Fundamentalist Atheists

[Willamena]

You know most people would get the social clues. Most reasonable and rational people would a least try not to reinforce stereotypes about their group. They would at least try to reason. But what to you do when someone thinks that atheist are smug and arrogant? You answer them in a smug and arrogant manner.

While there may be "an eye for an eye", there is also, "If all your friends jumped off a bridge, would you do that too?"

 

[Thief]

The point I think your getting at is that Foxes can be changed or evolved over a short amount of time. So are they still foxes? Actually they are thinking of giving them their own species. Much like dogs from wolfs. Doesn't change the nature of the argument.

But I do have a similar theory that some people have something within them that allows them to either accept a belief in god or eventually reject it. Such as its not just the accumulation of circumstances but rather an almost innate quality. Though the counter evidence to this is that its actually more dominated by cultural or external sources is that the change in proportions of Atheism throughout time and demographics where genetics doesn't seem to be a factor.

So admitting some 'predisposition' attributed to culture and environment....
You would hold those same items have no effect on genetics?

 

[Monk Of Reason]

So admitting some 'predisposition' attributed to culture and environment....
You would hold those same items have no effect on genetics?

I'm sayings its possible that it may be a predisposition in terms of people being atheist or theist. There is obviously a cultural drive as well.

But I clearly stated that the change in mass would be a sign of cultural impact rather than genetic predispositions.

And what would you have in mind caused these predispositions if there were not in fact genetic?

 

[Thief]

Well...there is some indication that territory is an influence.
Growing up in a population heavy in belief would tend to turn a mind and heart.

But not always.
I broke from congregation.
Still believe...but I don't follow anyone and no one follows me.
Don't have a religion I can call m own.

Still some countries and territories seemed firm over many generations.
Could the mindset of religion affect chemistry of dna?
I suspect influence.
Generations of practice seem to lean to it.

Granddad was a railroad man.
Dad was a machinist turned mechanic.
I became a tool a die guy.

The parents do seem an influence....in chemistry and spirit.

 

[yoda89]

What would Jesus do? An eye for an eye?

Most likely light all atheists on fire and send them to hell.

 

[Sir Doom]

Most likely light all atheists on fire and send them to hell.

Pretty sure he has lackeys for that.

 

[Thief]

Most likely light all atheists on fire and send them to hell.

How about? ....allowing them to see what their denial has taken away.....
THEN send them to hell.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

How about? ....allowing them to see what their denial has taken away.....
THEN send them to hell.

That would certainly be more cruel, but also a lot more funny.

 

[TheGunShoj]

That would certainly be more cruel, but also a lot more funny.

So you find someone being tortured for eternity humorous? And also the more cruel the torment, the more amusing?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

So you find someone being tortured for eternity humorous? And also the more cruel the torment, the more amusing?

Yes. Totally.

 

[IHaveTheGift]

Reminds me of Dawkins reply to the "what if you are wrong" question...

As if one is going to stand before the big guy, creator of everything (the almighty Smiter of smiters's as Jim Carry puts it) and have the audacity to think he can actually throw his weight around, if you will.

 

[Copernicus]

Reminds me of Dawkins reply to the "what if you are wrong" question...

As if one is going to stand before the big guy, creator of everything (the almighty Smiter of smiters's as Jim Carry puts it) and have the audacity to think he can actually throw his weight around, if you will.

God's retribution doesn't exist to scare atheists into belief. It exists to scare believers away from losing faith.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

Reminds me of Dawkins reply to the "what if you are wrong" question...

I am still waiting for Dawkins to give an actual real answer to that question.

 

[Bunyip]

I am still waiting for Dawkins to give an actual real answer to that question.

It is just a silly question, anyone can be wrong.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

It is just a silly question, anyone can be wrong.

And Dawkins answer to that question betrayed what a shallow unimaginative little man he really is.

 

[Bunyip]

And Dawkins answer to that question betrayed what a shallow unimaginative little man he really is.

You are pretty keen on flinging insults, but rarely ever deign to make an argument or give an example or rationale to support your disdain.

Love how you call one of the most important and successful scientists of modern times an 'unimaginitive little man' though, when you will never achieve a fraction of what he has.

It comes across as just intolerant hatefullness, rather than debate.

 

[Sir Doom]

God's retribution doesn't exist to scare atheists into belief. It exists to scare believers away from losing faith.

I don't think its either of those. Its another safety blanket. We know we can't punish all the wicked of the world. But sooner or later...

It's not about fear, its about hope. The idea wouldn't persist otherwise.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

You are pretty keen on flinging insults, but rarely ever deign to make an argument or give an example or rationale to support your disdain.

Love how you call one of the most important and successful scientists of modern times an 'unimaginitive little man' though, when you will never achieve a fraction of what he has.

It comes across as just intolerant hatefullness, rather than debate.

Fanboy much?

You know the last time I heard "I know you but what am I" as a retort was by a six year old in a grade school playground.

You Dawkin's otaku might admire grown men who make grade school taunts during a serious Q&A, but to us grown-ups it seems childish and he comes off as an unimaginative little man.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Fanboy much?

You know the last time I heard "I know you but what am I" as a retort was by a six year old in a grade school playground.

You Dawkin's otaku might admire grown men who make grade school taunts during a serious Q&A, but to us grown-ups it seems childish and he comes off as an unimaginative little man.

Because, clearly, the best way to argue against the claim that you are doing nothing more than flinging insults and being hateful and intolerant, is to fling insults and say intolerant and hateful things.

"What if you are wrong?" is a nonsense question, as Dawkins addresses in this lecture:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=GB&v=6mmskXXetcg&hl=en-GB

It's not an argument, and nor is it something that has to be even addressed if you feel you have a good reason to believe that you are right. The question "what if you are wrong?" is irrelevant. What's important, relevant and worth answering is "Why do you think you're right?"

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Fanboy much?

You know the last time I heard "I know you but what am I" as a retort was by a six year old in a grade school playground.

You Dawkin's otaku might admire grown men who make grade school taunts during a serious Q&A, but to us grown-ups it seems childish and he comes off as an unimaginative little man.

There goes that psychological projection again.