GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-07-2012, 21:37   #51
Comrade Bork
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 874
!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geko45 View Post
Those too, of course, but there are many more subtle ways that religion hurts society. The political realm, already crippled under the weight of partisanship is further hindered by primitive notions of morality brought forward by those still adhering to ancient religions.

Many of the faithful don't even realize that they themselves are being hurt by their faith. They might never know what they could have achieved if only they had focused on developing their potential instead of following what they "discerned" to be god's purpose for their life. Sure, religion has helped some, but I'm convinced it's net effect is far from positive.
At minimum, demands of the clergy upon the "faithful" are their time and treasure.

In more extreme cases, clergy not only demands time and treasure, but also, as in the case of 9/11/01, blood and lives as well.

Even in the relatively benign western religions, treasure wasted in supporting "the church" and more to the point, the indolent con-men clergy that infest "the church", is money that does NOT go towards the health, welfare, and education of the faithful's own children and is thus, totally wasted.

Comrade Bork is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2012, 20:29   #52
brokenprism
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 263
I'll say this for the atheist usual suspects, you guys are intelligent, well-read, and you can write. That's rare on a gun forum.

I do wish that non-believers would stop laying the cruelty of the crusades/inquisitions, and the money-harping 'ministries' at the feet of Christians. I would dare to say the 'true' Christians are not responsible for those things. Between about 500 AD and 1550 AD, you probably had to look under rocks to find Christians. There was a large religious organization, complete with religious trappings & symbology, but they are doctrinally not Christian and freely admit to the doctrinal chasm, of their making, that separates them from Protestants -- they're proud of it. They should not be expected to have behaved with circumspect morality, because they did not have new natures or Divine assistance that come with true conversion, which in turn is accompanied by (and flows from) correct doctrine. And is there no end to the river of pedophile priests...? I think there's a clue there. Just saying.

Anyway, you guys are worthy ideological opponents. Well done.


***
On the subject of evolution, I've always wondered a couple of things. Why do all giraffes have long necks? Was it as simple as evolving long necks to avoid competition with grazing animals? Why are there no short-necked giraffes?

And why does the turtle have a shell when the lizard, who lived in similar environments, didn't feel the need of one? Where is the turtle that didn't grow a shell for self-defense?

Thanks.
brokenprism is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2012, 11:29   #53
English
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: London
Posts: 5,286
Fist of all, can I say that I have never seen such a collection of intelligent, knowledgeable and well reasoned posts in a single thread in all the time I have been on Glock Talk. Congratulations to all!

Quote:
Originally Posted by OctoberRust View Post
...

I'm Atheist, but I do not live in a fantasy world that all Atheists are amazing people. If I'm not mistaken, Stalin was an Atheist, we saw how well he worked out in a position of power.......
.....
OctoberRust,
It is important to distinguish between different types of atheist. Atheism is an unfortunate term dating back to a time when all ideologies which sought to explain the nature of life and existence and the proper forms of behaviour within that scheme were religions. What proper atheists object to is the irrational nature of those ideolologies and the tendency of their followers to impose them on others. In fact, socialism and communism are merely ideologies which differ from religion in little other than the existence of God. They are just as irrational and just as eager to impose their ideologies on others as any other religion.

And so it is fallacious to argue, as many theists do, that Stalin et al demonstrate that atheism does not lead to freedom or whatever good you choose, because Stalin was simply following a different but equally bad and equally irrational ideology.

English
English is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2012, 18:59   #54
Dadof4
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NW Arkansas
Posts: 55
Send a message via Yahoo to Dadof4
English, I think that you want to carve out a nitch for an atheism that you can be proud of. The point of the Stalin example is this: if there is no God ordained morality, then it is up to humans to decide what is moral. In that case, the humans in power get to decide. Fascism, socialism and racism are rational belief systems, based on the idea that there is no higher authority than the state.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
Dadof4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2012, 19:55   #55
ArtificialGrape
CLM Number 265
Charter Lifetime Member
 
ArtificialGrape's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 5,546
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dadof4 View Post
English, I think that you want to carve out a nitch for an atheism that you can be proud of. The point of the Stalin example is this: if there is no God ordained morality, then it is up to humans to decide what is moral. In that case, the humans in power get to decide. Fascism, socialism and racism are rational belief systems, based on the idea that there is no higher authority than the state.
Do you still advocate slavery, putting adulterers to death, putting rape victims (in some circumstances) to death, and stoning women to death on their father's doorstep if they weren't a virgin when they got married?

-ArtificialGrape
ArtificialGrape is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2012, 21:50   #56
Animal Mother
Not Enough Gun
 
Animal Mother's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 14,839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dadof4 View Post
English, I think that you want to carve out a nitch for an atheism that you can be proud of. The point of the Stalin example is this: if there is no God ordained morality, then it is up to humans to decide what is moral. In that case, the humans in power get to decide. Fascism, socialism and racism are rational belief systems, based on the idea that there is no higher authority than the state.
Is racism a rational belief system based on the idea that a deity said so?
__________________
"Pain, or damage, don't end the world. Or despair. Or beatin's. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you've got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man, and give some back."
Animal Mother is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2012, 22:11   #57
Geko45
CLM Number 135
Smartass Pilot
 
Geko45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Short final
Posts: 13,377


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dadof4 View Post
if there is no God ordained morality, then it is up to humans to decide what is moral. In that case, the humans in power get to decide. Fascism, socialism and racism are rational belief systems, based on the idea that there is no higher authority than the state.
No, they don't (and the state is not the highest authority). If there is no objective source of moral truth then the state has no legitimate claim to rule. If morality can only ever be subjective, then one person's opinion is no more or less valid than anyone elses. Therefore, no one's opinion on what ougth to be can (or should) be enforced on another.

What this logically leads to is the barest minimum form of government most accurately expressed by libertarianism where the only just laws are designed such that one individual is prohibited only from interfering with the rights of another (and is otherwise free to do as they please) and government is only large enough to effectively enforce those protective laws.

Communism adopts atheism, not because they agree that morality is subjective, but rather because it is politically expedient for that form of government to eliminate any entity that might claim moral authority and challenge their regime. So, while communism may adopt the trappings of atheism, atheism only ever logically leads to libertarianism.
__________________
CavDoc: "If you have to pretend that a person with a different opinion has an opinion other than his own in order to score points in an argument, you've forfeited any points that you pretended to have."
CavDoc: "You consider yourself as non-religious, and I consider you a religious zealot."

JBnTX: "Freedom of religion doesn't mean you can worship any God, anyway you see fit or not even worship any God if you so choose. [...] Christianity should be the only religion protected under the constitution, and congress shall make no law restricting its practice."

Last edited by Geko45; 10-16-2012 at 12:46..
Geko45 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2012, 04:08   #58
G23Gen4TX
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,152
Quote:
Originally Posted by brokenprism View Post

***
On the subject of evolution, I've always wondered a couple of things. Why do all giraffes have long necks? Was it as simple as evolving long necks to avoid competition with grazing animals? Why are there no short-necked giraffes?

And why does the turtle have a shell when the lizard, who lived in similar environments, didn't feel the need of one? Where is the turtle that didn't grow a shell for self-defense?

Thanks.
A short neck giraffe is called Okapi. A turtle without a shell is a crocodile. These are the closest relatives of the two animals you mentioned.

Same as a very hairy human is called an ape.
G23Gen4TX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2012, 09:07   #59
Glock36shooter
Senior Member
 
Glock36shooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 3,159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dadof4 View Post
English, I think that you want to carve out a nitch for an atheism that you can be proud of. The point of the Stalin example is this: if there is no God ordained morality, then it is up to humans to decide what is moral. In that case, the humans in power get to decide. Fascism, socialism and racism are rational belief systems, based on the idea that there is no higher authority than the state.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
Humans decided what morality lines the pages of the bible. Has nothing to do with a God. Deuteronomy was supposed to be an original part of the Torah. It was not. It was added later during the rule of Josiah I believe.
Glock36shooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2012, 11:56   #60
Dadof4
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NW Arkansas
Posts: 55
Send a message via Yahoo to Dadof4
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArtificialGrape View Post
Do you still advocate slavery, putting adulterers to death, putting rape victims (in some circumstances) to death, and stoning women to death on their father's doorstep if they weren't a virgin when they got married?

-ArtificialGrape
An involved explanation is needed to address this question. But just for the sake of argument,what if I said yes (which I don't). How can an atheist tell me there is anything wrong with any of those practices?


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
Dadof4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2012, 11:59   #61
Dadof4
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NW Arkansas
Posts: 55
Send a message via Yahoo to Dadof4
Quote:
Originally Posted by Animal Mother View Post
Is racism a rational belief system based on the idea that a deity said so?
No it is not rational because some deity said so.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
Dadof4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2012, 12:08   #62
Dadof4
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NW Arkansas
Posts: 55
Send a message via Yahoo to Dadof4
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geko45 View Post
No, they don't (and the state is not the highest authority). If there is no objective source of moral truth then the state has no legitimate claim to rule. If morality can only ever be subjective, then one's person opinion is no more or less valid than anyone elses. Therefore, no one's opinion on what outgh to be can (or should) be enforced on another.
As an atheist, on what basis can you decide what ought or should be or not be? My point is just that, with no objective morality your view is no better than stalin's or mao's. there is no good or bad. There is no better or worse. Justice is just a word without any objective meaning. So, those in power get to (or rather will) decide for the rest of us. Own your atheism to its ultimate conclusion.

(BTW, I do agree that a more libertine govt and society yields the best outcome for everyone. But that comes from my Christian worldview where there is an objective basis to decide what the "best outcome" might be. You have to borrow your ideas of what is best from somewhere else. And that's not being true to your belief that there is no objective good.)


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Last edited by Dadof4; 10-16-2012 at 12:27..
Dadof4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2012, 12:14   #63
Syclone538
Senior Member
 
Syclone538's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,346
__________________
Some people want freedom, even for those they disagree with, and some don't.
Do lot Do so sinh Ban buon quan ao Chup anh cho be
Quote:
Originally Posted by CAcop View Post
...
The constitution is not, nor was it meant to be absolutely literal.
...
Syclone538 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2012, 12:50   #64
ArtificialGrape
CLM Number 265
Charter Lifetime Member
 
ArtificialGrape's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 5,546
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dadof4 View Post
An involved explanation is needed to address this question. But just for the sake of argument,what if I said yes (which I don't). How can an atheist tell me there is anything wrong with any of those practices?
Answering my questions may provide you with the answer to your question...

Given that you "don't" still advocate the punishments in the scenarios that I previously described, on what basis are you able to reject those?

Is the Bible a good source of morality? Don't worry, I'm not taking this down the path of providing counter examples.

-ArtificialGrape
ArtificialGrape is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2012, 12:55   #65
Geko45
CLM Number 135
Smartass Pilot
 
Geko45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Short final
Posts: 13,377


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dadof4 View Post
As an atheist, on what basis can you decide what ought or should be or not be? My point is just that, with no objective morality your view is no better than stalin's or mao's. there is no good or bad. There is no better or worse. Justice is just a word without any objective meaning. So, those in power get to (or rather will) decide for the rest of us. Own your atheism to its ultimate conclusion.
This is just twisting it around and ignoring my fairly obvious argument. Let's say we have a would-be-Stalin that wants to rule all, send people to gulags, purge intellectuals, etc. His views on what ought to be are no more valid than my views that he should just be shot in the head. Therefore, he doesn't get his purges and I don't get to shoot him in the head. The only valid basis for law is to codify a system where people aren't allowed to impose their subjective will on others as if it were objective (like communism insists on). The only crimes resulting in punishment would come from attempting to violate this principle.

Quote:
BTW, I do agree that a more libertine govt and society yields the best outcome for everyone. But that comes from my Christian worldview where there is an objective basis to decide what the "best outcome" might be.
Libertarianism is found nowhere in the bible. The only form of government that is ever put forth in the bible is that of a benevolent (hopefully) monarchy. So, unless you want a king appointed by an establishment of religion that carries the weight of law with its edicts then you are not following the bible's example.
__________________
CavDoc: "If you have to pretend that a person with a different opinion has an opinion other than his own in order to score points in an argument, you've forfeited any points that you pretended to have."
CavDoc: "You consider yourself as non-religious, and I consider you a religious zealot."

JBnTX: "Freedom of religion doesn't mean you can worship any God, anyway you see fit or not even worship any God if you so choose. [...] Christianity should be the only religion protected under the constitution, and congress shall make no law restricting its practice."

Last edited by Geko45; 10-16-2012 at 12:56..
Geko45 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2012, 13:10   #66
ArtificialGrape
CLM Number 265
Charter Lifetime Member
 
ArtificialGrape's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 5,546
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geko45 View Post
[[Stalin's]] views on what ought to be are no more valid than my views
George Carlin put it this way, "I have as much authority as the pope, I just don't have as many people who believe it."
ArtificialGrape is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2012, 13:10   #67
The Maggy
Senior Member
 
The Maggy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Stillwater, OK
Posts: 3,092
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dadof4 View Post
English, I think that you want to carve out a nitch for an atheism that you can be proud of. The point of the Stalin example is this: if there is no God ordained morality, then it is up to humans to decide what is moral. In that case, the humans in power get to decide. Fascism, socialism and racism are rational belief systems, based on the idea that there is no higher authority than the state.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
I'm not trying to nitpick but racism and race based slavery were born from the Catholic church. The church determined Africans to have no soul thus making them less than human and gave their blessing on the atlantic slave trade. Before this, the concept of superiority based upon skin color was nononexistent.
Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
__________________

The Maggy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2012, 13:37   #68
Gunhaver
the wrong hands
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 2,736
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by brokenprism View Post
On the subject of evolution, I've always wondered a couple of things. Why do all giraffes have long necks? Was it as simple as evolving long necks to avoid competition with grazing animals? Why are there no short-necked giraffes?

And why does the turtle have a shell when the lizard, who lived in similar environments, didn't feel the need of one? Where is the turtle that didn't grow a shell for self-defense?

Thanks.
The ability to retreat into a shell would be handy in any environment with predators yet few animals can do so. The ability to reach the higher leaves and spot danger from the crow's nest view like giraffes do would also be handy in the survival game yet few animals are built that way. Animals don't just evolve what they want to evolve nor do they automatically evolve what would work best in any given environment.

What they do is make the best of what their particular genetic makeup can muster over a long stretch of time under the pressure of environmental stress by gradual change from one generation to the next. When the environment stays the same the animals stay the same since everyone gets to eat and breed freely and all genetic makeups in a given population are moved equally through the timeline. But introduce a gradual drop in temperature and there will be a gradual increase of larger furrier animals as the smaller less insulated ones fall out of that particular gene pool. Go the other direction with a gradual increase in temperature and you'll see a gradual increase of animals in a population that have the genetic ability to deal with that by evolving ways to deal with that like sails on the back or large ears to help dissipate heat. Turtle shells might not be as useful in a desert environment as the skin texture and behavioral adaptation of some lizards that allow them to collect the morning dew along grooves in their skin and direct it towards their mouths. There will be tortoises in the same environment that started out as something that had genes to form a shell and they will have different ways to deal with the water collection issue. Problems don't need to be solved in the same way by all animals. They just need to be solved.

The vast majority of all animal species that have ever lived have failed at problem solving at some point and gone extinct. What remains today is the elite cream of the crop of evolutionary adaptation and we see the process continue to this day with spotted owls and narwhals and every other critter on the endangered species list.

The fossil record reflects this process with exactly what you should expect to find under these circumstances. Given the rarity of occasion where an animal dies in a manner that it avoids being torn apart by scavengers and also finds it's bones in a suitable medium to be replaced by minerals rather than just decaying away, one should expect to see the majority of fossils from animals that have lived in an environment for a great deal of time unchanged because of unchanging conditions. It's those intermediary forms that transition from one common form to the next during the environmental stressor periods where there simply aren't as many being fossilized. Those won't be found nearly as often as something like T-Rex or Mastodon that has been living relatively unchanged for many millions of years.

That's why we have a harder time finding those "missing links" but we still do find them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therapsida
Gunhaver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2012, 17:52   #69
Dadof4
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NW Arkansas
Posts: 55
Send a message via Yahoo to Dadof4
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArtificialGrape View Post
Answering my questions may provide you with the answer to your question...

Given that you "don't" still advocate the punishments in the scenarios that I previously described, on what basis are you able to reject those?
-ArtificialGrape
AG, there's a lot of info out there to explain this from a historical, cultural and theological perspective. So I'm not going to take the time. While most Christians can't articulate why those laws are no longer in effect, nor why they were ever instituted, it's not like you're bringing up something scholars never noticed before. I say this because I hear atheists bring it up frequently as though Christians will go "oh gee whiz, they've got me now. My faith has been destroyed."


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
Dadof4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2012, 18:01   #70
Dadof4
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NW Arkansas
Posts: 55
Send a message via Yahoo to Dadof4
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArtificialGrape View Post

Is the Bible a good source of morality? Don't worry, I'm not taking this down the path of providing counter examples.

-ArtificialGrape
When asked what the most important command was, Jesus replied: "'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments." (Matthew 22:37-40 NIV) The Apostle Paul reiterated the same. Yes, the Bible is the best source of morality, WHEN CORRECTLY INTERPRETED.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
Dadof4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2012, 18:14   #71
Dadof4
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NW Arkansas
Posts: 55
Send a message via Yahoo to Dadof4
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geko45 View Post
The only valid basis for law is to codify a system where people aren't allowed to impose their subjective will on others as if it were objective (like communism insists on).
If everything is relative and there is no absolute morality, the strong imposing her will on the rest by shooting those who disagree in the head is just as valid. If you disagree, she'll shoot you in the head too and the universe won't even burp. If we're all just an accident of nature, it doesn't matter who shoots who.

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
Dadof4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2012, 18:27   #72
Dadof4
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NW Arkansas
Posts: 55
Send a message via Yahoo to Dadof4
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Maggy View Post
I'm not trying to nitpick but racism and race based slavery were born from the Catholic church. The church determined Africans to have no soul thus making them less than human and gave their blessing on the atlantic slave trade. Before this, the concept of superiority based upon skin color was nononexistent.
Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
Maggy, I don't know the history of raced based slavery. But you are correct that it is not in the bible. Slavery in the Old Testament was more like indentured servant hood, and the Israelites were given strict rules concerning its operation. In the New Testament slavery is condemned. Paul said "We know that the law is good if one uses it properly. We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy . . . for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine" (1 Timothy 1:8-10 NIV)


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
Dadof4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2012, 18:52   #73
ArtificialGrape
CLM Number 265
Charter Lifetime Member
 
ArtificialGrape's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 5,546
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dadof4 View Post
AG, there's a lot of info out there to explain this from a historical, cultural and theological perspective. So I'm not going to take the time. While most Christians can't articulate why those laws are no longer in effect, nor why they were ever instituted, it's not like you're bringing up something scholars never noticed before. I say this because I hear atheists bring it up frequently as though Christians will go "oh gee whiz, they've got me now. My faith has been destroyed."
Nope, the goal was not to destroy your faith; however, the point remains, the Bible directs the death penalty to: unruly children, children who strike or curse a parent, witches, fortunetellers, homosexuals, adulterers, women who are not a virgin on their wedding night, some rape victims...

Either those directions:
. were moral then and are moral now
. were moral then, but are are immoral now
. were immoral then and are immoral now

Which is it?

-ArtificialGrape
ArtificialGrape is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2012, 22:25   #74
Geko45
CLM Number 135
Smartass Pilot
 
Geko45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Short final
Posts: 13,377


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dadof4 View Post
If you disagree, she'll shoot you in the head too and the universe won't even burp.
Not if I shoot her (how did this become a her?) first. And I'm a very good shot.

But, I'm betting it won't come to that as I believe the majority will see the logic in not electing someone that wants to send people (possibly them) to gulags to die.
__________________
CavDoc: "If you have to pretend that a person with a different opinion has an opinion other than his own in order to score points in an argument, you've forfeited any points that you pretended to have."
CavDoc: "You consider yourself as non-religious, and I consider you a religious zealot."

JBnTX: "Freedom of religion doesn't mean you can worship any God, anyway you see fit or not even worship any God if you so choose. [...] Christianity should be the only religion protected under the constitution, and congress shall make no law restricting its practice."

Last edited by Geko45; 10-16-2012 at 22:28..
Geko45 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2012, 23:10   #75
Geko45
CLM Number 135
Smartass Pilot
 
Geko45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Short final
Posts: 13,377


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dadof4 View Post
And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'
At least for this second principle, almost every major religion has incorporated it in some form or another. It's hardly unique to christianity.
__________________
CavDoc: "If you have to pretend that a person with a different opinion has an opinion other than his own in order to score points in an argument, you've forfeited any points that you pretended to have."
CavDoc: "You consider yourself as non-religious, and I consider you a religious zealot."

JBnTX: "Freedom of religion doesn't mean you can worship any God, anyway you see fit or not even worship any God if you so choose. [...] Christianity should be the only religion protected under the constitution, and congress shall make no law restricting its practice."
Geko45 is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:52.



Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,258
355 Members
903 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 11:42