Posts

Total: 203
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
So which pussy deleted the post?
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
-->
@3RU7AL
That's okay you're the one wallowing in the mud with the pigs
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@SkepticalOne
I don't find atheists so much into exploring ideas as they are in destroying ideas.  And ridiculing people along the way.  If they had something better to offer it might assist. 

From what I can see, it doesn't look like you're interested in exploring the views and ideas of atheists. It looks like you find their criticism true in some way and want to retaliate (by destroying their views) while you are quite literally ridiculing (atheists are cowards).

If you sincerely want to know someone's views - you would just ask rather than pretend you are a victim.
On the contrary,

My view in exploring ideas it to take someone's idea and simply extend it as far as we - allowing everyone to see what that particular view is and what's implications are.  That is how I think. 

This is why I find the atheist position so well cowardly.    It is permitted to attack my views - which incidentally I am ok with - since it will help me understand my own views better.  Yet, it never provides an alternative - except - there is no god.  And that is it. 

It fails to engage properly with its own position.  So not only is it cowardly, it is stupid.  And self-demeaning.  Yet for whatever reason thinks it is objective, rational, and elitist.  and somehow morally superior. True not all atheists think that way.  Yet not thinking it doesn't remove it from their lips. 

But how can an idea - since it is clearly not more than that - it is self professedly not a worldview, somehow take on the persona that it can destroy entire worldviews?    It logically just can't do that.  An idea must fit within a context - a worldview to have such a self-important view of itself.  Yet as soon as it does it, it effectively destroys itself as an idea only. 
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@3RU7AL
It's been my experience that Theists love to show up to religious threads.  They get to have their say. They get to destroy their opponents.  They get to prove how cool they are in the world of philosophy.

But this is why I say they are cowards.  Because they are afraid to reveal what they believe.  For instance, what do Theists believe? 

Nothing. One common doctrine. God does exist. An argument based on an unfalsifiable claim. That is it.  Nothing else. We are not allowed to know what else they believe - because there is no common factor. 

Hence why Theists are COWARDS.   They criticize - but without fear of being criticized. That is not criticism. That is safe ground.  Bogus. really. 

Are there more doctrines for the Theist than there is God? No.   nary  a one. LOL! laughable. And weak.  Cowardly really. there is no other words that can account for this state of being. A worldview - that is not really a worldview - a position - that is not really a position - a statement that allows no criticism. Imagine if we tried to apply to that any religion?  It would be laughed out of the stadium.  that is why Theism is cowardly. One rule for them. 

My view is that only people with worldviews should be allowed to contribute in a religious forum.   An Theist ought be rejected unless they can provide a worldview to be considered.  Unless this occurs - then there is no basis of comparing and contrasting. There is no basis for conversation.

Unless an Theist is able to come up with a worldview - then the Theist's opinions ought not be welcome. 

We should not be permitted to criticize others unless we have something alternative to offer. Theists have nothing to offer - of their own admission - so why ought we subject to ANY of their criticisms.  By admitting they have no other doctrines, they admit they use religious doctrines to live their lives.  

Ok. 
SkepticalOne
SkepticalOne's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 1,720
3
3
7
SkepticalOne's avatar
SkepticalOne
3
3
7
-->
@Tradesecret
This is why I find the atheist position so well cowardly.    It is permitted to attack my views - which incidentally I am ok with - since it will help me understand my own views better.  Yet, it never provides an alternative - except - there is no god.  And that is it. 
It seems to me you don't understand atheism. It is not a moral philosophy, an epistemological  foundation, a worldview, an alternative to a theistic worldview...it is not even the view that 'there is no god'. Atheism at its core is non-belief in deities. That's it. This is what all atheists have in common. 

Also, fwiw, an alternative isnt required to challenge a worldview. If someone truly believed the great teapot in the sky (GTS) guided their every move and was involved in every facet of their life, it would be a non-sequitor for them to claim only someone with an alternative could legitimately challenge their views. Someone sans GTS can have sufficient perspective to point out flaws.
amandragon01
amandragon01's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 101
1
2
2
amandragon01's avatar
amandragon01
1
2
2
"My view in exploring ideas it to take someone's idea and simply extend it as far as we - allowing everyone to see what that particular view is and what's implications are.  That is how I think."

That's great, it's a good way to address ideas. Yet atheism doesn't address an idea, it specifically addresses a belief. When discussing if one should hold a belief seeing how likely that belief is to be true seems important to me.

"This is why I find the atheist position so well cowardly.    It is permitted to attack my views - which incidentally I am ok with - since it will  help me understand my own views better.  Yet, it never provides an alternative - except - there is no god.  And that is it."

Atheism doesn't attack any world view (again you are mistaking atheists for atheism). It simply doesn't accept a single belief. It isn't the position 'god doesn't exist' it is simply the position of not believing in a god. There is a vital difference. Some atheists believe god doesn't exist, others simply don't believe a god does exist. Not accepting A as true isn't the same as accepting Not-A as true. 

Further atheism doesn't provide an alternative, nor is it within the purview of atheism to do so. Atheists may, but that will be drawn from other beliefs, ideas and philosophies, atheism is simply the state of not accepting a specific single claim.

"This is why I find the atheist position so well cowardly.    It is permitted to attack my views - which incidentally I am ok with - since it will help me understand my own views better.  Yet, it never provides an alternative - except - there is no god.  And that is it."

Atheism doesn't attack anything, it is simply the state of not accepting your claim. Atheists may attack your position, but that is an individual using their beliefs and ideas beyond their atheism.

"But how can an idea - since it is clearly not more than that - it is self professedly not a worldview, somehow take on the persona that it can destroy entire worldviews?    It logically just can't do that.  An idea must fit within a context - a worldview to have such a self-important view of itself.  Yet as soon as it does it, it effectively destroys itself as an idea only."

Atheism isn't an idea, nor is it meant to destroy theism. Atheism is simply the position of not accepting the claim of a gods existence. *Atheists* may attack a theists world views, they may even destroy them, but that isn't with atheism, it's through other ideas and beliefs that likely make up the atheists worldview.

Atheism is simply the position of not accepting a gods existence as true. I see little reason this isn't the most reasonable position in regards to the claim of a gods existence. I'm open to discussing this of course (it's the main reason why I'm here).
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,078
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Tradesecret
So did you reply to me Trade?

Or did you do the cowardly thing and ignore me?


Atheists are cowards.
Defo one of your more stupid propositions.


Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Tradesecret
True not all atheists think that way.
Then you’re not talking about atheism.
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Tradesecret
It's been my experience that Vegetarians love to show up to religious threads.  They get to have their say. They get to destroy their opponents.  They get to prove how cool they are in the world of philosophy.

But this is why I say they are cowards.  Because they are afraid to reveal what they believe.  For instance, what do Vegetarians believe? 

Nothing. One common doctrine. Don't eat meat. An argument based on a personal preference. That is it.  Nothing else. We are not allowed to know what else they believe - because there is no common factor. 

Hence why Vegetarians are COWARDS.   They criticize - but without fear of being criticized. That is not criticism. That is safe ground.  Bogus. really. 

Are there more doctrines for the Vegetarian than don't eat meat? No.   nary  a one. LOL! laughable. And weak.  Cowardly really. there is no other words that can account for this state of being. A worldview - that is not really a worldview - a position - that is not really a position - a statement that allows no criticism. Imagine if we tried to apply to that any religion?  It would be laughed out of the stadium.  that is why the Vegetarian is cowardly. One rule for them. 

My view is that only people with worldviews should be allowed to contribute in a religious forum.   A Vegetarian ought be rejected unless they can provide a worldview to be considered.  Unless this occurs - then there is no basis of comparing and contrasting. There is no basis for conversation.

Unless an Vegetarian is able to come up with a worldview - then the Vegetarian's opinions ought not be welcome. 

We should not be permitted to criticize others unless we have something alternative to offer. Vegetarians have nothing to offer - of their own admission - so why ought we subject to ANY of their criticisms.  By admitting they have no other doctrines, they admit they use religious doctrines to live their lives.  
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@amandragon01
Not accepting A as true isn't the same as accepting Not-A as true. 
exactly

it's like claiming "all non-stamp-collectors don't believe exactly the same things, therefore their non-habit of non-stamp-collecting is an incoherent non-worldview"
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
Funny comparing atheists to vegetarians cuz they both go around basically looking for people that engage in an activity they're not interested in engaging in and telling them they're f****** assholes for it.
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
Funny comparing atheists to vegetarians cuz they both go around basically looking for people that engage in an activity they're not interested in engaging in and telling them they're f****** assholes for it.
i've known a few vegetarians personally, and i've never heard any of them call other people "f***** a******"

i have seen them incessantly harassed by self-described "carnivores" though
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
-->
@3RU7AL
You're free to be a liar too cuz everybody knows it's not the goddamn people who like to eat steak out protesting in front of places that sell steak. It's not people who like to eat fish putting up signs about Jeffrey Dahmer eating fish is like eating a human. So you go ahead and lie like the rest of them it's okay we really don't expect anything else from you people.
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
You're free to be a liar too cuz everybody knows it's not the goddamn people who like to eat steak out protesting in front of places that sell steak. It's not people who like to eat fish putting up signs about Jeffrey Dahmer eating fish is like eating a human. So you go ahead and lie like the rest of them it's okay we really don't expect anything else from you people.
uh, wow

i don't personally know any of these people, and i think that's the point

not all vegetarians ARE EXACTLY THE SAME
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Double_R
True not all atheists think that way.
Then you’re not talking about atheism.
bingo
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
Isn't it funny how not a single group is exactly the same as each other except for theist we must be super duper f****** special we must be super duper f****** unique and we don't even know it look at our superpowers we can band together like a f****** hive somebody should have told us this s*** no wonder Christians took over the world. 
amandragon01
amandragon01's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 101
1
2
2
amandragon01's avatar
amandragon01
1
2
2
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
Isn't it funny how not a single group is exactly the same as each other except for theist we must be super duper f****** special we must be super duper f****** unique and we don't even know it look at our superpowers we can band together like a f****** hive somebody should have told us this s*** no wonder Christians took over the world. 
I personally find your sarcasm and vitriol unnecessary, but that aside, I would address your point by saying that I personally don't claim all theists are the same. I don't know of anyone who has taken that position. I will say all theists share a position. That of believing in a god or gods. I would go further and say that the god or gods will further shape what they believe or don't believe. Though at no point will I assert a universal attribute to theists other than belief in god or gods.

All atheists also share a position. That of not believing in a god or gods. However, where belief in god(s) has led to set religions which contain beliefs necessary to their acceptance (Christians believe in christ for example). Atheists however can't be said to necessarily believe in anything. Not the big bang or evolution. They also aren't required to not believe in anything other than gods. They can believe in ghosts, fairies, lochness monsters, reincarnation or anything else that isn't a god. This does make their beliefs harder to group than theists.

However, since we're discussing the possibility of a god/gods and the nature such a god or gods may have, it seems reasonable that the theists beliefs are more relevant to the discussion. The theists claims are what are being discussed after all. 
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
-->
@amandragon01
I really don't give a s*** what your opinion is about me or my beliefs. I don't even think atheist should be allowed to post in certain topics here. 
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,078
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
Good Golly Miss Poly.

Christianity is one of many outlandish but enduring, data transferring, brain conditioning techniques.

One of the many side effects of being simultaneously clever and stupid....Sort of the Yin and Yang of  human existence as it were.

We're all prone to bouts of it....But some people are more f****** prone to  s*** than others.
amandragon01
amandragon01's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 101
1
2
2
amandragon01's avatar
amandragon01
1
2
2
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
How very oppressive of you.

What is your reasoning for this position? Or is it just a dislike for people who question your beliefs? I've never known why people would be so upset about having their beliefs questioned.
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
-->
@amandragon01
1. Atheists are not here to engage in debate they're here to tell us that we're stupid, evil and that our children should be taken off of us. 
2. The atheist are allowed to do post that violate the code of conduct and the mods not only allow it they encourage it. At this point the mods have even engaged in it. 
3. There's no reason there shouldn't be one post in this forum that only theists are allowed to post in so that they can have actual conversations about doctrine and belief without someone coming in and saying you're all stupid, you're all mentally ill,  you're all lairs and you are all child abusers. And I haven't even begun to address the inappropriate sexual comments that are made here all the time including comments about theists children and pedophilia.

amandragon01
amandragon01's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 101
1
2
2
amandragon01's avatar
amandragon01
1
2
2
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
1. Atheists are not here to engage in debate they're here to tell us that we're stupid, evil and that our children should be taken off of us. 
I can't speak to what other atheists are here for, but I am here to discuss people's beliefs with them. 

2. The atheist are allowed to do post that violate the code of conduct and the mods not only allow it they encourage it. At this point the mods have even engaged in it. 
This is an issue with enforcement of the rules and particular atheists. Not all atheists. I have not intentionally, or to my knowledge at all, insulted anyone, nor is it my intention to do so.

3. There's no reason there shouldn't be one post in this forum that only theists are allowed to post in so that they can have actual conversations about doctrine and belief without someone coming in and saying you're all stupid, you're all mentally ill,  you're all lairs and you are all child abusers. And I haven't even begun to address the inappropriate sexual comments that are made here all the time including comments about theists children and pedophilia.
There is no reason I can see that atheists should be excluded from discussion of beliefs and doctrine. I do however think atheists who insult, belittle or harass theists are another matter.

You are consistently equating the actions of some atheists with all atheists, this is unreasonable. I have (many times) been insulted by theists, I've been accused of moral degregation, being an idiot and much worse. In no way do I assume this is the belief of all theists.
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
-->
@amandragon01
All atheists think these things they just some are nicer than others in the way they present them. And yes atheists treat all theist the same. 
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
I don’t think any theists should be allowed on this site because they’re all morons and they all support pastors rapping little boys. Some might pretend they’re not ok with this, but really it’s all of them.
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
-->
@Double_R
Then you should certainly pursue that. Honestly if you approach the mods they probably would actually consider it. I mean there was at some point a policy being thrown out that people should be able to be shadowbanned by the site and nobody would be able to read any of their posts and they wouldn't know that so you should probably talk to someone about that and try to get that policy instituted that would be a great idea.
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
I mean there was at some point a policy being thrown out that people should be able to be shadowbanned by the site and nobody would be able to read any of their posts
the proposal was - - posts would be hidden from people who have blocked that specific user

for example

since you have blocked me, you wouldn't be able to see any of my posts

including this one
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Double_R
it's almost like you've never heard of the BROAD-BRUSH fallacy
amandragon01
amandragon01's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 101
1
2
2
amandragon01's avatar
amandragon01
1
2
2
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
I have to strongly disagree. I do this based on the fact that I am an atheist and I do not think those things. I have a negative opinion of some theists. Others I consider good friends. I will concede, I can't see the reasoning behind their belief, but I don't think that is in any way an indicator of their intelligence or character. However. I do find telling someone what they as a member of a group think about something that is in no way a necessary trait of being part of that group unreasonable and bigoted.
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
And I think if I put someone on ban they shouldn't be able to read my posts. That said there was several topics around that time of the election where this was addressed and I remembered distinctly several posts about the ghosting so I've tried going through some of them I don't have time to finish right now got some things to do but I'll find where you talk about how there should be certain members that are just ghosted and that they wouldn't know they were ghosted and that you would basically have to go and opt out to be able to read their posts. And all those members suggested were theists that post in the religion forum.
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
And I think if I put someone on ban they shouldn't be able to read my posts.
then we agree - - the original proposal was a MUTUAL-MUTE

i suspect i know what my proposal was better than anyone else