How would that change anything in terms of the current discussion?
Printable View
How would that change anything in terms of the current discussion?
So then at what probability does something become certain enough that you can say you believe it to be so, conversationally?Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
You see where I'm going here? You're equating two things that are very unequal using a bullshit inverse slippery slope argument where you will only accept absolutes.
Certainly there are people that accept atheism on authority out of a kind of faith, but that doesn't make the belief itself a faith-based one. Most people accept that particle theory on authority without really understanding it, but that doesn't make it the same as believing in fables you heard as a kid.
Because the theoretical discussion we are having doesn't focus much on the fact that creationists want creationism taught in schools to talk about Jesus. You can sling your faith cock around all you want, but that doesn't change facts. IP nailed this earlier. Some of us forget that the middle of the country is a wasteland of Jesus. Do you really want the schools in our nation teaching Christianity?
When brown people people threaten your white ass kids in your white ass school with some scary brown religion people are going to see this a LOT differently. What about the children, etc.
I definitely see where you are going, but I think the desire to label oneself as an atheist has more to do with current trends than any amount of probability. In fact, I doubt most atheists even know what probability is, just like most religious people.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frogacuda
Ah, so you're back on topic. This thread has been so much more interesting since we ditched that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh
Good luck with the Muslim thing though. The blacks and Latinos that the Democrats love to crow so much about in terms of demographics are overwhelmingly Christian. This may wind up being a case of "be careful what you wish for; you just might get it."
Side question: do you agree with the entire republican platform as it currently stands or just the majority of it? If their platform swung on a spwcific issue you currently agree with to one you no longer do would you admit that you don't agree with it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
Personally I just agree with more stances the democratic party has, but I agree with like 30% or so of what your average republic platform contains.
I definitely don't agree with all of it. I am agnostic in terms of religion and very much for animal rights and other environmental issues. In a nutshell, I am in favor of helping creatures that cannot take care of themselves in a human-dominated world, whether they are animals, children, the severely handicapped, or the elderly. Where I am very much Republican is that anyone who is physically capable of taking care of himself should be expected by all of society to do so and that no one gets a second chance until everyone gets a first one. I view abortion as a lack of taking responsibility, so I am against it in all non-criminal or severe medical cases. I am very much pro-military and space, if you can separate those, both because of national security and because of the side effects, such as technological advancements: Velcro, Tang, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Opaque
I agree with literally everything you just said.
The funny part is I don't think either of us would think we agree on the tactics to get there. Which is wierd.
For the record, I snuck an abortion line in there during/after Opaque's post. I don't want to unintentionally put words in his mouth.
This is just crazy. Don't you yip and yap about welfare all the time? Does the world need more unwanted children? Literally one hundred other questions too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
This is just crazy. Don't you yip and yap about welfare all the time?Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
http://www.the-nextlevel.com/tnl/att...8&d=1362094756Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi