(June 19, 2012 at 10:48 pm)FallentoReason Wrote:gringoperry Wrote:Another thought has occurred to me; which I think they explain in the first linked article: It's basically saying that we are going full circle, only now we have evolved far enough to form a better understanding of the mysteries labelled as God; and in doing so, we should be in a more comfortable place to label them as such, without assigning supernatural powers to them. Does anyone else agree/disagree?
Yeah you're right. Except it's a pretty damn hard thing to do, relabel the word 'god' to mean reality and not an entity outside of space-time.
(June 19, 2012 at 8:10 pm)Brian37 Wrote: Agreed, but what is your point? We should kill everyone who claims an invisible friend...
You sir, are dripping with dogma. Change your 'religious views' to Militant non-spiritual Theist.
Your dogma is no better than that of religions either...
Calling atheism a dogma is like calling bald a hair color.
What is "dogmatic" about saying "god" as a claim is a broken claim?And trying to change the definition to me, is merely putting lipstick on a pig.
And what is "militant" about using sarcasm? You do know what sarcasm is don't you?
I am tired of "militant" being used a a childish slur. Militant is what the 9/11 hijackers did. Militant is what Iran's Imams are. Militant is what the Dark ages were.
Cussing and sarcasm doesn't make me want to murder in the name of "atheism". It only means when I do it, that I think the person is full of shit. Please tell my how saying to anyone "you are full of shit" makes me "militant".
