xfire
New Twitter/X @cxffreeman
My sister used to hide my Satanic Bible every time she came for a visit. The Koran, not so much. What's your point, exactly?
-
Hey, guys! FreeOnes Tube is up and running - see for yourself!
-
FreeOnes Now Listing Male and Trans Performers! More info here!
One Porn Star's Political Opinions...
- Thread starter Mariahxxx
- Start date
My sister used to hide my Satanic Bible every time she came for a visit. The Koran, not so much. What's your point, exactly?
I am saying that LaVey was an atheist. God was not part of the equation. As for the other religions, I prefer to look at God as the center of a wheel and all the other religions are a spoke leading to that center.
xfire
New Twitter/X @cxffreeman
LaVey was an opportunist and a con man. I have no argument with God being the center of a wheel surrounded by spokes of different faith. I'm not anti-God, I'm anti-evangelical right-wing Christian.
Rattrap would be well served to step away from his Mr. Spock approach to logic and critical thinking in discussions of the existence of a Supreme being.
In fact considering your bias toward the subject, you should probably excuse yourself from the debate. I know the concept of a creator is mind boggling to you but you are looking at the origin of the universe as something evolving from nothing and it just happened. Who is to say that what you conceive as the "universe" is not just a speck in space and time and there could be numerous other areas of the universe that do not fall under the laws of physics that we as humans understand. We humans would have no concept of time if the earth didn't spin around once every 24 hours or travel around the sun every 365 days. Assuming you are correct, there is no God and the universe was created during the Big Bang there are physical laws and matter that even caused that and had to come in to existence some way.
And I am convinced that all of the scientific knowledge and the intellectual capacity to understand these things were limited by A Supreme Being.
In fact considering your bias toward the subject, you should probably excuse yourself from the debate. I know the concept of a creator is mind boggling to you but you are looking at the origin of the universe as something evolving from nothing and it just happened. Who is to say that what you conceive as the "universe" is not just a speck in space and time and there could be numerous other areas of the universe that do not fall under the laws of physics that we as humans understand. We humans would have no concept of time if the earth didn't spin around once every 24 hours or travel around the sun every 365 days. Assuming you are correct, there is no God and the universe was created during the Big Bang there are physical laws and matter that even caused that and had to come in to existence some way.
And I am convinced that all of the scientific knowledge and the intellectual capacity to understand these things were limited by A Supreme Being.
Not too sure what you are on about here. You are very odd to say the least.
I prefer the term peculiar.
I'll stick with 'odd' if you do not mind.
Ok. fair enough and I will refer to you as queer.
Rattrap
Doesn't feed trolls and would appreciate it if you
That's the only arena God has left. Science certainly doesn't support it.
All of this is true. None of it remotely suggests a God in any meaningful sense of the concept (i.e., an Abrahamic god).
Such a concept is a dead-end for discussion. It's like believing the Matrix is actually our reality; whether it is or isn't isn't something we can prove or disprove or do anything about, so it as a concept is irrelevant.
I must give you credit in that your embrace of critical thinking is intellectually honest. Every decision you make in life must take up a great deal of your time.
Good point.
Truth be told, I find most Athiests that have been debating this issue to be somewhat disingenous people. When confronted with questions regarding the existance of a Supreme being or the supernatural, their response to these questions is inevitably "I don't know the answer". However, the appropriate position of an open-minded enlightened person who "doesn't know" is Agnostic, not Athiest. Yet these so-called Athiests often approach theological debates with the same irrational, hateful, intolerant zeal as the common right-wing christian evangelical lunatic.
If these so-called Athiests' only response to metaphysical questions is "I don't know the answer", then they should have no problem with those that have faith in something greater than themselves as providing a possible explanation.
But what if those different spokes contradict each other?
There's the irreducible principle of non-contradiction - if two competing claims contradict each other, they can't BOTH be true.
xfire
New Twitter/X @cxffreeman
I truly support the 1st Amendment, each individual should pursue his or her faith or lack thereof to the extent they wish. I'm not keen on anyone proselytizing religion, especially political parties. One's faith doesn't make them a good person, let alone a better person than anyone else. I've always found it odd that merely saying, "I'm a believer", whether it's sincere or not, will gain you acceptance in certain circles. Way too easy to manipulate a situation like that and some of the absolute shittiest people I've encountered have claimed to be Christians.
That's why I'm a firm believer in the 1st Amendment, it's individual choice and belief, not belief that all should be forced to subscribe to. As far as I'm concerned it's as arbitrary as picking which flavor of ice cream you prefer.
Mariahxxx
Official Checked Star Member
well I dont give a shit if someone believes in God or not, as long as they arent making laws that govern MY life based on those views. that is unconstitutional but then again since when did this batch of republicans give a fuck about that piece of paper?
live however you want, just let me do the same. but, christians seem to not get that concept.
live however you want, just let me do the same. but, christians seem to not get that concept.
You really aren't going to start up about Republicans trampling on our Constitutional rights in light of everything that going on with The DOJ and IRS intimidating Americans right now are you?
Of course you pick and choose your battles and you hate the Tea Party so that is ok in your book. And since you said "this batch" of Republicans, what laws specifically have been enacted by them recently that have trampled upon your civil liberties and freedom of religion? You know, laws that the President would have signed?
I'll hang up and listen.
Rattrap
Doesn't feed trolls and would appreciate it if you
Ironically, I'm quite impulsive. I'm still trying to figure out how I've signed myself up to live in Germany for the next few years.
I'm glad you bring up Agnosticism and its common misconception; Agnosticism is the 'enlightened' choice, as you say, only when there is about the same evidence for both sides - not simply when a claim isn't disprovable. This isn't the case concerning this debate.
Ultimately, here's my beef: I don't mind someone believing in a god or gods or the Flying Spaghetti Monster. I will argue with the willing that said beliefs are in error, but please don't mistake this as hostility toward said beliefs. Religion, on the other hand, I have a big problem with, for the reason Mariah has pointed out: it always seeks to control how people live their lives. In the US we see this mostly from the social conservatives mostly from the Republican Party. It's subtly in the background as well, though, unrelated to politics - circumcision is one ready example. People who can't eat pork, another. In less civilized parts of the world you see more extreme and violent examples of this control.
...but I'm drifting too far into a debate about religion, which I don't really want to get into. It's a lot more grey than a debate about the existence of god.
Rattrap, I was in Frankfurt for 3 days this week. I think it is a beautiful city and could live there without reservation.
