Posts: 4940
Threads: 99
Joined: April 17, 2011
Reputation:
45
RE: In general, a man with religion is better than an atheist.
May 9, 2011 at 10:36 am
(This post was last modified: May 9, 2011 at 1:08 pm by Doubting Thomas.)
(May 6, 2011 at 6:51 pm)rumbuggerylash Wrote: He is better because he is potentially less dangerous.
You mean like the Branch Davidians, Hutarees, Scott Roeder, Eric Rudolph, Tim McVeigh, IRA, Al Qeida, or anyone listed on the Army of God website?
A man is far more dangerous with religion when he wants to kill someone. Because then he has a god telling him not only that it's OK to do so, but it's his duty.
Christian apologetics is the art of rolling a dog turd in sugar and selling it as a donut.
Posts: 10
Threads: 1
Joined: October 11, 2010
Reputation:
0
RE: In general, a man with religion is better than an atheist.
May 9, 2011 at 12:41 pm
I totally agree with Min. Way too many "shit and runners"! Though I'm not a frequent poster, I do like to visit the forum as much as my time allows. That being said, I've noticed a pattern with these S&R's, as I'm sure most of the regulars here have. Many of you guys/gals are an invaluable resource, at least as far as I'm concerned, and put a lot of intelligent thought into your replies and or arguments. Much of that seems to be wasted on persons who have not come here to have an intelligent discussion, but only to do their (insert your religeous preference here) duty of converting the non believers.
"Being right too soon is socially unacceptable." Robert A. Heinlein
Posts: 4940
Threads: 99
Joined: April 17, 2011
Reputation:
45
RE: In general, a man with religion is better than an atheist.
May 9, 2011 at 12:53 pm
Maybe they're used to Christian websites where you quickly get banned for saying the wrong thing, so they think we'd do the same thing here. Or they could just be afraid that they can't refute any ridicule of their beliefs. Or, they could just be trolls or assholes.
Christian apologetics is the art of rolling a dog turd in sugar and selling it as a donut.
Posts: 69247
Threads: 3759
Joined: August 2, 2009
Reputation:
258
RE: In general, a man with religion is better than an atheist.
May 9, 2011 at 12:59 pm
I'll go with the last one.
Posts: 10
Threads: 1
Joined: October 11, 2010
Reputation:
0
RE: In general, a man with religion is better than an atheist.
May 9, 2011 at 1:08 pm
I wonder how may atheists troll on Christian forums? I, for one, sure wouldn't go through the trouble of creating an account just tell them how silly they are. But it is tempting! Heck, living in the bible belt, I have enough religious nonsense to wade through without having to look for it!
"Being right too soon is socially unacceptable." Robert A. Heinlein
Posts: 86
Threads: 2
Joined: April 20, 2011
Reputation:
3
RE: In general, a man with religion is better than an atheist.
May 9, 2011 at 1:31 pm
Isurus, I have heard of plenty of atheists who admitted trolling on christian websites. They loved getting a rise out of them.
As for the 'same old, same old' problem; Maybe it's an idea to find a database where the most common questions are answered, and the next time someone comes rolling in, we just post a link in reply. Nothing else. Just a link. And if they go like 'yeah but...' we just say 'So you read the link? First try to refute that.' Saves us a heap of trouble, and we don't have to burn so many torches. Seriously, those things can be expansive 
When I was a Christian, I was annoyed with dogmatic condescending Christians. Now that I'm an atheist, I'm annoyed with dogmatic condescending atheists. Just goes to prove that people are the same, regardless of what they do or don't believe.
Posts: 69247
Threads: 3759
Joined: August 2, 2009
Reputation:
258
RE: In general, a man with religion is better than an atheist.
May 9, 2011 at 1:57 pm
Talk Origins maintains some useful archives on evolution and the so-called "Flood" and probably others.
Oddly, the evolution section contains a complete text of Darwin's Origin of Species and that contains this line in Chapter 14.
Quote:Authors of the highest eminence seem to be fully satisfied with the view that each species has been independently created. To my mind it accords better with what we know of the laws impressed on matter by the Creator, that the production and extinction of the past and present inhabitants of the world should have been due to secondary causes, like those determining the birth and death of the individual.
Even an intellect like Darwin's couldn't shake itself loose from fairy tales.
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-evolution.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-...html#court
Of course, the problem is to get them to actually read it. They prefer fairy tales.
Posts: 10
Threads: 1
Joined: October 11, 2010
Reputation:
0
RE: In general, a man with religion is better than an atheist.
May 9, 2011 at 2:38 pm
Girlysprite, I think that would be hilarious! Religious S&R posts "preaching rant".....silence...someone posts a link....more preaching, more ranting....silence....another link. HA! Posts something worth discussing, gets numerous replies.
Min, I can't blame the Christians for not reading it. Hell, I own the book (Kindle and hardback) and it's rather dry LOL! Goes back to "you can lead a horse to water...."
"Being right too soon is socially unacceptable." Robert A. Heinlein
Posts: 69247
Threads: 3759
Joined: August 2, 2009
Reputation:
258
RE: In general, a man with religion is better than an atheist.
May 9, 2011 at 2:56 pm
Yeah...although not reading it does not stop them from screaming bloody murder about it.
Posts: 13051
Threads: 66
Joined: February 7, 2011
Reputation:
92
RE: In general, a man with religion is better than an atheist.
May 9, 2011 at 3:37 pm
(May 9, 2011 at 1:57 pm)Minimalist Wrote: Talk Origins maintains some useful archives on evolution and the so-called "Flood" and probably others.
Oddly, the evolution section contains a complete text of Darwin's Origin of Species and that contains this line in Chapter 14. Quote:Authors of the highest eminence seem to be fully satisfied with the view that each species has been independently created. To my mind it accords better with what we know of the laws impressed on matter by the Creator, that the production and extinction of the past and present inhabitants of the world should have been due to secondary causes, like those determining the birth and death of the individual.
I thought this whole 'Darwin believed in the Creator' was a myth propigated by the religious to try to discredit him. Not that it makes any difference, but I sure would like to be able distinguish whether it's true or not. It would be interesting to discern whether Darwin actually caved on his theory in some pathetic attempt to save his soul. I would guess it's utter bs.
Even if the open windows of science at first make us shiver after the cozy indoor warmth of traditional humanizing myths, in the end the fresh air brings vigor, and the great spaces have a splendor of their own - Bertrand Russell
|
