, before you will seek the understanding to know.

By this logic I have to wast time being agnostic about any stupid claim someone makes. Its an absurd position.

For instance, do you believe in the Lords of Kobol? The mythical creators of man from the television show Battlestar Galactica? Since you cant say for certain they dont exist, by your reasoning, the only logically justified position is to be agnostic.

 

[torchbearer]

By this logic I have to wast time being agnostic about any stupid claim someone makes. Its an absurd position.

For instance, do you believe in the Lords of Kobol? The mythical creators of man from the television show Battlestar Galactica? Since you cant say for certain they dont exist, by your reasoning, the only logically justified position is to be agnostic.

Yes, that would be honest.
I know he doesn't exist in my sphere of known world.
But if someone else wants to believe he exist... thats ok. As long as they aren't getting the government to push the Lords of Kobol's agenda.
Then I will have a problem with their government interference.
Not their idea of such a thing possibly existing.
Though I will debate them on the subject.. because I could be wrong...they may prove they do exist.
I don't know.

 

[Mitt Romneys sideburns]

Yes, that would be honest.
I know he doesn't exist in my sphere of known world.
But if someone else wants to believe he exist... thats ok. As long as they aren't getting the government to push the Lords of Kobol's agenda.
Then I will have a problem with their government interference.
Not their idea of such a thing possibly existing.
Though I will debate them on the subject.. because I could be wrong...they may prove they do exist.
I don't know.

Do you not see how silly this argument is?

 

[torchbearer]

Do you not see how silly this argument is?

Its not an argument.
It is being willing to accept that you don't know everything, and that those things you take as fact, may not be so...
It doesn't mean you don't know anything, but that not everything is known.
That is very logical.

 

[Mitt Romneys sideburns]

Its not an argument.
It is being willing to accept that you don't know everything, and that those things you take as fact, may not be so...
It doesn't mean you don't know anything, but that not everything is known.
That is very logical.

But you are trying to use this to arrive at an absurd position of intellectual dishonesty in regards to your position on the question of belief in a single assertion.

 

[torchbearer]

But you are trying to use this to arrive at an absurd position of intellectual dishonesty in regards to your position on the question of belief in a single assertion.

Your above post is a supposition.

 

[Freedom 4 all]

Your Pluto and Peter analogy fails pretty hard. Nobody would have asked Peter if he believed in Pluto unless they had know about it and observed it themselves. otherwise how would they have even know about Pluto in order to ask him about it? And then they could have let him look through the telescope and see it for himself.

If you are going to go with that logic then God necessarily exists, seeing as people ask about it.

 

[wizardwatson]

Bill Maher is an asshat. He is no friend to critical thinking and skepticism. He admits he believes in God, its just religion he has a problem with. Hes another one of those douchebags too afraid to accept what they believe and dont believe, so he goes looking for a happy intelectual middle ground where he doesnt have to get caught up on taking sides. Much like fake libertarians like Neal Bortz

He reminds me a lot of our very own Truth Warrior. He wont commit himself to a position, he just makes fun of everyone else.

I agree with you that Maher is an asshat.

Religion is supposed to be about practice, about self-awareness and being a better person. It's the dogmatic stuff and the "God or no God" stuff that is irrelevant.

If there is a "force" in the universe, I seriously doubt it cares about what you conjure up in your imagination factory. It probably doesn't have time to care as it's too busy 'being the force'.

Action is what matters. The practice of religion is what matters. Communication of religion is no different than communication of any other idea, it isn't perfect. Religious communication is doubly imperfect though by those who prey on the weak in order to control and manipulate them.

What bothers me about people who are into spreading 'the truth' about 'reality' is that they tend to want to attack the weak for being weak rather than focusing on how exactly the manipulative among us have bent and contorted the original message.

 

[worl]

Guys, unless you want this movement to stay the same size it is, or reduced by the number of people reamed by same, we might really want to consider focusing on those things that will get us out of this predicament we now find ourselves in. Instead of insulting the hell out of each others' faiths.

The ultimate goal of the anti-religious elites is to transform America into a completely secular nation, a nation that is legally and culturally biased against Christianity. RON PAUL. Their goal is to separate people & cause arguments within the Ron paul movement. I would suspect them being obama or huck. supporters & they know without the christian vote we stand no chance of geting anyone elected, so they attack religion. This is a tactic used a lot by goverment's to control the people. The best way to deal with these people is to ignore them.

 

[torchbearer]

atheism is the consequence of the Pat Robertson's of the world.
Without them... people wouldn't be so turned off about the idea of religion.

 

[Mitt Romneys sideburns]

atheism is the consequence of the Pat Robertson's of the world.
Without them... people wouldn't be so turned off about the idea of religion.

Absolutely wrong here. The only reason I even half to call myself an Atheist is because there are so many people who are deluded into thinking their is a god or group of gods.

 

[Mitt Romneys sideburns]

The ultimate goal of the anti-religious elites is to transform America into a completely secular nation, a nation that is legally and culturally biased against Christianity. RON PAUL. Their goal is to separate people & cause arguments within the Ron paul movement. I would suspect them being obama or huck. supporters & they know without the christian vote we stand no chance of geting anyone elected, so they attack religion. This is a tactic used a lot by goverment's to control the people. The best way to deal with these people is to ignore them.

Wow, you really are ignorant. You think atheists are secret Huckabee supporters trying to break the Ron Paul movement apart?

And maybe the 9/11 truthers are really part of a secret Rudy Giuliani gulag?

 

[torchbearer]

Absolutely wrong here. The only reason I even half to call myself an Atheist is because there are so many people who are deluded into thinking their is a god or group of gods.

or a force....

 

[M House]

I'm with Mitt here for the most part, I don't think he's got the right to judge an individual on their religious affiliation but I think he's got the right to call bullshit at bullshit. After reading all these threads about atheism is destroying the fabric of government and being a communist tactic, I kinda feel some people really don't get it. Our leaders are religious, the government's religious, and actually there weren't that many atheists in commie country.

 

[Mitt Romneys sideburns]

and actually there weren't that many atheists in commie country.

Yep. The connection between Communism and Atheism makes about as much sense as trying to link the Communists to the Amish populations of Ohio and Pennsylvania because both groups prohibit their citizens from using the Internet.