Christ's birthday

[Minimalist]

Because in most cases what a friend or family member tells you can usually be verified in one form or another and is not beyond the reach of investigation

Yeah, I keep Snopes.com on My Favorites just to refute the inane right-wing shit I get sent.

[Violet]

@ Sae

I understand faith to be belief without evidence. So to take evidence on faith, is incompatible with my definition.

Evidence is something that gives indication, that you take in. If there is such indication, if there is evidence, then your belief is evidence-based. If, however, you believe without any evidence whatsoever, if you take it on faith, if you just "have faith", which is blind, then your belief is faith-based and not evidence-based. And there is nothing more baseless, at least in my opinion, than faith-based belief.

EvF

Evidence is completely subjective. That which a scientist considers evidence is a far cry from the idiocy that the faithful accept as evidence.

Don't we discuss this enough? There is no absence of faith in belief... only degrees of faith a person needs to believe.

[chatpilot]

I agree Sae this argument gets pretty old pretty fast.

[Minimalist]

Won't stop some other fundie from starting it up again elsewhere.

[chatpilot]

Minimalist fundies never tire of the same old arguments. You could only get but so far with the bs they have in that book of myths.

[Minimalist]

I know, CP but it would be nice if they had a clearing house so that they could check out which silly arguments they had used here and try something different.

Gets tiresome dealing with the same silly bullshit all the time because they don't do their homework.

[fr0d0]

Hey... if I made a list of your arguments would you stop repeating them?

[chatpilot]

I think this thread is officially starting to fizzle out.

[fr0d0]

You think....?

[littlegrimlin1]

EvF So since faith is blind, then "blind faith" is just redundant right? Heard that in a couple places....