Why are Atheists on Religiousforums?

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Well, you are free to prove my religious beliefs false, but that is an impossibility. You claim they are "nonsense," but that is not accurate. That would only be the case if they had been shown to be false.

"Nonsense" doesn't necessarily mean "false"; it means something more like "irrational" or "unjustified".

A belief that's logically incoherent could never be shown to be false (since it couldn't be evaluated at all) but still be nonsense. Even if a belief is coherent and internally consistent, Russell's Teapot and Carl Sagan's "invisible dragon in the backyard" illustrate how these sorts of ideas can be nonsense even if there's no evidence against them.

 

[Cephus]

Suppose that I hold the position that planets are kept in orbit by invisible angels impervious to empirical evidence (being spiritual).

Do you think that my theory of gravitation makes sense?

I'm sure it makes sense to you, since you came up with it and believe it, but it wouldn't make sense to anyone else and nobody ought to believe such a ridiculous thing. Most theists would agree with me, even though they do the same thing when it comes to their own religious beliefs.

 

[Ouroboros]

To annoy religionists?
To become religionists?

I think people who spend time on a discussion forum is doing so because they like to discuss things. Sure, there are some who a trolling, and some who try to convert believers, but I think in general, atheists like to discuss religion because it's an interesting topic, and sometimes they discuss it to try to understand. Not everyone has malicious intent in their curiosity.

 

[morphesium]

To annoy religionists?
To become religionists?

The world without religion is a far better place. No terrorism in the name of religion, No torture or massacres or blood shed in the name of religion. This forums is a place for and against religion.

There would be much greater progress for science and technology. better living standards and much lesser unethical practices done in the name of / because of religion.

 

[McBell]

Well, you are free to prove my religious beliefs false, but that is an impossibility.

I cannot help but wonder if that is the reason you have them.
I mean, you cannot prove them true, so that is not the reason you have them.

You claim they are "nonsense," but that is not accurate.

Prove it.
Now if you cannot prove it then, just like your beliefs.....

That would only be the case if they had been shown to be false.

how do you figure that?

 

[McBell]

The world without religion is a far better place.

Pure speculation.

No terrorism in the name of religion, No torture or massacres or blood shed in the name of religion.

Stop counting the hits and ignoring the misses.

This forums is a place for and against religion.

There would be much greater progress for science and technology. better living standards and much lesser unethical practices done in the name of / because of religion.

Still counting the hits and ignoring the misses...

 

[Cephus]

Pure speculation.

Of course it is, we've never had a world without religion, hence any judgement we might make about such a thing is going to be pure speculation. Is this a bad thing?

Stop counting the hits and ignoring the misses.

Which misses are these? I've been asking for years for anyone to produce a demonstrably true thing that religion provides that cannot be achieved equally as well or better through purely secular means and so far, nobody has come up with any. So what's your list?

 

[McBell]

Which misses are these? I've been asking for years for anyone to produce a demonstrably true thing that religion provides that cannot be achieved equally as well or better through purely secular means and so far, nobody has come up with any. So what's your list?

morphesium was counting the hits and ignoring the misses.
In his case, he is ignoring the good that comes from religion.

I am not interested in your sad attempt at butting in and attempting to move the goal posts.
Go find a noob for that newbie tactic.

 

[Cephus]

morphesium was counting the hits and ignoring the misses.
In his case, he is ignoring the good that comes from religion.

I am not interested in your sad attempt at butting in and attempting to move the goal posts.
Go find a noob for that newbie tactic.

And which good is that? I'm sure we can find "good" that comes from racism too, at least to those who value it. Does that therefore make racism good? Or should we seek the "good" from racism elsewhere because racism is, on balance, bad? You're just avoiding very simple questions because you really have no decent answers.

 

[McBell]

And which good is that? I'm sure we can find "good" that comes from racism too, at least to those who value it. Does that therefore make racism good? Or should we seek the "good" from racism elsewhere because racism is, on balance, bad? You're just avoiding very simple questions because you really have no decent answers.

You are free to believe whatever line of bull **** you wish to feed yourself.

However, before you make an even bigger fool of yourself, I would like to point out that not once in post #104, you know, the post I was replying to, is the word "secular".

Now I understand you got that there "there is nothing religious that secular cannot provide" bone you refuse to let go of like it is some kind of ace in the hole.
Problem here is that it does not apply to post #104 or my reply to post #104.

Now do not get me wrong, I don't give even a single crickets fart why you felt the need to make such a sad pathetic attempt at using my post to launch into your "there is nothing religious that secular cannot provide" bone.
I can say I am not the least bit interested in your Pigeon Chess.

So you go right ahead and take your shallow empty "you really have no decent answers" ""win"" and fly on home.

 

[leibowde84]

I cannot help but wonder if that is the reason you have them.
I mean, you cannot prove them true, so that is not the reason you have them.


Prove it.
Now if you cannot prove it then, just like your beliefs.....


how do you figure that?

I think that holding beliefs can be "rational" according to the definition of the term, as long as they are beneficial. "Rational" simply means that something can be substantiated logically. One deinition of the word "logical" is something that is (of an action, development, decision, etc.) "natural or sensible given the circumstances." I woud argue that, since my beliefs do benefit me greatly (not sofar as they are the only option to recieve these benefits, but provide them all the same), and in no way hinder my understanding of scientific understanding, they are "sensible given the circumstances.

"Nonsensical", on the otherhand, refers to something that is ridiculously impractical or ill-advised. Now, since I can point to benefits, and no one has yet pointed out detrimental aspects of my beliefs, I would not classify them as "nonsense." Now, you can obviously argue with defining these terms, but I have used the english definition provided by Websters. So, I would ask that if you have another definition, please provide it from a reputable source.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I'm still wondering why this is just about always (I think always, but I can't be 100% on if it is always or just nearly always) brought up by conservative Abrahamic? None of the other religions here seem to have a problem with atheists here, nor do they question their presence.

 

[leibowde84]

I'm still wondering why this is just about always (I think always, but I can't be 100% on if it is always or just nearly always) brought up by conservative Abrahamic? None of the other religions here seem to have a problem with atheists here, nor do they question their presence.

Sometimes it seems like the conservative Abrahamics (love that term, btw) see atheists as lesser people.

 

[Jumi]

To annoy religionists?
To become religionists?

To discuss and learn.

 

[Doug Shaver]

What do atheists want to gain from religiousforums?

Converts to atheism.

 

[dust1n]

Personally, I'm here to secretly and insidiously undermine the will of religious people in order to bring about the collapse of civilization as we know it. Either that, or for the beer. I can't recall which. At my age, you forget your goals now and then.

I came for the vigorous discussion; I stayed for the baby buffet.

 

[Revoltingest]

They're like cats and you have a tuna sandwich, so they follow you around and meow,
but the tuna sandwich is not for them and they can't have any.

Sometimes a piece of tuna falls on the floor though.
Chance favors the prepared mind. (L Pasteur)

 

[outhouse]

They're like cats and you have a tuna sandwich, so they follow you around and meow,
but the tuna sandwich is not for them and they can't have any.

You wont have much a future here, after refusing to have any peaceful dialogue.

Its also your second account for the day, did you get banned already or just start another account?

 

[Revoltingest]

You have 27,792 comments, and I have a life.

He's just a beginner....trying desperately to catch up with me some day.

 

[outhouse]

you're not that important.

That's probably the most correct thing you have stated