- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Arkansas' new Ten Commandments monument at Capitol destroyed
Posted on 6/29/17 at 4:13 pm to antibarner
Posted on 6/29/17 at 4:13 pm to antibarner
quote:
antibarner
quote:
Not to mention they love to use the first part of the sentence, then conveniently omit the part after the comma about the free exercise thereof.
I regret that I have only one upvote to give you.
0
Posted on 6/29/17 at 4:15 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
Hitchens is a fool.
Hitchens would run circles around you on just about any topic you chime in on here.
I didn't agree with him on everything, but I'm glad to see that you called yet another intellectual titan a fool. It really speaks to how much your thoughts are worth. Very little, if that wasn't clear to you.
Posted on 6/29/17 at 6:37 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
Put it up in your front yard if you think it is an expression of your free speech that it should be put in a place where the public can see it.
quote:
There was a big fuss about removing religious symbols from public land. I assume you also favor putting those in your front yard as well.
I don't have a front yard but if I did I'd put pink flamingos all over it to represent people like you.
As far as public land, I have no problem with the the local citizens voting for what religious symbols they want to allow to be put on their community's public land.
Posted on 6/29/17 at 6:53 pm to GeauxTigerTM
quote:
I think he's saying that folks like you who dogmatically believe holy texts have been known...on occasion...to violently force their worldview on others.
Meh, Catholics aren't going to go back to the 12th century and force people under threat of death to convert to Roman Catholicism.
Today, the only religion that would force people under threat of death to convert to their religion is Islam.
This post was edited on 6/29/17 at 6:55 pm
Posted on 6/29/17 at 6:54 pm to GeauxTigerTM
quote:
Let me guess...because you think he must actually believe, right?
Good guess, but no..I do think he doubts his beliefs and is seeking to fight that doubt.
Posted on 6/29/17 at 7:02 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
DisplacedBuckeye
doing work son
Posted on 6/29/17 at 7:12 pm to antibarner
quote:
Either they are constitutional and allowed to be there, or not. SCOTUS is hypocritical.
SCOTUS when ruling on this issue consolidated two cases both concerning religious fixtures on public property (if I remember correctly from Con Law, they were both ten commandment statutes). In one case the fixture had been there for 50 years with no complaint brought to the court until it was then being ruled on; the other complaint was over a brand new fixture.
The Court held that the fixture that had been there for 50 years could stay because it had become an historical fixture and applied the doctrine of laches to say that because no one had brought a claim for 50 years, any claim that could be made was waived.
The Court held that the new fixture was unconstitutional because a claim was timely brought and it violated the establishment clause and furthermore that no historical value was present in the fixture.
Posted on 6/29/17 at 7:26 pm to DawgfaninCa
quote:
I don't have a front yard but if I did I'd put pink flamingos all over it to represent people like you.
I figured it'd be sea worms.
quote:
As far as public land, I have no problem with the the local citizens voting for what religious symbols they want to allow to be put on their community's public land.
Sorry you hate America.
Posted on 6/29/17 at 7:27 pm to REG861
I try. It's ultimately for nothing, but hey, I'm having fun.
Posted on 6/29/17 at 7:34 pm to GeauxTigerTM
quote:Let me ask you this: if the miracles did happen as the Bible describes and the writers of the New Testament wanted to make a record of those miracles to tell others about them, what would you expect those writers to do to accomplish that goal which would make someone like yourself believe it?
You're missing the point, either accidentally or on purpose. The issue is the reporting of MIRACLES. With that type of claim comes a standard of evidence FAR HIGHER than merely asserting a guy named such and such lived here and said this and that. We have claims of the supernatural today that are given almost no credence because there is no evidence to back them up. But for some reason we are supposed to take at their word the unsupported claims of miracles 2,000 years ago?
This is only reasonable to you because you want to believe it.
What it boils down to is belief and faith. Just as if you are a juror in a courtroom, you have to decide whether or not you are compelled to believe the testimony of purported eye-witnesses. Clearly you are not compelled, but I am. Different people are compelled to faith by various evidences which may not compel others. I'm intimately familiar with the Bible and I trust the words it contains as if my own wife was telling me something and I had to choose to believe her or not.
quote:You can't possibly believe that it is not evidence. Evidence can be literally anything put forth to support a proposition. In this case, the evidence is a composition of testimonials written mostly by eye-witnesses. You can choose to discard the evidence as not having any (or much) weight, but you can't rationally claim it's not evidence.
No, it isn't.
quote:Such testimony can also be reliable and critical to a case.
Which is terrible given how much we now know about how unreliable eye witness testimony is.
quote:The type of evidence you require is impossible to procure, no matter the truth of the proposition. The lack of evidence that you decide is necessary to convince you does not mean that the truth claim is false, it just means that you choose to reject such a claim because your standard is not met.
In other words, special pleading to not have to provide the type of evidence all other claims require. Sorry...that's not a card you can play in an honest debate.
quote:I don't blame you one bit, but after exhausting all possibilities you either have to conclude that there is an explanation that you just can't think of (the likely choice for someone with a naturalistic worldview) or that you just witnessed a miracle.
Agreed! Now you're thinking! Our brains fool us all the time! If I see or experience something so extraordinary as to break all known laws of physics, you're damned right I'm not going to automatically assume what I saw was real! I'd be a damned fool to do that. That's how you get idiots saying things like, "I know what I saw!!!" No...I'd certainly tell someone what I saw and ask if they saw it too. I'd go and get checked out to see if there was something wrong with me, etc. I'd exhaust all other possibilities before simply thinking a "miracle" happened. To do otherwise is lazy thinking.
quote:In my case, the amount of evidence needed to convince me and the amount of trust I put in the source depends on several things. If some random guy came up to me on the street and said he saw a ghost, I might believe him or I might not (probably not), but if my wife said the same thing, I would be more inclined to believe her because she has shown me years of rationality and trustworthiness to make me trust her assertion.
Let me ask you...do you believe EVERYTHING someone tells you they saw or experienced? Ghosts, Big Foot, Aliens, etc? Do you simply take their word for it, or do you require more than that if the claim is especially unusual? Now...if you're going to tell me you accept ALL claims at a 100% rate regardless of how unusual they are if someone tells you they "saw" it, then I think we'd be done talking. As I don;t think that's the case, I'm wondering how and why you expect more or less evidence for claims such as those?
quote:Oh I agree with, but my point was that the miracles are only part of why Christians believe what we do. I'm not denying the importance of miracles, only the claim that the religion is predicated on the miracles alone, which after listening to again, was more of an inference than an outright statement. The truth was in the message that Christ gave and the miracles simply affirmed who the message bearer was. There are certainly a few miracles that had to happen for Christianity to be what it is, namely the virgin birth, the resurrection form the dead, and the ascension into Heaven, but turning water into wine, walking on water, healing the sick, and those other works that accompanied the message of Jesus were not necessary
Nah...sorry. Without the miracles Jesus is no more than a prophet or a wise man. You're talking the Jefferson Bible type Jesus, and you know full well THAT Jesus does not have an entire faith built around him. Miracle Jesus does.
Posted on 6/29/17 at 8:03 pm to GeauxTigerTM
quote:I'm fine with certain laws being passed to curb immoral behavior (like laws against murder), but I don't force my version on morality on to anyone, like I said.
I have no interest in going political point by political point here, but I'd be hard pressed to agree with this in principle. While you may not do that personally, I'd quite confident you're ok with it being done politically.
If you want to talk about others forcing morality on to others that I happen to agree with, that's a different matter. Everyone has a moral standard and everyone wants that standard accepted by society as a whole to one degree or another. I'm not exception there. I believe abortion, for instance, is murder according to my moral standard and I would love for it to be abolished. Until the politicians and the judges agree with me on that standard, though, all I can do it talk about I would like for that to happen.
quote:Eh... not really. Morality gets ingrained in people and even if they choose to act against their moral standard, they still hold that standard none the less and they don't "choose" to feel that guilt for violating it.
Eh...no one has to give up their morals. That's a choice.
quote:I guess. I also feel that way.
As for the business, with that as a libertarian I'll agree entirely. I find it absurd a business should have to do business with ANYONE for ANY REASON if they don't want to. That being said, I'd like to be the first person to buy a cake at the bakery that does not discriminate against anyone...but more power to those that want to. Happy?
quote:For the most part, yes. The Roman Catholic Church didn't allow the people to have direct access to the scriptures. They had to rely entirely on what the Priests were teaching, and a lot of the time, the message was in a language (Latin) that the common person didn't even understand. Also, to most, the Pope's word was as good as (in practice, better than) the Bible since he acted as the vicar of Christ on earth. If he said it was fine to slay Muslims in the name of Jesus, they took that as gospel (literally). The Pope was more than just the head of the church during most of Christian history. He was a political ruler and held power over kings. The Popes abused that power and the common man thought that what he said was true because they couldn't say differently due to their ignorance of the scriptures.
So...they didn't understand what it teaches? For nearly 1500 Christians did some fairly hair raising bull shite all around the world, and your claim is they did it...but they were all missing the message? Again...this reads like claims from groups like CAIR making excuses for ISIS.
I'm not apologizing or making excuses for the atrocities performed (wrongly) in the name of Jesus. I think those people who did those things performed evil and sinned against God and should have been punished (and are likely in hell being punished right now) for abusing the faith as they did. Unlike CAIR, though, I can point to the scriptures and condemn those actions. Muslims who want to rape and kill in the name of Islam have justification to do so, both in their holy books and the life of its founder, Muhammad.
quote:There aren't a lot of good analogies for this sort of thing so sorry if they offend you. My point stands: just because someone takes something harmless or good and does evil in its name doesn't mean that harmless or good thing is now evil. The people are evil and are abusing that harmless or good thing for their own evil purposes.
Ugh... that would be a terrible analogy even if you had said Green Peace was doing the killing, as Green Peace is not saying they are getting their views on the UNIVERSE from the creator of it. C'mon, man...
Are you just terrible at analogies or dishonest? Gosh.
quote:Please do.
Don't make me start pulling passage after passage out of the bible to prove this statement wrong. And I don't mean the OT.
Posted on 6/29/17 at 8:06 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:After this post, consider it done. I shouldn't have been feeding the trolls anyway by responding to you, so that really is on me for giving you validation
I don't care if you ignore me. In fact, I'd prefer it. Feel free to do so permanently at any time.
I will continue to downvote any response you provide to my posts, just so you know that I've read it and am sticking to the shunning.
Posted on 6/29/17 at 8:09 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:Well shoot.. I take it back. After this post the shunning begins. I just had to correct you here.
Hitchens would run circles around you on just about any topic you chime in on here.
I didn't agree with him on everything, but I'm glad to see that you called yet another intellectual titan a fool. It really speaks to how much your thoughts are worth. Very little, if that wasn't clear to you.
Whether Hitchens or any other atheist would "run circles around [me]" in a debate is of no matter to me because I don't disagree that he is smart or knows his stuff within the context of his areas of expertise. A fool doesn't have to be an idiot. A fool is someone who rejects the truth about God, and he is most certainly a fool.
Thus ends the casting of pearls before swine, at least in regards to you.
Posted on 6/29/17 at 8:12 pm to DawgfaninCa
quote:
Today, the only religion that would force people under threat of death to convert to their religion is Islam
This
Men are Evil. Christianity is not.
Men can take several passages of a "holy book" and use them as an excuse to do horrible things.
Posted on 6/29/17 at 8:14 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
Everyone has a moral standard and everyone wants that standard accepted by society as a whole to one degree or another.
Meh, they don't have any morals at all.
They just want to do whatever they want to do and they don't want anyone telling them that they can't do whatever they want to do.
Posted on 6/29/17 at 8:17 pm to DawgfaninCa
quote:Agree with you but I would say that that is their moral standard: whatever is "right" in their own eyes.
Meh, they don't have any morals at all.
They just want to do whatever they want to do and they don't want anyone telling them that they can't do whatever they want to do.
But yeah, I would bet many would say they don't have any morals. I've gone off about this several times but most atheists have a disconnect between their worldview and their moral standard, whatever it is.
Posted on 6/29/17 at 8:20 pm to FooManChoo
Coming from someone who presumably doesn't support stoning for idolatry, it seems we all pick and choose our morals as we see fit... no?
Posted on 6/29/17 at 8:23 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
Agree with you but I would say that that is their moral standard: whatever is "right" in their own eyes.
That's not a moral standard.
That's an amoral standard.
quote:
a·mor·al
a'môr?l/Submit
adjective
lacking a moral sense; unconcerned with the rightness or wrongness of something.
Posted on 6/29/17 at 8:25 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
After this post, consider it done.
Posted on 6/29/17 at 8:26 pm to rbWarEagle
If atheism is correct there is no reason whatsoever to have any "morals" whatsoever. They are a sucker's game. Your morals are what you can get away with.
Page 12 of 18
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News