Angry Atheists and Anti-Theists

[Amarok]

So far uv just been a troll but i'll give u a chance and we'll see.

So far I have told it like it is sorry you got emotional over it . Nor do I need your chances . 

There is no group A or B there is just the one group he is angry about

Yes there is and this isn't a response 

If his parents "don't know better" than neither do the rest.

That doesn't follow his parents might not know better but others do or should  (at least in his opinion ) and even if we apply the same group even then their can be degrees of responsibility .

If his to be upset at anyone its his own parents who taught him that.

Yup he is upset about that that doesn't mean  he can't forgive his parents for not knowing better 

Thats who I was pissed off at first, my parents.

Well that says a lot 

Not random people. Random people did nothing to him or me

See my second point

[Belacqua]

your use of special pleading and unwarranted reinterpreting of Aquinas' arguments to support your bogus claim.

But I'm not doing those things. What I say of Aquinas is accurate about what he wrote. If you were taught differently, that is neither my fault nor Aquinas'. 

If you want to stand by your claims, I'll ask you to give me links to reputable knowledgable sources, which show that my reading is incorrect.

[Peebothuhlu]

At work.

Hello!

So.... I identify myself as a 'Non-theist' as I feel it's a good fit.

I'm not angry.

I fail to see any evidence to indicate the presence of Odin, Zeus, Yahwey etc it's as simple as that.

No hate, no preaching just a simple reply post.

Cheers.

No not all atheists are angry there is bound to be some normal ones

But did anyone explain how one accepts his parents as "not knowing any better" but he still slams theists. That's not rational

I..... must admit to not quite grokking what it is your reply is pertaining to.....

Cheers... ?

[Gwaithmir]

your use of special pleading and unwarranted reinterpreting of Aquinas' arguments to support your bogus claim.

But I'm not doing those things. What I say of Aquinas is accurate about what he wrote. If you were taught differently, that is neither my fault nor Aquinas'. 

If you want to stand by your claims, I'll ask you to give me links to reputable knowledgable sources, which show that my reading is incorrect.

Take it up with Dawkins and the Catholic Church.

[Belacqua]

[Angrboda]

The CIA is an arm of the government. I think it's pretty much a non-mention that politics and government has given rise to heinous acts. Do you have a comparable example to that of religion that is not inside the obviously hazardous realm of governance? It's also worth noting that the church incorporated and functioned as a system for governance for much of the period in question, so pointing out the evils involved in governance actually implicates religion rather than exonerates it. I'm not sure this tu quoque is headed toward anything productive.

(ETA: I'll also point out that governments serve an inestimably more important function than religions, so their excesses are better compensated, if not justified.)

[Agnostico]

So far uv just been a troll but i'll give u a chance and we'll see.

So far I have told it like it is sorry you got emotional over it . Nor do I need your chances . 

There is no group A or B there is just the one group he is angry about

Yes there is and this isn't a response 

If his parents "don't know better" than neither do the rest.

That doesn't follow his parents might not know better but others do or should  (at least in his opinion ) and even if we apply the same group even then their can be degrees of responsibility .

If his to be upset at anyone its his own parents who taught him that.

Yup he is upset about that that doesn't mean  he can't forgive his parents for not knowing better 

Thats who I was pissed off at first, my parents.

Well that says a lot 

Not random people. Random people did nothing to him or me

See my second point

Okay... Being angry, attack randoms at will. Justified... No morals mate... No morals at all.
If u were after an honest discussion u would at least say his a bit over the top.
But its obvious u only want to troll.. Goodbye...

[Agnostico]

ggggg

[Peebothuhlu]

At work.

?

Either a puzzling post....

Or a cat scampering across a keyboard.

[Amarok]

Okay... Being angry, attack randoms at will. Justified... No morals mate... No morals at all.

Not sure were you get that conclusion from my post?

If u were after an honest discussion u would at least say his a bit over the top.

Of he's over the top Dusty is always over the top that's how he gets views

But its obvious u only want to troll.. Goodbye...

Your free to that conclusion but you didn't get it from anything I said

---

At work.

?

Either a puzzling post....

Or a cat scampering across a keyboard.

That could be said of a few of his posts