XPost: sac.politics, can.politics, alt.atheism
XPost: alt.politics.homosexuality
On Sat, 24 Jan 2015 21:29:10 -0800, Jeanne Douglas
wrote:
.
>In article , mur wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 15 Jan 2015 17:44:17 -0800, Jeanne Douglas
>> wrote:
>> .
>> >In article <6kegba5bsp77juf1sdap2iup4qpf7urmqf@4ax.com>, mur wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Sun, 11 Jan 2015 06:00:52 -0800, Jeanne Douglas
>> >>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> .
>> >> >In article <129f3254a1890a73efd847857aa101e5@dizum.com>,
>> >> > "Thomas" wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> In article
>> >> >> mur.@.not. wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > On Tue, 6 Jan 2015 00:51:51 +0000 (UTC), "70.66.89.54@sjrb.ca"
>> >> >> > <70.66.89.54@sjrb.ca> wrote:
>> >> >> > .
>> >> >> > >On 05 Jan 2015, §pammer§top posted some
>> >> >> > >news:ZEDqw.196226$_R5.48954@fx28.iad:
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > >> From: §pammer§top
>> >> >> > >> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0)
>> >> >> > >> Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0
>> >> >> > >> Message-ID:
>> >> >> > >> NNTP-Posting-Host: 70.66.89.54
>> >> >> > >> X-Complaints-To: internet.abuse@sjrb.ca
>> >> >> > >> X-Trace: 1420494521 70.66.89.54 (Mon, 05 Jan 2015 21:48:41 UTC)
>> >> >> > >> NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2015 21:48:41 UTC
>> >> >> > >> Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2015 13:49:06 -0800
>> >> >> > >> X-Received-Bytes: 1407
>> >> >> > >> X-Received-Body-CRC: 282770615
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > I'll tell you a little bit. They claim that there is no
evidence
>> >> >> > of
>> >> >> > God's
>> >> >> > existence which is an obviously stupid claim because if there really
>> >> >> > was
>> >> >> > none,
>> >> >> > no one would believe he exists because there would be nothing TO
>> >> >> > believe.
>> >> >> > Moving
>> >> >> > on with that stupidity we can conclude that their dishonest denial
>> >> >> > means
>> >> >> > they
>> >> >> > are very unsatisfied with and reject all evidence that does exist.
>> >> >> > This
>> >> >> > clearly
>> >> >> > tells us they believe that if God truly does exist there should be
>> >> >> > some
>> >> >> > sort of
>> >> >> > very strong verifiable evidence to the point of being proof that he
>> >> >> > does
>> >> >> > exist.
>> >> >> > That much they make very clear. But! They have also made it very
>> >> >> > clear
>> >> >> > that
>> >> >> > even
>> >> >> > though they believe such "evidence"/proof should exist, they have no
>> >> >> > clue
>> >> >> > at all
>> >> >> > what it should be, where it should be, why it should even be
>> >> >> > available
>> >> >> > to
>> >> >> > humans, or when it should have been or should be made available.
>> >> >> > That's
>> >> >> > one
>> >> >> > of
>> >> >> > the amusing positions they are in.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Atheists don't like it that atheism has been deemed a religion
>> >> >> either.
>> >> >
>> >> >It hasn't been, so what is there not to like?
>> >>
>> >> Strong atheism is a religious belief. How much faith a person has
that
>> >> there
>> >> is no God associated with this planet is what determines how strong an
>> >> atheist
>> >> that person is or is not. Someone with no faith about it is a weak
>> >> atheist.
>> >> So
>> >> what is there that you don't like about those facts?
>> >
>> >What facts?
>>
>> The ones I again pointed out for you. What is there that you don't like
>> about them, are you ashamed to say?
>
>What facts?
Strong atheism is a religious belief. How much faith a person has that
there
is no God associated with this planet is what determines how strong an atheist
that person is or is not. Someone with no faith about it is a weak atheist.
>Try to answer the question this time.
You're the one who's ashamed to say what you don't like about them.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
