This is just silly and seems hypocritical
-
Just relax dude.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
-
Nowhere in this thread have you given any empirical evidence. There's not a single scientific study link that you have given. There's no survey you've linked to. Nothing. Are you surprised that you've been challenged on this? When you make a generalisation like this, you have to expect that someone will challenge you to prove it. So - where's your proof? Provide me with a solid, irrefutable proof.
*pre-emptive celebratory nipple tassle jiggle* - Sean Ewington
"Mind bleach! Send me mind bleach!" - Nagy Vilmos
My blog | My articles | MoXAML PowerToys | Mole 2010 - debugging made easier - my favourite utility
Look up the word empirical in the dictionary and you'll see. I never claimed this was a scientific study. All along I have claimed it was my experience and from people I knew.
Quote:
Are you surprised that you've been challenged on this?
I wouldn't really call this a challenge. You are going in the wrong direction and I am just watching you go off. It's actually quite humorous how far you have taken this and you won't let go.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
-
Atheists use ‘unholy water’ to ‘unbless’ Florida highway[^] Since atheists don't believe in God or the Divine nor in the Holy or in Blessings, how can they believe in anything "unholy" or in "unblessing"? If you are "undoing" something doesn't that mean you give credence to the "doing" of a thing? Just a thought. I don't really care one way or the other. Just seems contradictory and hypocritical to me for an atheist to "undo" anything that a religionist "does".
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader." - John Quincy Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering” - Wernher von Braunahmed zahmed wrote:
Since atheists don't believe in God or the Divine nor in the Holy or in Blessings, how can they believe in anything "unholy" or in "unblessing"? If you are "undoing" something doesn't that mean you give credence to the "doing" of a thing?
Now that I bothered to read it... Your take is incorrect. The "unholy" meant that the water had not gone through a religious process. (Just has bringing water into church does not make it 'holy'.) The "unbless" was meant to convey that their actions were meant as a counter to the specific ceremony (which actually occurred) and had nothing to do with any metaphysical reality.
-
jschell wrote:
planned specifically to show the ridiculous of the other action
Only to those who already agree with such bigotry. It was certainly mocking and derisive. Which makes them petty and stupid.
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader." - John Quincy Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering” - Wernher von BraunNow that I bothered to read the article...
ahmed zahmed wrote:
Only to those who already agree with such bigotry
First as I already noted - the US specifically allows free speech. Second the content of the previous religious ceremony was specifically meant to target non-believers. As such that ceremony is offensive.
ahmed zahmed wrote:
Which makes them petty and stupid.
I am guessing that you are not aware of the very real legal (actually illegal) actions that the sheriff is taking in the county in an attempt to surpress, seemingly, any non-christian ideology at any level. That is petty, stupid and hopefully criminal.
-
Speech entails more than using words coming out of your mouth and from pen on a piece of paper. Speech also actions. Flag burning is speech. Protesting is speech. Civil disobedience is speech. All constitutionally protected forms of speech. Religion is all about words coming from my mouth, my pen and it is all about my actions and how I comport myself with other people. All forms of speech. Speech that you want to prevent.
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader." - John Quincy Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering” - Wernher von Braunahmed zahmed wrote:
Speech entails more than using words coming out of your mouth and from pen on a piece of paper.
I am quite comfortable in my knowledge both of the constitution and of Supreme Court rulings on what is and what isn't free speech. As well as understanding what is reasonable and unreasonable in the same context as far as what other rights may infringe on that.
ahmed zahmed wrote:
Religion is all about words coming from my mouth,
Wrong. As I already stated the framers of the Constituion, the Supreme Court and many current religious leaders disgree with your interpretation. The constitutionally protected right to religion is NOT the same as that of speech.
ahmed zahmed wrote:
Speech that you want to prevent.
Wrong. Free speech allows you to say what you want (within limits) and it also gives me the right to refute, via speech, every single thing that you say (within limits.)
-
jschell wrote:
No it isn't.
The Supremes disagree. I can certainly carry on religious activities anywhere I like in public. It may require a permit in some cases, just like have a demonstration may require a permit, but it's allowed.
jschell wrote:
right to defecate
Religious expression is not defecation.
jschell wrote:
You are wrong.
No, I'm correct. That is the stated goals of most atheist organizations: to remove religion from the public sphere and inhibit the free speech rights of a significant portion of the population.
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader." - John Quincy Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering” - Wernher von Braunahmed zahmed wrote:
The Supremes disagree. I can certainly carry on religious activities anywhere I like in public.
Wrong, both in your claim that the Supreme court allows it and that there are not restrictions.
ahmed zahmed wrote:
...just like have a demonstration may require a permit, but it's allowed.
You do realize that the second part of that statement specifically contradicts what you said before in that it isn't anywhere you like but anywhere you are permitted. As a specific example you cannot hold a satanic ritual in a Catholic church. Even if you want to.
ahmed zahmed wrote:
to remove religion from the public sphere and inhibit the free speech rights of a significant portion of the population.
All I can say is that you really need to read some legal proceedings and to actually read some rulings from federal courts and the Supreme court. Again free speech is NOT freedom of religion. They are different. And there have been SPECIFIC court cases brought because of the conflict between them.
-
Quote:
So what exactly did they believe in?
Who knows. They actually didn't even know. They believed there had to be a supreme being who created all things but they did not have any idea what he/she/it was like.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
Ah, I've met that kind of person. Typically they rattled off something about not being religious but being spiritual. A theological shrug effectively. Odd they'd snag atheism as a branding though, as the one thing they subscribe to is the one thing that atheism explicitly denies. But certainly not the stupidest thing I've seen people pull on the subject.
-
Look up the word empirical in the dictionary and you'll see. I never claimed this was a scientific study. All along I have claimed it was my experience and from people I knew.
Quote:
Are you surprised that you've been challenged on this?
I wouldn't really call this a challenge. You are going in the wrong direction and I am just watching you go off. It's actually quite humorous how far you have taken this and you won't let go.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
Let's see: Empirical: provable or verifiable by experience or experiment. So, where is the proof? You make a crass generalisation and then your defense of it is "well I know peope who think like this so it must be true". I know of people who think that the earth is flat and that AIDS is gods punishment on gay people. Neither of these positions is correct. So again, I challenge you, prove your statement. If you have faith in your argument, you won't mind doing this and should be able to offer more than just "ooh, these people you've neve met but we have a gestalt mind so we know that it's true".
*pre-emptive celebratory nipple tassle jiggle* - Sean Ewington
"Mind bleach! Send me mind bleach!" - Nagy Vilmos
My blog | My articles | MoXAML PowerToys | Mole 2010 - debugging made easier - my favourite utility
-
Look up the word empirical in the dictionary and you'll see. I never claimed this was a scientific study. All along I have claimed it was my experience and from people I knew.
Quote:
Are you surprised that you've been challenged on this?
I wouldn't really call this a challenge. You are going in the wrong direction and I am just watching you go off. It's actually quite humorous how far you have taken this and you won't let go.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
Given how your godless view is much like how many countries outside the US consider it to be a nation full of warmongering imperialists I think it's pretty easy to see how it could get people riled up. And I find it really funny to note that england still has a state sponsored religion, where the US doesn't, and most major Christian factions in the US descend from that state sponsored religion. Yet england is godless.
-
Let's see: Empirical: provable or verifiable by experience or experiment. So, where is the proof? You make a crass generalisation and then your defense of it is "well I know peope who think like this so it must be true". I know of people who think that the earth is flat and that AIDS is gods punishment on gay people. Neither of these positions is correct. So again, I challenge you, prove your statement. If you have faith in your argument, you won't mind doing this and should be able to offer more than just "ooh, these people you've neve met but we have a gestalt mind so we know that it's true".
*pre-emptive celebratory nipple tassle jiggle* - Sean Ewington
"Mind bleach! Send me mind bleach!" - Nagy Vilmos
My blog | My articles | MoXAML PowerToys | Mole 2010 - debugging made easier - my favourite utility
For Pete's sake, what is your deal?
Quote:
Empirical: provable or verifiable by experience or experiment.
I have been stating over and over, and hopefully for the last time, that it is my experience that has shown the UK to be godless. The only way to prove my experience is to get sworn notarized testimonies from everyone I have ever heard say that. Cut me some slack. At least give me a few days to gather the paperwork. Where should I send it to?
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
-
Given how your godless view is much like how many countries outside the US consider it to be a nation full of warmongering imperialists I think it's pretty easy to see how it could get people riled up. And I find it really funny to note that england still has a state sponsored religion, where the US doesn't, and most major Christian factions in the US descend from that state sponsored religion. Yet england is godless.
That is funny. Although you could debate "most major Christian factions in the US descend from that state sponsored religion." Most were started because they disagreed with that religion. Once a normal person finally read the Bible they realized that religion was way off. Martin Luther and others might disagree with descending but rather they would say dissenting.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
-
Atheists use ‘unholy water’ to ‘unbless’ Florida highway[^] Since atheists don't believe in God or the Divine nor in the Holy or in Blessings, how can they believe in anything "unholy" or in "unblessing"? If you are "undoing" something doesn't that mean you give credence to the "doing" of a thing? Just a thought. I don't really care one way or the other. Just seems contradictory and hypocritical to me for an atheist to "undo" anything that a religionist "does".
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader." - John Quincy Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering” - Wernher von BraunI'd file it more under PR stunt. Though what triggered it stuns the snot out of me:
some psychos said:
“It’s objective is to place Holy Angels at all roads that lead into or out of Polk County,” the group wrote. “A strip of anointed oil has been placed over all lanes of highway at the county line and a prayer has been given at each location asking God to have angels inspect every vehicle that travels into or out of this county and to bring under conviction to those who seek evil and we asked God to bring them to a state of submission and repentance.” “If they will not submit to God’s way of living, then the prayer is to have them incarcerated or removed from the county.”
Personally I'd be a tad miffed if someone pulled something like that in my county too. And while I mostly know of this particular county due to police chase videos, I've heard of things like this before. Typically when an atheist group does something like this it's more to remind other less vocal atheists that they aren't alone in the area, even if it is particularly hostile to their beliefs. Or in this case, hostile to any beliefs other than Christianity. My guess the whole false charges filed against the head of the organization that did this probably didn't help.
-
For Pete's sake, what is your deal?
Quote:
Empirical: provable or verifiable by experience or experiment.
I have been stating over and over, and hopefully for the last time, that it is my experience that has shown the UK to be godless. The only way to prove my experience is to get sworn notarized testimonies from everyone I have ever heard say that. Cut me some slack. At least give me a few days to gather the paperwork. Where should I send it to?
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
So what experience have you got to show this? Is your experience based on your own personal interactions with a large number of people from the UK, or are you just getting your material from the media? I am genuinely curious.
*pre-emptive celebratory nipple tassle jiggle* - Sean Ewington
"Mind bleach! Send me mind bleach!" - Nagy Vilmos
My blog | My articles | MoXAML PowerToys | Mole 2010 - debugging made easier - my favourite utility
-
That is funny. Although you could debate "most major Christian factions in the US descend from that state sponsored religion." Most were started because they disagreed with that religion. Once a normal person finally read the Bible they realized that religion was way off. Martin Luther and others might disagree with descending but rather they would say dissenting.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
And you get a fun debate out of the deal
ryanb31 wrote:
Most were started because they disagreed with that religion. Once a normal person finally read the Bible they realized that religion was way off. Martin Luther and others might disagree with descending but rather they would say dissenting.
I mostly say descend as they broke off from it and evolved from there. Much of the base belief remains the same even after they broke from the old church. Not to down play what they've done since, but I've always found it rather difficult to believe that one can manage to get closer to an otherwise unknowable god through what looks distinctively like politicking to me. Though most of my interest in religion and theology are related to how they tie into politics, so it may be that coloring my views a bit.
-
If you believe an act has no meaning when performed by someone else, then it is hypocritical to perform the same act to "undo" the one performed by the first. If the first act has no meaning and the atheist believes he and nobody else has such power to bless something, then it is hypocritical to perform said powerless act to undo the powerless act of the first. The atheist is "pretending" to beliefs he does not hold to be true. Of course, if this were an act making fun of black people or jews or women it would be seen for the prejudiced bigotry that it really is. In addition, it is hypocritical because the atheists are being intolerant of others beliefs and views when they demand tolerance and acceptance of their own.
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader." - John Quincy Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering” - Wernher von BraunYou did catch the bit where these people wanted you removed from the county or incarcerated if you disagree with them right? It had a political meaning that is pretty hard to miss, even if it was supposedly a religious observance of some kind. As such a similarly petty PR stunt is pulled in response to it. And as a note, the majority of instances where atheists push for the removal of religious speech is when someone is doing so with government authority behind it. If you as Ahmed Zahmed want to say something about your beliefs, I've got no issue with it. If you were a school principle, sat down all the kids in your school and told them they'd all burn in hell if they didn't believe what you told them, then I'd be right pissed. If you decide to take some mass produced religious monument of no historical significance and put it on government property, then I've got another problem. Put it in your own yard? No real issue, good luck mowing around it. Beyond that kind of thing you always have the militant idiots who actually do aspire to the kind of thing you blame the lot of us for, but I've cracked more than one of them upside the head with whatever was handy to get them to shut up long enough to explain the concept of freedom of religion to them. But I'm meaner to people who nominally agree with me and are idiots than folks I don't share much with.
-
Now that I bothered to read the article...
ahmed zahmed wrote:
Only to those who already agree with such bigotry
First as I already noted - the US specifically allows free speech. Second the content of the previous religious ceremony was specifically meant to target non-believers. As such that ceremony is offensive.
ahmed zahmed wrote:
Which makes them petty and stupid.
I am guessing that you are not aware of the very real legal (actually illegal) actions that the sheriff is taking in the county in an attempt to surpress, seemingly, any non-christian ideology at any level. That is petty, stupid and hopefully criminal.
jschell wrote:
First as I already noted - the US specifically allows free speech.
Certainly. All speech, including that of a religious (or anti-religious) nature. As such, that doesn't mean the speech can't be called what it is: bigotry.
jschell wrote:
I am guessing that you are not aware of the very real legal (actually illegal) actions that the sheriff is taking in the county in an attempt to surpress, seemingly, any non-christian ideology at any level.
No! I was certainly not aware of that. I'd kick that guy in the head if I knew that. That is indeed stupid.
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader." - John Quincy Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering” - Wernher von Braun -
You did catch the bit where these people wanted you removed from the county or incarcerated if you disagree with them right? It had a political meaning that is pretty hard to miss, even if it was supposedly a religious observance of some kind. As such a similarly petty PR stunt is pulled in response to it. And as a note, the majority of instances where atheists push for the removal of religious speech is when someone is doing so with government authority behind it. If you as Ahmed Zahmed want to say something about your beliefs, I've got no issue with it. If you were a school principle, sat down all the kids in your school and told them they'd all burn in hell if they didn't believe what you told them, then I'd be right pissed. If you decide to take some mass produced religious monument of no historical significance and put it on government property, then I've got another problem. Put it in your own yard? No real issue, good luck mowing around it. Beyond that kind of thing you always have the militant idiots who actually do aspire to the kind of thing you blame the lot of us for, but I've cracked more than one of them upside the head with whatever was handy to get them to shut up long enough to explain the concept of freedom of religion to them. But I'm meaner to people who nominally agree with me and are idiots than folks I don't share much with.
Yes, I remember reading that, but it's a "blessing" asking God to cause it to happen. Not a gov't directive. As for what the rest of what you say, I'm in perfect agreement. I agree that the gov't can't give even the appearance of authority to some religious whatnot, and I don't want it to either. That for me is also part of religious freedom.
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader." - John Quincy Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering” - Wernher von Braun -
Atheists use ‘unholy water’ to ‘unbless’ Florida highway[^] Since atheists don't believe in God or the Divine nor in the Holy or in Blessings, how can they believe in anything "unholy" or in "unblessing"? If you are "undoing" something doesn't that mean you give credence to the "doing" of a thing? Just a thought. I don't really care one way or the other. Just seems contradictory and hypocritical to me for an atheist to "undo" anything that a religionist "does".
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader." - John Quincy Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering” - Wernher von BraunThis people really don't know what they are doing. To be real atheists you must have to be understand the concept of religion.
-
That was the aim. All this talk of religion is heavy.
*pre-emptive celebratory nipple tassle jiggle* - Sean Ewington
"Mind bleach! Send me mind bleach!" - Nagy Vilmos
My blog | My articles | MoXAML PowerToys | Mole 2010 - debugging made easier - my favourite utility
Pete O'Hanlon wrote:
All this talk of religion is heavy.
I'm a few days late on this thread, and just looking for a place to jump in feet first. Awwww, forget it ;P
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer "Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon "Not only do you continue to babble nonsense, you can't even correctly remember the nonsense you babbled just minutes ago." - Rob Graham
-
I have a kindly face: I'm always the one that gets stopped: people think I'm interested because I smile and look them in the eye. Well, fock em, from now on it's the grinch! Actually, I think one was a scientologist: scum of the earth.
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair. nils illegitimus carborundum me, me, me
Years ago I w stopped on Putney high street on my way home to paint the flat. I feigned interest, invited them back. Two of them came with me, and helped paint the wall. I engaged them in fascinating conversation until the wall was all but done, thanked the. For theri help, opened the door and watched them leave. To this day I'm still not sure of what faith they actually were
MVVM# - See how I did MVVM my way ___________________________________________ Man, you're a god. - walterhevedeich 26/05/2011 .\\axxx (That's an 'M')