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 20:50:28 -0600, David Johnston wrote:
> .
>> On 4/29/2015 5:58 PM, mur wrote:
>>> On Sun, 19 Apr 2015 00:35:37 -0600, David Johnston wrote:
>>> .
>>>> On 4/17/2015 2:51 PM, mur wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 09 Apr 2015 06:28:06 -0500, duke 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.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Too much hair splitting.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why are you so overwhelmed by those easy distinctions, do you
have any idea?
>>>>>
>>>>>> Evidence exists for the presence of God - it can't be
>>>>>> denied.
>>>>>
>>>>> It is denied by blatant liars.
>>>>
>>>> Yes
>>>
>>> Do you really believe that fact?
>>>
>>
>> What fact?
>
> That evidence is denied by blatant liars of course.
>
What's the evidence the blatant liars are denying?
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
