Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Grakelin]

I counter-contest, my dear Mr. Wiggles. A resurrection is a resurrection, regardless of the stature of its subject.

[Neruz]

I counter-counter-contest Grakelin; this thread has not been ressurected, it has been reanimated as an undead horror.

[Grakelin]

I triple-counter-contest Neruz: It has been reanimated via a Divine Miracle!

Coincidence that his name is Urist McOverlord? It couldn't be more obvious if he had signed on as 'Urist McYahweh'.

[RAM]

I think you really need to provide counterproofs to each variety of god individually.

Creator gods, while they could create evidence of any history they want, are completely unnecessary and any given version of createor god is pretty much just a guess with sufficiently poor odds to be more trouble than they could possibly be worth.

Absolute gods fail the all-powerful, all-knowing, and actually like us test, so you have to pick one that, at best, just doesn't care about you. And once again it is a completely unnecessary guess.

Patron gods seem to be absent, but don't let me stop you for dividing the world's shipping into 3 equal groups, having one do nothing, one always make a sacrifice to Poseidon, and one always ask for help from 'the god of the sea' before every trip and then look for significant variation in their experiences of weather, accidents, spontaneous insanity, and being sucked down to the depths by malevolent forces then you might have an argument for or against...

Ancestor spirits is an interesting one, a serious study into past life phenomena might lend some credibility. On the other hand, what makes a dead person any better than a live person... For the moment it seems pretty unlikely regardless.

Afterlives are pretty easily explainable by wishful thinking, and familiarity effects with mundane mental causes... Actually doing anything to stop wishful thinking is an entirely different leviathan...

Fairies(mythic creatures and superstitions) are, well, getting steadily less likely as more physiological and mental conditions are explained and as more of the world is explored, and it is past the point to take them seriously...

Mind over matter is some great wishful thinking, but has yet to have any public proof, which by now would seem to confirm that there is no such thing...

[Neruz]

Quadruple-Counter Grakelin; The Overlord is not a god.

A force to be feared certainly, but no God. One of them is the Lord of Hell however.

[Urist McOverlord]

Whilst the comparison to the divine is flattering, I stole my name from the Starcraft zerg dude. Speaking of which, spawn more of them. And pylons. You must construct additional pylons.

[Neruz]

Shut up Aldaris, i have enough goddamn pylons.

[Ampersand]

I think you really need to provide counterproofs to each variety of god individually.

You don't need any counter proofs for anything that has not been proven.

[Kebooo]

Wow, 207 pages?  I used to debate these kinds of things, but I came to the realization almost no one even slightly changed their positions or conceded points.  Ever.

I'm atheist and my main concern is freedom from religious law.  For example, living under Saudi Arabia's laws would be one of the worst fates.  I don't think I could ever peacefully allow such a system to come to power where I live.  I don't care if people believe in a god or not, although I am deeply disturbed when people say "well what's the point of life if there's no god" or act like there's no reason at all to have morals and ethics without one. 

[Andir]

Wow, 207 pages?  I used to debate these kinds of things, but I came to the realization almost no one even slightly changed their positions or conceded points.  Ever.

I'm atheist and my main concern is freedom from religious law.  For example, living under Saudi Arabia's laws would be one of the worst fates.  I don't think I could ever peacefully allow such a system to come to power where I live.  I don't care if people believe in a god or not, although I am deeply disturbed when people say "well what's the point of life if there's no god" or act like there's no reason at all to have morals and ethics without one. 

I agree... Though I have trouble accepting the Ohio Constitution because it pretty much says you have to have some form of religion: http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/constitution.cfm?Part=1&Section=07 and it could be read to encourage schools teaching it even though I think the schools statement was meant to apply to knowledge...

Religion, morality, and knowledge, however, being essential to good government(really?), it shall be the duty of the general assembly to pass suitable laws to protect every religious denomination in the peaceable enjoyment of its own mode of public worship, and to encourage schools and the means of instruction.

It's a poorly worded jumble of ideas either way.  I always found it funny that The US Constitution would be so ardent in omitting references to religious ties but the state legislatures would be so bold to require it.

[Ampersand]

That's all because legislation is done by politicians, who by the nature of the electoral process, are more concerned with political expediency and public relations gained from that sort of nonsense, than with good governance.

Most if not all states with such nonsense on the law books happily ignore their existence. These things are put into state law because it makes a large group of voters happy, and the politicians know it, and they know that their presence there is pointless because such things are nullified by the Supremacy clause* of the United States constitution.

So, when there is a requirement that elected officials acknowledge some kind of God in states like Texas, I don't really personally care, because it doesn't matter. It's language that was inserted into the State constitution by politicians courting the Christian vote, language that is utterly meaningless due to the aforementioned Supremacy clause.


* "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

[Andir]

Oh, I totally understand that... until you get some nutjob in there that points to it and uses it in their argument on why religion needs to be taught in school or how our founding fathers intended this be a Christian nation.

You'll also note that most religious people will do this in any and all arguments.

[Grakelin]

The founding fathers probably weren't intending for the USA to be a Jewish nation.

[Huesoo]

They were intending this country to become a Nonreligious country.

[Andir]

They were intending this country to become a Nonreligious country.

Er... they intended that religion be kept a private matter and not a matter of the States or Federal government.  Saying that they intended a non-religious country is not the correct thing to say.

Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law.