Turning around in neighbor's driveway
in [Drive]
|
Prev: Would Consumer Reports say this is a shady practice?
Next: Seat Belt: Will You Get Ticketed If You Show Medical Exemption?
From: � UltraMan � on 5 May 2007 04:25 Jeckyl wrote: > "Fred G. Mackey" <nospam(a)dont.spam> wrote in message > news:NNWdnZVSSbx6gqHbnZ2dnUVZ_tunnZ2d(a)comcast.com... >> Jeckyl wrote: >> >>>> That's not the atheist position. You've done a GREAT job of >>>> explaining the agnostic position. >>> >>> >>> Which is also the atheist position .. you are confusing atheist >>> with the subset "strong-atheist", >> >> That's a crock - an atheist is an atheist. > > Can't argue with that. And some are only weak atheists and some are > also strong atheists. > >> They BELIEVE there is no god of any kind. > > They do not BELIEVE there is a god of any kind > >> Your pleas only help prove my point that it IS a religion. > > What pleas? > >> If you weren't religious you would get so hyped up about it > > Oh .. was I hyped? > >> especially in the face of valid cites >> which prove my position on this issue. > > I'm just interested in the truth. An atheist is someone who does not > believe in god (or gods). > >>> who not only have a lack of theism (ie no belief in gods) but also a >>> belief that gods to not exists. >> Yep - atheists have a belief that gods do not exist. > > Some atheists have a belief that gods do not exist. Nope. A-theism = Lack of Belief.
From: � UltraMan � on 5 May 2007 04:28 Martin Phipps wrote: > On May 5, 7:06 am, Kent Wills <compu...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> As I understand it, on Fri, 4 May 2007 10:37:06 +1000, "Jeckyl" >> >> <n...(a)nowhere.com> wrote: >>> "Kent Wills" <compu...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >>> news:hatk331kpodcvs6mel0a1gmeklc6rq8qo8(a)4ax.com... >>>> As I understand it, on Fri, 4 May 2007 03:14:47 +1000, "Jeckyl" >>>> <n...(a)nowhere.com> wrote: >> >>>>>>> _ Prof. Jonez _ <thep...(a)jonez.net> wrote: >>>>>>>> I will gladly show that your pig-ignorant grotesque >>>>>>>> perverted superstition that you call christianity is >>>>>>>> utterly false. >> >>>>> Please present this proof. >> >>>> I've been asking for proof that atheism is correct for a very >>>> long time. >> >>> Easy .. >> >>> The theist position is to know that god exists >> >> To claim to KNOW is to claim to have proof. No sane person >> would claim to KNOW there is a god. >> I do believe, but freely admit I can't prove that God exists. >> >>> The atheist position is to not know that god exists >> >> That's an agnostic's position. > > Not quite. Agnostics don't know that gods exists but they also aren't > sure if he doesn't exist. An agnostic person could take Pascal's > Wager and decide that he should pray just in case. That position > doesn't make him particularly honest but then few theists are. Most Agnostics are Atheists, they are just too cowardly to admit it. > > Martin
From: � UltraMan � on 5 May 2007 04:32 Martin Phipps wrote: > On May 5, 1:08 am, "_ Prof. Jonez _" <thep...(a)jonez.net> wrote: >> Jeckyl wrote: >>> "� UltraMan �" <u...(a)man.jp> wrote in message >>>> Jeckyl wrote: >>>>> "� UltraMan �" <u...(a)man.jp> wrote in message >>>>>> Jeckyl wrote: >>>>>>> "� UltraMan �" <u...(a)man.jp> wrote in message >>>>>>>>> but again, no code of ehtics or values. So no, it would not >>>>>>>>> be a religion in any useful sense of the word. >>>>>>>> Exactly. >>>>>>> There you go .. there was no need for the 'bullshit' remark >>>>>> Yes there was. Asserting that A-theism might possibly >>>>>> be a "religion" is a tautological impossibility. >>>>> Not really .. just not in any useful way. Strong atheism has a >>>>> particular belief that all strong atheists share. But that is >>>>> not a useful definition of a religion, as then anything that >>>>> people hold as true could be a religion. >>>> Which is why it is misleading to conflate the terms belief, faith >>>> and religion. >> >>> I'm not the one doing that. >> >> Yes, you are. >> >>> Belief is anything you hold to be true (especially without proof) >>> Faith is firm belief (usually with no proof) >> >> In the context of A-Theism and Theism, the "especially without proof" >> part is the key element of the definition, otherwise the discussion >> and definitions become meaningless. >> >> A-Theism is the ANTONYM of Theism, ipso facto. > > We're not going to prove anything with semantics. If we can't agree on the semantics and meanings of the terms under discussion, the results would be as meaningless as mathematicians not agreeing on the value of specific numbers. > The fact is that atheism has no beliefs, no dogma, no rituals, none of the > things that > are associated with religion. Exactly -- the Antonym of Religion > People assume that because theism and > atheism rhyme that they are similar. That's dumb. That's theists. > > Martin
From: Christopher A.Lee on 5 May 2007 04:58 On Fri, 04 May 2007 23:00:44 -0700, "Fred G. Mackey" <nospam(a)dont.spam> wrote: >Robibnikoff wrote: >> "Fred G. Mackey" <nospam(a)dont.spam> >> snip >> >>>That's the SECONDARY definition. I notice you left out the PRIMARY >>>definition. >> >> >> So? If it's wrong, it's wrong. Deal. > > >Deal with it yourself. The accepted definition is that atheists believe >there are no gods. Accepted by pig-ignorant sociopathic and nasty theists who can't grasp what an atheist is, in the real world outside their religion. In short bigots like you. But not accepted by atheists because it's the label for *U*S*. Which has to describe *U*S* accurately. You don't get to tell us what our position is. And neither do dictionaries. We are simply people who are absent the property of being theist. If you are too bigoted, stupid and nasty to accept this, you are the problem, not the definition. Because the accurate definition is also in most dictionaries even though it is ignored by idiots who don't know how dictionaries work. http://atheism.about.com/od/definitionofatheism/a/definition.htm "There is, unfortunately, some disagreement about the definition of atheism. It is interesting to note that most of that disagreement comes from theists � atheists themselves tend to agree on what atheism means. Christians in particular dispute the definition used by atheists and insist that atheism means something very different."
From: Christopher A.Lee on 5 May 2007 05:00
On Fri, 04 May 2007 23:12:21 -0700, "Fred G. Mackey" <nospam(a)dont.spam> wrote: >Jeckyl wrote: > >>>That's not the atheist position. You've done a GREAT job of >>>explaining the agnostic position. >> >> >> Which is also the atheist position .. you are confusing atheist with the >> subset "strong-atheist", > >That's a crock - an atheist is an atheist. They BELIEVE there is no god >of any kind. Why do you lie, liar? >Your pleas only help prove my point that it IS a religion. If you >weren't religious you would get so hyped up about it, especially in the >face of valid cites which prove my position on this issue. Why do you lie, liar? >> who not only have a lack of theism (ie no belief in >> gods) but also a belief that gods to not exists. > >Yep - atheists have a belief that gods do not exist. Why do you lie, liar? |