XPost: sac.politics, can.politics, alt.atheism   
   XPost: alt.politics.homosexuality   
   From: David@block.net   
      
   On 5/8/2015 8:03 PM, mur wrote:   
   > On Wed, 29 Apr 2015 20:42:48 -0600, David Johnston  wrote:   
   > .   
   >> On 4/29/2015 5:57 PM, mur wrote:   
   >>> On Fri, 17 Apr 2015 18:55:08 -0600, David Johnston  wrote:   
   >>> .   
   >>>> On 4/17/2015 2:46 PM, mur wrote:   
   >>>>> On Tue, 07 Apr 2015 15:39:58 -0600, David Johnston    
   wrote:   
   >>>>> .   
   >>>>>> On Tue, 07 Apr 2015 17:03:53 -0400, mur wrote:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> On Wed, 01 Apr 2015 11:29:59 -0500, duke  wrote:   
   >>>>>>> .   
   >>>>>>>> On Tue, 31 Mar 2015 20:02:20 -0400, mur. <> wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 03:19:40 -0700, Jeanne Douglas    
   >>>>>>>>> wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>> .   
   >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 25 Mar 2015 21:33:27 -0400, mur. <> wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 19 Mar 2015 05:04:44 -0700, Jeanne Douglas <   
   lwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>> .   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> In article ,   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> David Johnston  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/18/2015 5:11 PM, mur wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I prefer the gigantic cow hypothesis.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>         One absolute consistency is that you atheists can only   
   "consider" the   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> possibility of God's existence in very childlike ways, but   
   never in any   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> realistic ways.Of course that is significant since if you could   
   think of it   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> in   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> any realistic way you wouldn't be restricted to an atheist way   
   of thinking,   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> Your assumption that I am "restricted" to an atheist way of   
   thinking is   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> false.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> What the fuck is "an atheist way of thinking"?   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>       LOL....you really can't figure out a damn thing.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Why didn't you answer my question?   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>       Before reading your post I predicted it would be either some   
   sort of blatant   
   >>>>>>>>> lie, or more of you revealing that you can't comprehend what's being   
   discussed.   
   >>>>>>>>> We'll if you can deal with it after I point out some basics.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> 1. Strong atheism is the belief that there is no god associated with   
   this planet   
   >>>>>>>>> and may or may not be that there is no type of god associated with   
   any place(s)   
   >>>>>>>>> in "the" universe, depending on the personal belief of the   
   individual.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> 2. Weak atheism is having no belief about whether or not there is   
   any god   
   >>>>>>>>> associated with any place(s) in "the" universe, which would   
   necessarily involve   
   >>>>>>>>> giving consideration to the possibility that there may be as well as   
   that there   
   >>>>>>>>> is not if a person has been exposed to the idea.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> Weak atheism is otherwise called agnosticism.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>       There's more to it than that. Strong agnostics believe nobody   
   can know if   
   >>>>>>> God exists. Weak agnostics believe it's possible that some people can   
   know if   
   >>>>>>> God exists. I'm a weak agnostic.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> An agnostic is normally an atheist who doesn't care to argue the point.   
   >>>>>> You are clearly an exception since you will argue the point endlessly.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>        I'm an actual weak agnostic which necessarily involves   
   considering the   
   >>>>> possibility that there is a God associated with Earth, and other things   
   all of   
   >>>>> which are beyond the consideration of some other people.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Hell I "consider" that.   
   >>>   
   >>>       Try providing evidence that you can by showing us how you can do it.   
   >>   
   >> I did that when I started discussing original sin and Hell.  Note that   
   >> the word "consider" does not mean "fail to decide".   
   >   
   >      If you decide there is no God associated with Earth it means you could   
   NOT   
   > realistically consider how there could be.Even an atheist SHOULD be able to   
   > comprehend that much.   
      
   Actually I'm capable of hypothetical reasoning.   
      
   >   
   >>>> But since I only consider it and don't believe   
   >>>> it, I'm an atheist.   
   >>>   
   >>>       As yet there's no reason for anyone to believe you can consider it.   
   Even if   
   >>> you eventually are able to provide evidence that you can you could still   
   be a   
   >>> weak agnostic rather than the weak atheist you want people to believe you   
   are.   
   >>   
   >> That doesn't make any sense.  Everyone is a "weak agnostic" if they are   
   >> sane.  Everyone is aware that they could be wrong.  That's why I don't   
   >> call myself "agnostic".  The word's meaningless in itself.   
   >   
   >      No it's not.   
      
   So you claim.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)