(September 18, 2012 at 10:34 pm)Drich Wrote: Why do you think you need dawkins approval to think as you do? does it some how lend crediance to your own conclusions? Does your compliance to his thoughts somehow validate your own? Why not simply stand or fall on what you believe? why do you need a 'greater' man to support the thoughts you have adopted?
..And 'we' are called brain washed..
You just don't fucking get it, do you? WE don't need Dawkin's for credibility. Our credibility is as good as yours, both standing on the facts of existence. You base your existence on multi-generational accounts of revelation. WE base our existence on discernible facts of existence. You say your knowledge is complete, WE recognize and admit what we don't know while all the time endeavoring to discover.
You and your ilk deny science, but enjoy science's output everyday of your life. Your god couldn't even get ethics right, let alone cosmology or natural history. Really? What the fuck good is your god? I can make up a better list of ten rules than that cocksucker did. We all can. Our ten rules may be different; however, it's hard for me to believe that adults in the 21st century can't come up with just 'ten' special rules that are inferior to the wants of bronze age desert goat herders. Tithe, mother fucker, tithe. Sorry, that was rude. It's not really tithing anymore, it's a 'love gift'.
