Our server costs $25 per month to run. Please consider donating to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
 
Current time: 31st August 2015, 05:46

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The Burden of Proof
#1
The Burden of Proof
In respect to religious claims, the burden of proof rests solely on the person or persons making the claim. If a person were to make an extraordinary and improbable claim. Their claim, would be subject to immediate scrutiny and ridicule and in turn, would be responsible for the burden of proof.

The scientific method requires evidence supporting a hypothesis or the reverse (A hypothesis that supports evidence) before it can become a theory, and even more, irrefutable evidence to make it a law. It, however, does not say that if a person says “pigs can fly.” Now, prove me wrong. Or that the people who didn’t make the claim have to provide evidence to the contrary, and if they can’t, then the former must be true. This is circular reasoning and it is the basis of every theological debate. Theist know the burden of proof rests with them. They don’t have any proof, nor could they, because their whole proposition is based on faith. This is why they always try to pass the buck when it comes to the burden of proof. Theologist have the ability to reason just like anyone else, they just refuse to do so in this one area of faith. For example:

If I were to say to them: “ Pigs can fly! ” And they said: “Did you see them?” And I said: “Well, uh, no.” And they said: “Do you know someone who did?” And I said: “Well, uh, no.” And then they said: “Do you have any evidence?” And I said: “I don’t have any evidence but, (wait for it) what I do have is a collection of books. These books contain many stories of miraculous things. Some of which are virgin births and resurrections and other suspensions of the laws of physics and of nature. Which are also without evidence. These books were written by numerous unknown authors two thousand years ago. These authors did not witness or have first hand knowledge of the events but, instead, wrote down folklore accounts, passed down by word of mouth for generations after the supposed events took place. They were then translated into many different languages over the next two millennia and picked through by various groups of people who added or subtracted from the already inaccurate accounts.” Then to have the audacity to say, “Take my word for it because I know it in my heart to be true.”

They would think I was a crackpot, and rightly so. This is precisely what religion asks of it’s followers. I think that all unfounded claims and especially these extraordinarily unfounded claims deserve the utmost scrutiny. But, somehow in our credulity, society has given license to these claims in the pretense of not “offending” anyone. The Constitution of the United States of America grants people the right to believe in whatever they choose. It also affords and protects the right of people to not be made to believe as others do. It also grants freedom of speech and of the press. It, however, does not grant the right of people to not be “offended”. This is one of the greatest amendments if not the greatest (probably why it’s the


first) and that makes it different from any other constitution in the world. The men who wrote this infallible document were fighting against a totalitarian, despotic regime where the monarchy was, and still is, the head of the church. A church that oppressed all other beliefs or disbeliefs and was founded on the morals of Henry VIII. The authors of the constitution were well aware of the dangers of allowing the ruling class into religion and religion into politics. This is explicitly why we must keep religion out of government and schools and courts. It should have no influence on medicine or science or politics. Humanity and solidarity and science should be the only principals “preached”. For without these, the species is doomed to extinction. Remember the “Golden Rule”: Do unto others as you would have done unto you. (One of many ideas plagiarized by the Bible from centuries before it’s time)
Reply
#2
RE: The Burden of Proof
While we're keeping religion out of all of those places, perhaps we should keep the pitfalls of religious thought, infallibility for example, out of our idea of the constitution. It's a minor nitpick. Welcome aboard btw.
“I find something repulsive about the idea of vicarious redemption. I would not throw my numberless sins onto a scapegoat and expect them to pass from me" - Christopher Hitchens.


Reply
#3
RE: The Burden of Proof
Hello there.

Ever heard the phrase "preaching to the choir?"

The atheists around here already know the theists are fools. The theists think every god except their own is false and they won't be persuaded by appeals to reality.

Relax and enjoy yourself. You are among friends for the most part and you'll identify the enemy soon enough.
[Image: Atheismreality_zps62a2c96a.jpg]
Reply
#4
RE: The Burden of Proof
The for the most part is because there are as many 1-time-shitter atheists as there are theists... and I don't look well upon either.

Please give me a home where cloud buffalo roam
Where the dear and the strangers can play
Where sometimes is heard a discouraging word
But the skies are not stormy all day
Reply
#5
RE: The Burden of Proof
(19th August 2011, 02:10)Rhythm Wrote: While we're keeping religion out of all of those places, perhaps we should keep the pitfalls of religious thought, infallibility for example, out of our idea of the constitution. It's a minor nitpick. Welcome aboard btw.

I see your point. I have such a great respect and admiration of the constitution though. I do see it as infallible and it upsets me to no end to see religious fundamentalists and zealots try and screw it up with their superstition. Thank you for the welcome.
Reply
#6
RE: The Burden of Proof
Quote:I do see it as infallible and it upsets me to no end to see religious fundamentalists and zealots try and screw it up with their superstition.

No human idea is infallible. That is why the constitution was deliberately designed to be a living document.Hence the amendments such as the Bill Of Rights.

My understanding is that the US constitution can only be amended by a 2/3 vote of Congress,the representatives of 'we the people' and not by narrow vested interest.

Of course you have every right to be upset, stamp your little foot if it will make you fee better.. What you do not have is a right NOT to be upset. Cool Shades
Man is not so much a rational animal as a rationalising one.
Reply
#7
RE: The Burden of Proof
(19th August 2011, 04:00)padraic Wrote:
Quote:I do see it as infallible and it upsets me to no end to see religious fundamentalists and zealots try and screw it up with their superstition.

No human idea is infallible. That is why the constitution was deliberately designed to be a living document.Hence the amendments such as the Bill Of Rights.

My understanding is that the US constitution can only be amended by a 2/3 vote of Congress,the representatives of 'we the people' and not by narrow vested interest.

Of course you have every right to be upset, stamp your little foot if it will make you fee better.. What you do not have is a right NOT to be upset. Cool Shades

2/3 vote of congress. This is exactly why people need to be aware of the people they elect into these positions and the superstitions they may or may not believe in. Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
Reply
#8
RE: The Burden of Proof
Equally Anti religious claims shoulder the same burden. IOW : STFU Big Grin
Reply
#9
RE: The Burden of Proof
Frodo desperately needs this to be true..lol. He's a smart guy though, and he knows it isn't
“I find something repulsive about the idea of vicarious redemption. I would not throw my numberless sins onto a scapegoat and expect them to pass from me" - Christopher Hitchens.


Reply
#10
RE: The Burden of Proof
Well then fr0d0, prove to me that there isn't an invisible, ten foot, naked woman with breasts the size of my head floating 1000 yards in the air above you. If you can't, then that must be proof it exists.
"It could be a miracle. It could be bullshit. The one thing we do know for sure is that it's a goddamn goldmine." - Frank, from It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
Question Atheists: would proof of the resurrection matter to you? robvalue 55 1285 19th July 2015, 07:40
Last Post: robvalue
  Help: jumped on for seeking scientific proof of spiritual healing emilynghiem 55 2578 21st February 2015, 03:54
Last Post: JesusHChrist
  The Proof! rtfguy 50 2338 2nd October 2014, 17:01
Last Post: TaraJo
  Proof of the soul? JesusLover1 50 2692 6th March 2014, 12:23
Last Post: pocaracas
  Why atheism always has a burden of proof Vincenzo "Vinny" G. 358 54443 31st October 2013, 21:40
Last Post: Stimbo
  Can you provide proof or evidence that atheism is accurate and correct? Lemonvariable72 32 7440 6th September 2013, 15:41
Last Post: Heir Apparent
Wink Proof that God(s) can not exist. way12go 19 3034 18th August 2013, 22:22
Last Post: bennyboy
  Burden of Proof Mark 13:13 213 25384 12th January 2013, 20:38
Last Post: Stimbo
  What proof and evidence is there for "atheism" to be accurate and correct? SavedByChrist94 42 7743 12th January 2013, 20:27
Last Post: Aegrus
  Gods existence.. true scientific proof of intelligence -Jimmy2010 jimmy2010 61 10049 15th August 2012, 23:52
Last Post: Cthulhu Dreaming



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)