(July 10, 2012 at 9:54 am)frankiej Wrote: What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. While an absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, you can still only prove a positive..... is that right? I dunno, I'm kind of drunk... I'll re-read this later to see if I made sense.
Frankie dearest, you know they are fucked when a drunk Scott makes more sense than they do..
"A good case against god"?
Sorry for butting in but.. I'm a gnostic atheist when it comes to gods in literature. You don't feel the wrath of Väinämöinen, Odin, Amon-Ra, Zeus, Jupiter or any of the religions that have come before. Why the fuck should I care for a fantasy divinity that someone came up with more recently? It's still a ridiculous thought as those ancient characters are now. They day you can prove that a god indeed exists I will change my mind, before that I say that all book bound divinities are fabricated by man.
See, drunk Scott and Finn make more sense than the believers
When I was young, there was a god with infinite power protecting me. Is there anyone else who felt that way? And was sure about it? but the first time I fell in love, I was thrown down - or maybe I broke free - and I bade farewell to God and became human. Now I don't have God's protection, and I walk on the ground without wings, but I don't regret this hardship. I want to live as a person. -Arina Tanemura
