The Muslims are coming, the Muslims are coming...
-
Joergen Sigvardsson wrote:
Having fun fighting straw men?
Ah yes...The ol' feigned fallacy to escape an argument. I asked a simple question. The point of taking an oath in the name of God is to do so with full confidence that (assuming you're faithful) you will carry out that oath as it's done in the witness of that thing held in the highest regard by God-fearing people. You claim that if an atheist were to swear an oath, he would do so to himself, thereby implying that he holds himself in higher regard than any other thing. Do you?
It's all Smoke and Mirrors. An honorable person will tell the truth regardless of what peice of paper they swear on, a dirtbag will tell lies regardless of what they swear on. The only thing thta might keep them in check is the threat of perjury charges.
-- Rules of thumb should not be taken for the whole hand.
-
It's all Smoke and Mirrors. An honorable person will tell the truth regardless of what peice of paper they swear on, a dirtbag will tell lies regardless of what they swear on. The only thing thta might keep them in check is the threat of perjury charges.
-- Rules of thumb should not be taken for the whole hand.
That's definately true. An oath is largely symbolic and completely dependent on the character of the person making it. But the purpose of swearing to God is to do so in witness of the thing you hold in higher regard than any other thing. So what would an atheist swear to? Himself (thereby holding himself in high regard)? Society (or the state)? "Reason" (or whatever frequently faulty interpretation of it)? What exactly does an atheist hold in higher regard than himself, if anything?
-
not nearly as bad as a Hispanic midget woman...
I win because I have the most fun in life...
-
That's definately true. An oath is largely symbolic and completely dependent on the character of the person making it. But the purpose of swearing to God is to do so in witness of the thing you hold in higher regard than any other thing. So what would an atheist swear to? Himself (thereby holding himself in high regard)? Society (or the state)? "Reason" (or whatever frequently faulty interpretation of it)? What exactly does an atheist hold in higher regard than himself, if anything?
Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.
I win because I have the most fun in life...
-
VonHagNDaz wrote:
not nearly as bad as a Hispanic midget woman...
Well we already have a Giant Jackass in the whitehouse so a Hispanic midget women would be an improvment in the evolutionary sense.
led mike
what if they were Jewish as well, thats a bunch of minorities rolled into one...
I win because I have the most fun in life...
-
That's definately true. An oath is largely symbolic and completely dependent on the character of the person making it. But the purpose of swearing to God is to do so in witness of the thing you hold in higher regard than any other thing. So what would an atheist swear to? Himself (thereby holding himself in high regard)? Society (or the state)? "Reason" (or whatever frequently faulty interpretation of it)? What exactly does an atheist hold in higher regard than himself, if anything?
Red Stateler wrote:
What exactly does an atheist hold in higher regard than himself
Principles like honor and integrity, if he has them, just like a Religious person. When they don't have them then you get nothing but bullshit regardless of their so called religious affiliation.
led mike
-
You know, it could've been worse. It could've been an atheist! :rolleyes:
-- Verletzen zerfetzen zersetzen zerstören Doch es darf nicht mir gehören Ich muss zerstören
Joergen Sigvardsson wrote:
It could've been an atheist!
I don't believe that. :laugh:
Chris Meech I am Canadian. [heard in a local bar] I agree with you that my argument is useless. [Red Stateler] Hey, I am part of a special bread, we are called smart people [Captain See Sharp] The zen of the soapbox is hard to attain...[Jörgen Sigvardsson] I wish I could remember what it was like to only have a short term memory.[David Kentley]
-
Joergen Sigvardsson wrote:
It could've been an atheist!
I don't believe that. :laugh:
Chris Meech I am Canadian. [heard in a local bar] I agree with you that my argument is useless. [Red Stateler] Hey, I am part of a special bread, we are called smart people [Captain See Sharp] The zen of the soapbox is hard to attain...[Jörgen Sigvardsson] I wish I could remember what it was like to only have a short term memory.[David Kentley]
Now there's a rational belief! ;)
-- For proper viewing, take red pill now
-
Red Stateler wrote:
What exactly does an atheist hold in higher regard than himself
Principles like honor and integrity, if he has them, just like a Religious person. When they don't have them then you get nothing but bullshit regardless of their so called religious affiliation.
led mike
Honor and integrity aren't "principles". They are a dedication principles. But the question I posed is "What do atheists hold in the highest regard"?
-
Rob Graham wrote:
but *ghasp* women...
Not much longer, if the Quaran people start to take over ! :-) Marius
--------------------------------------------------------- Complete freedom is a state without context ---------------------------------------------------------
Not much longer if the christians start to take over either. Women will be home squirting babies like slurm queens. (Women's emancipation was never mentioned in the bible, so how can it be anything other than the devil in the works?)
-- Not Y3K Compliant
-
Yeah, but, uuh.. that happened so long ago. That doesn't count! And besides, they own casinos, roads and even hard rock cafe nowadays! Let's not forget that they were heathen either. They had it coming, and they deserved it! :~
-- Bender's humor by Microsoft Joke
-
Atheist could also pinky promise...
I win because I have the most fun in life...
VonHagNDaz wrote:
pinky promise
Eh?
Ðavid Wulff What kind of music to programmers listen to?
Join the Code Project Last.fm group | dwulff
I'm so gangsta I eat cereal without the milk -
Red Stateler wrote:
What exactly does an atheist hold in higher regard than himself
Principles like honor and integrity, if he has them, just like a Religious person. When they don't have them then you get nothing but bullshit regardless of their so called religious affiliation.
led mike
led mike wrote:
you get nothing but bullsh*t regardless of their so called religious affiliation.
Espeir being a perfect example. Bullshit, all the bullshit, and nothing but the bullshit so help his sorry ass.
The evolution of the human genome is too important to be left to chance.
-
brianwelsch wrote:
the Virgil Goode position on immigration
Damn, and here I thought that was the 'Stan Shannon' position on immigration.
A virtual fence for the virtual borders of a virtual nation.
Which is? My prejudice tells me it must involve someone getting rich off it, and anyone who doesn't make it to the US is just to lazy. Or is it the generic "Let them come, and the economy sort them out"?
Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Velopers, Develprs, Developers!
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
Linkify!|Fold With Us! -
Honor and integrity aren't "principles". They are a dedication principles. But the question I posed is "What do atheists hold in the highest regard"?
Red Stateler wrote:
Honor and integrity aren't "principles". They are a dedication principles.
So they aren't principles but they are principles .... whatever. :rolleyes:
Red Stateler wrote:
But the question I posed is "What do atheists hold in the highest regard"?
No, wrong, more spin and fabrication. I already quoted what you said.
Red Stateler wrote:
What exactly does an atheist hold in higher regard than himself, if anything?
I already answered the "first" question you asked because I wanted to. You can spin your garbage all you like but the bottom line is, you don't like the answer and you don't like reality. You would rather run your mouth spewing fabricated illogical nonsense in failed attempts at proving you are better than all of the people that you put into your neatly categorized generalization roadmap to humanity. Give it some thought and have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. :cool:
led mike
-
Not much longer if the christians start to take over either. Women will be home squirting babies like slurm queens. (Women's emancipation was never mentioned in the bible, so how can it be anything other than the devil in the works?)
-- Not Y3K Compliant
Joergen Sigvardsson wrote:
Not much longer if the christians start to take over either.
That would be a reversion of historical development. Once the Catholic church has already "taken over". And it lasted a long time. I agree, that then, women were treated differently than today. But now we have secular states were Church and State are divided. For sure every religion has its fundamentalists in a very wide sense of the word. But they cannot simply take over without support from the people if they do not want to install dictatorship. In this sense, one could say that every people has the form of Government that belongs to it... But I think you didn't mean the Church taking over, but certain conservative streams that are more or less related to to the church and christian values. They have the traditional role of women in mind, where women don't work in a company but work at home by caring for the children, doing the household, etc... But again, I think that the development of the emancipation of women cannot be undone without their support. (Except by forcing them, but wise men would never do this). I think it is now as it should be. Women can actually choose which role they want to take. And a rather big part of them chooses both, and for some, living this reality is quite a load.
Joergen Sigvardsson wrote:
Women's emancipation was never mentioned in the bible, so how can it be anything other than the devil in the works?
... I don't think so ! When talking about the works of certain spirits I think that they act in quite bigger schemes than this! But that would be another thread :-) Marius
--------------------------------------------------------- Complete freedom is a state without context ---------------------------------------------------------