(October 19, 2012 at 10:32 am)Rev. Rye Wrote: Well, to be fair, he was undergoing a legal separation at the time.

As a secularist, I do not personally find anything wrong with his conduct. But, he is still married, and his relationship with another woman is unquestionably adulterous according to the god he worships. I wonder how he justifies this?

(October 19, 2012 at 10:38 am)Akincana Krishna dasa Wrote: Why does he assume the Bible is a valuable book worth following? Do you think there are no good reasons to do so, that only an "idiot" would do so?

There is a huge difference between 'a valuable book worth following', which is really a matter of taste I happen to not share, and 'the inerrant word of God', which is sheer lunacy.

(October 19, 2012 at 11:15 am)Ben Davis Wrote: Do you realise how fallacious 'God of the gaps' arguments are? And do you understand how condescending it is to berate someone for not having all the answers?

1. Never made that argument.

2. I didn't berate you for not knowing everything. I called you a fanatic for being intolerant of how other people answer questions about the meaning of life.

Quote:I called you a fanatic for being intolerant of how other people answer questions about the meaning of life.

Toleration is not always desirable.

(October 19, 2012 at 12:51 pm)Ryantology Wrote:

Quote:I called you a fanatic for being intolerant of how other people answer questions about the meaning of life.

Toleration is not always desirable.

Awesome! Wow, I can't wait until modern society finally gets rid of all these irrational, controlling religions, so that they can be replaced by intolerant atheists!

(October 19, 2012 at 12:09 pm)Akincana Krishna dasa Wrote: 2. I didn't berate you for not knowing everything. I called you a fanatic for being intolerant of how other people answer questions about the meaning of life.

How other people answer them, okay. But when other people try to force those answers (and their implications) on others, then there is a problem. Also, if god were self evident then parents wouldn't need to indoctrinate their children in the vital early period of childhood.

Why on earth should anyone tolerate a claim which is completely unsubstantiated?

Call me when you find atheists spreading atheism at swordpoint, or by burning theists alive, or by blowing up buildings, or passing laws specifically to deny human rights to theists.

If you can't figure out why it makes sense to tolerate others, I feel really sorry for you. That's the mentality of a fanatic.