PLEASE DONATE TO MY CHANNEL WHERE I MAKE INTERESTING VIDEOS ABOUT PEOPLE HUGGING TREES..
I need a amount of clothing percentage in these videos. If it's anything like the anti fur PETA you have my donation
Atheists unite
- Thread starter anything I don't mind
- Start date
I need a amount of clothing percentage in these videos. If it's anything like the anti fur PETA you have my donation
Please name an atheist that matches that description.
Unless by confrontational you mean debating, you won't.
You're wrong. There may be some atheists that will say that they are certain that there is no god, but they are being intellectually dishonest. How could any one possibly know that ?
Almost all atheists I come across accept they can not dismiss the possibility of gods existence so as I said before they use the label agnostic atheist. This is being intellectually honest. Richard Dawkins draws out a seven point scale in his book 'The God Delusion'. 1 being certain there is a god 7 being certain there is not. He puts himself as a 6.5. An agnostic atheist.
- Joined
- 28 Dec 2009
- Posts
- 13,052
- Location
- london
Some atheists do agree in the possibility of gods or god. They just do not agree the religious books are from god nor would they claim that it is fact or proven. It is simply not ruled out as a possibility and given enough evidence they would potentially change their mind.
See above.
What I find utterly hilarious about this thread is that atheists often moan about how religious people fight with each other. Yet here in a thread about atheism all the atheists are at each others' throats.
This is GD gold, ladies and gentlemen.
This is GD gold, ladies and gentlemen.
Some?
Read this thread! Read the myriad others! Atheists tend to be completely dismissive of anyone else. That's not me judging them, that's just fact.
Agnostics tend to be the only group of people not taking militant approaches to it.
What I find utterly hilarious about this thread is that atheists often moan about how religious people fight with each other. Yet here in a thread about atheism all the atheists are at each others' throats.
This is GD gold, ladies and gentlemen.
Bit of a difference between an online debate and for example the Crusades but if you say so Theo.
Who's taking a militant approach?
What militant atheists?
http://www.charismanews.com/us/41531-when-a-militant-atheist-assaults-a-christian-pastor
If someone believes in something so strongly they'll do anything to further the cause of it.
1. He wasn't posing as a religious person to cause discredit as you claimed.
2. The pastor asked his girlfriend in his presence if she felt safe with him. Obviously it's not the only motivation but that would annoy anyone.
And we have a strawman - it's GD Bingo all over again!
Burn it down for me pls?
No the mascaraed as another religion in order to further their own cause.
Don't dispute the extreme atheists bit. Besides that article appears there are other motives and the religion motive was tacked on for a sensationalist story line.
- Joined
- 28 Dec 2009
- Posts
- 13,052
- Location
- london
What the religious want to do in the states, is teach evolution as non factual and creationism as factual. In the science class they want to teach creationism a long side the scientific understanding of the creation of the universe.
If i had my way i would restrict the teaching of all religious books to anyone under the age of 18. I would make them adults only. Children are far too young to be brainwashed with the religious books. Once they have developed their rationale and their logic capability, then if they so decide they will be free to read the religious books. The thing is though this would eventually phase religious out because it depends no brainwashing little children and capturing their minds when they are very young. Without that, the amount of people that would read the religious at 18 for the first time and actually believe it would be relatively insignificant.
Last edited:
Thankfully OCUK forums don't represent the wider atheist community for the most part. I agree with you that many atheists who post here can be arrogant and dismissive. However, I've been involved with the wider atheist community for over ten years. I'm a regular poster on Free Thought Blogs ( http://freethoughtblogs.com/axp/ ) where many prominent American atheists post including those from The Atheist Experience TV Show, PZ Myres, various YT atheists etc. and the type of debates we have there are much more factual and civil than the usual mud slinging we get here at OCUK.
Agnostics != atheists.
Atheists actively believe there is no God. Agnostics (where I sit, if anywhere) are of the mind that we have no evidence to prove one way or another. It is the only logical place to sit.
We do need to do this. Apologies to the OP, your beliefs are your own to have, or not
Gilly, A-X-ism is the default rational position when pursuing knowledge; belief is not a part of this position in any shape or form. Before an entity can be considered as an answer to a question, it must leave trace, a piece of direct or indirect evidence. Otherwise, the correct position towards it is A-X-ism, even if it is a hypothetical posibility.
Now more sure than before, OP is the person creating the videos and asking for donations
Yes, the problem is when evolution is not taught and Creationism is taught is Science lessons. As it is in the US in many places.
Personally, I've always thought threads like this go better when people avoid using labels & just state what they believe (without feeling the need to say "Well, then your not an atheist").
For one, in most cases the person doesn't seem to appreciate the complexity of the terminology used - secondly, the debate winds up in cesspit of semantic circular stupidity.
For one, in most cases the person doesn't seem to appreciate the complexity of the terminology used - secondly, the debate winds up in cesspit of semantic circular stupidity.