RE: How to tell a real freethinker
March 21, 2013 at 12:38 am
(This post was last modified: March 21, 2013 at 12:41 am by radorth.)
Quote:Really? Really?
The "historic fact" refers to the fact that the early Christians were persecuted, in case you were confused about that. The Romans, et al, recorded their own widespread persecutions of Christians, until Constantine put an end to it.
Quote:Despite the fact that everything we know about the universe around us points to the conclusion that space magic is impossible and that god has been remarkably silent since the invention of any kind of effective recording device, the burden of proof is on us?
It's on you for reasons given below. As for the silence of God, if the Christian God does exist, then he is a billion times smarter than you or I, and has no reason to talk to a race which ignored his commandments, killed his prophets, knocked off his son and who by the billions, prefer to worship men, like the Pope or Mao. I mean what rational God would bother? Would you stop compalining about him if he did speak to you? No. And he knows that. Which is why he mostly talks to praying grandmothers I assume.
Quote:If calling people deluded or dishonest requires proof... then do you not also have to provide proof that your shit it true before you can call us atheists deluded or dishonest, like you're doing right now?
I did? You aren't one of those conspiracy theorists are you?

Quote:Especially when we atheists have nothing to gain but persecution (which is an actual fact, unlike your "historic one"
True to some degree, but an excellent reason to stay away from Muslim countries. In fact it was Protestants like Locke and other students of Jesus' wisdom who were 98% responsible for the freedoms unbelievers do have. It's kind of sad you don't realize that. BTW at the same time Voltaire was justifying slavery, the Bible-addicted Wesley was calling it "the scourge of the earth." I guess he read Jesus' mission statement in Luke 4 or something.
Quote:You seem to be saying that the burden of proof is circular:Not at all. The law requires that any statement of defamation be proved, for good reason. It is assuming innocence until guilt is proved, you see.