Attn: Theists - What would it take to prove you wrong?

[discipulus]

Ultimately we homo sapiens, like the mosquito, or tape-worm, or roach, simply are living out and performing the functions that are included in the hand dealt to us by nature.

Wrong. This is the part where homo sapiens are different - our functions go above and beyond the dictates of nature.

So in light of the above, it is now clear that if a person finds meaning in life by believing in something in spite of the evidence against that belief, then they are simply dancing to their DNA and living out the life they feel is best for them to live. Some of course would say that living such a way is ridiculous and many would agree. Many would disagree and say that living however one desires to live is the way they should live.

And some would say that your view is insane because your DNA does not dictate your choice of beliefs and living how your desire is not how you should live if your desires run contrary to your life.

So essentially to anyone who gives me their opinion regarding the matter, I would give them mine, speaking atheistically, and say that many think people who eat spaghtetti are crazy and think that lasagna is the best Italian dish. Ultimately, it is all preference.

The point where it stops being a matter of opinion is where one path actually supports growth in life while the other contradicts it. We are no longer talking about eating lasagna vs eating spaghetti, we are talking about eating lasagna vs eating shit and I say it is no longer a matter of "preference".

All of the above is your opinion. And your opinion may be one commonly shared, however, there are many who disagree.

Many love having people urinate on them and in their mouth. It is sexually arousing and pleasurable to them. There are people who love to be pooped on and eat other peoples poop. Its called scat porn.

Speaking atheistically, its whatever floats your boat. You may think it disgusting, those that love it love it.

In fact you sound exactly like the Christian who claims homosexuality is bad even if people prefer it.

You are trying to convince me that your opinion is more than just your preference. But why should the woman who loves to eat poop from her lesbian lover place your opinion above her own in a world where she and not you determines what is meaningful to her?

[Captain Colostomy]

Not the greatest examples to be reading on an empty stomach.

[genkaus]

All of the above is your opinion. And your opinion may be one commonly shared, however, there are many who disagree.

Did you miss the part where if a statement is objectively true, it is no longer a matter of opinion?

Many love having people urinate on them and in their mouth. It is sexually arousing and pleasurable to them. There are people who love to be pooped on and eat other peoples poop. Its called scat porn.

Speaking atheistically, its whatever floats your boat. You may think it disgusting, those that love it love it.

You seem to have a problem with comprehension. Atheistically speaking, it isn't a matter of what floats your boat. Especially if what floats it damages it as well.

In fact you sound exactly like the Christian who claims homosexuality is bad even if people prefer it.

You are trying to convince me that your opinion is more than just your preference. But why should the woman who loves to eat poop from her lesbian lover place your opinion above her own in a world where she and not you determines what is meaningful to her?

Because "eating poop is bad for you" is an objective fact. "Having lesbian sex is bad for you" is not an objective fact. Which is why I say that the lesbian should not do the former while she may do the latter and which is why she should listen to me.

[Tonus]

One person persuades by the edge of the sword. Another by logical argument.

Both are acting in accordance with their desire and how they think persuasion is best accomplished. Both are doing what they find meaningful. Speaking atheistically for a moment, one is ultimately no better or worse off than the other.

What does "speaking atheistically" have to do with it? Is there an alternative way to "speak" that differs in meaning?

[discipulus]

All of the above is your opinion. And your opinion may be one commonly shared, however, there are many who disagree.

Did you miss the part where if a statement is objectively true, it is no longer a matter of opinion?

Many love having people urinate on them and in their mouth. It is sexually arousing and pleasurable to them. There are people who love to be pooped on and eat other peoples poop. Its called scat porn.

Speaking atheistically, its whatever floats your boat. You may think it disgusting, those that love it love it.

You seem to have a problem with comprehension. Atheistically speaking, it isn't a matter of what floats your boat. Especially if what floats it damages it as well.

In fact you sound exactly like the Christian who claims homosexuality is bad even if people prefer it.

You are trying to convince me that your opinion is more than just your preference. But why should the woman who loves to eat poop from her lesbian lover place your opinion above her own in a world where she and not you determines what is meaningful to her?

Because "eating poop is bad for you" is an objective fact. "Having lesbian sex is bad for you" is not an objective fact. Which is why I say that the lesbian should not do the former while she may do the latter and which is why she should listen to me.

You have yet to establish your opinions as objective. Simply labeling them so does not mean that I or anyone else must agree.

Stepping over the issue of whether or not your views have the weight of objectivity to support them, I simply pose a question:

How are you ultimately any better off than the poop eater?

---

One person persuades by the edge of the sword. Another by logical argument.

Both are acting in accordance with their desire and how they think persuasion is best accomplished. Both are doing what they find meaningful. Speaking atheistically for a moment, one is ultimately no better or worse off than the other.

What does "speaking atheistically" have to do with it? Is there an alternative way to "speak" that differs in meaning?

Yes. I am a Christian. I can speak theistically or if I desire to demonstrate a point I can speak atheistically or as one that speaks while taking into account certain implications that follow from a Godless reality.

[Tonus]

So a godless person cannot see a difference between persuasion by threat of force, and persuasion by logical argument?

[Esquilax]

You have yet to establish your opinions as objective. Simply labeling them so does not mean that I or anyone else must agree.

Stepping over the issue of whether or not your views have the weight of objectivity to support them, I simply pose a question:

How are you ultimately any better off than the poop eater?

Do we actually have to explain to you why, biologically, poop is bad to eat?

Not to mention that the metaphor has become extremely strained from its original context, if we're discussing this.

[genkaus]

You have yet to establish your opinions as objective. Simply labeling them so does not mean that I or anyone else must agree.

There is a simple way for you to find out. Try eating poop.

Stepping over the issue of whether or not your views have the weight of objectivity to support them, I simply pose a question:

How are you ultimately any better off than the poop eater?

Because my psychological motivations are sufficiently consistent with my biological ones such that I have no desire to eat poop.

Yes. I am a Christian. I can speak theistically or if I desire to demonstrate a point I can speak atheistically or as one that speaks while taking into account certain implications that follow from a Godless reality.

Unfortunately, you completely fail to understand the implications of a godless reality and therefore you do not actually speak "atheistically".

[pocaracas]

I have read a few posts from this discipulus character... can't find any substance in them...
What on earth are you guys arguing over?

Anyways... just to subscribe to this thread!

[Anomalocaris]

RE: Attn: Theists - What would it take to prove you wrong?

Convince a theist to open his mouth?