Neither is spending time de-constructing their arguments and logic only to find yourself going in circles over and over again xP
It's usually the people on the side lines who benefit from such arguments more then the person your arguing with. I also find it useful in my own right to test and retest my own views. So it's not really as futile as your making it out to be.
Now, there may be archaic laws on the books, but those are seen as non factors. If a state ever did try to act on one of these archaic laws that was unconstitutional, they would quickly have their heads shoved up their own butts. At least, that's what I've always thought. Am I totally wrong here?
Acting on archaic laws is exactly what happened in the link I provided.
Most of the time, its theists dragging atheists in circles with circular logic. If people were just able to set aside the petty beliefs they were indoctrinated with as infants and regard religion without bias, then maybe they would finally understand the reason behind atheism.
They can do that? I thought individual states couldn't touch the US constitution.
Actually the First Amendment only guarantees freedom to practice your religion. There is nothing which states that one must or must not abide by any religion to hold office. Each state is guaranteed the rights to set their own stipulations in regards to their government. Now, if it were to apply to a Senator or Congressman then it wouldn't work because they are governed by Federal law.
Atheists don't care about god, they just want to be mean to the loving, helpful, well meaning, good hearted Christians and try to take their happiness away from them, that's all they want to do. Well let me tell those Atheists something, they will all go to hell where they belong!
Right, so atheists are all evil. Ignore the atrocities such as the Salem Witch Trials and the Inquisition, because those things pale in comparison to people who simply don't believe in god. Atheists don't try to take anyone's happiness, or lives. People usually convert to atheism by their own reasonings, not because other atheists converted them. And who said being an atheist means being unhappy? To me it means that no over bearing divine ruler will cast me into an abyss of eternal flame if i fail to kiss his feet for all the bad as well as the good.
I dont know how much history you have been thought, but all those things you mentioned happened hundreds of years ago. You're comparing Apples and Oranges there.
True, but you never hear of Atheists going fanatical and killing those who do believe in god. And my main points still stand; how good of a person you are is not determined by your faith but by the way you treat other people and atheists are not necessarily unhappy.
I'm catholic myself. I don't try to get people to convert though. I'm fine with whatever you believe is right.
I thought this thread was about Atheism.
I dont know how much history you have been thought, but all those things you mentioned happened hundreds of years ago. You're comparing Apples and Oranges there.
So if a couple of hundreds of years pass, you can let Bigons be Bigons? You're comparing righteousness and evil through time.
Atheism.
A - without
Theism - Religion.
This means Atheism is without religion, it doesn't make you evil, nor does it mean that the people of Atheism want others to have loss of faith in their Theism. So... if this thread is about without religion and it's not a vs. thread... why the debates?
True, but you never hear of Atheists going fanatical and killing those who do believe in god. And my main points still stand; how good of a person you are is not determined by your faith but by the way you treat other people and atheists are not necessarily unhappy.
Woah, woah, don't put me under your roof, Atheists includes Me, and I am not a part in your "unhappiness".
Woah, woah, don't put me under your roof, Atheists includes Me, and I am not a part in your "unhappiness".
That's what i'm trying to say! A prevoius person claimed that atheists try to take away people's happiness. I'm saying that that isn't necessarily true!
That's what i'm trying to say! A prevoius person claimed that atheists try to take away people's happiness. I'm saying that that isn't necessarily true!
I know, I was just too lazy to look for the original post, so I used yours.
I notice that a lot of arguemnets boil down to the religious saying "You cannot disprove god!" and the atheists saying "You cannot prove that he exists!". Neither of these make anything true or false. I also notice that agnostics get bashed a lot, called the pussy form of atheists. This sort of gets to me, because faith is a hard decision that takes time to make, and no matter how much evidence you put on the table, neither side is concrete. Eventually you should pick a side though, at least for peace of mind.
If you are an atheist than go ahead. If you are christian, thats cool. Don't bash each other. There is no need for the random Christian bashers and respect each others beliefs. No need to give your 2 cents about everything. K bye
and no matter how much evidence you put on the table, neither side is concrete.
Atheists don't argue FOR atheism, they argue against religion, because it's retarded, also, religion has NO evidence, so how can they possibly put any on the table?
Atheists don't argue FOR atheism, they argue against religion, because it's retarded, also, religion has NO evidence, so how can they possibly put any on the table?
Well, argueing against religion and for atheism are the same thing. Atheism is not believing in any religion so argueing against religion is argueing for atheism.
