Forum menu
yes der brain, no mention of religion is not secular, secular is separation of church and state, not mentioning religion at all is atheism, or just plain sensible.
The USA separates Church and State in its constitution. Yet would you describe it as a secular country? I wouldn't.
What's your point caller?
Why can't somebody who disagrees with their statement say so?
That's not the issue. The issue is deliberately (or I suppose, ignorantly) misusing language in order to provoke a reaction.
Atheism isn't a faith, no matter how hard you want to believe it is. As someone (Junkyard?) said earlier; faith is belief without supporting evidence. Atheism is [i]a lack of belief[/i] without supporting evidence.
You aren't required to form unsubstantiated beliefs in order to not believe in something; if proof came along that the Christians were right all along, we'd happily revise our opinions. You can't say the same of faith, faith eschews alternative theories as 'false gods' and suchlike.
Those bastard oppressors and destroyers of freedom!
Precisely. Thanks for your support!
Atheism is a lack of belief without supporting evidence.
I would call that agnosticism. Atheism is the belief that there is no God. Look it up in the OED.
No, I would describe it as having a secular constitution, TBH I don't know about the country, havent been there.
And you have comitted your umpteenth [url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignoratio_elenchi ]logical fallacy[/url] with that leap.
From the 'Dealing with religious people' Manual, page 44;
Atheism is a religion like bald is a hair colour...
From the 'Dealing with religious people' Manual, page 44;Atheism is a religion like bald is a hair colour...
Isn't Metaphor the reason you guys hate the Bible?
[i]Isn't Metaphor the reason you guys hate the Bible[/i]
a) You don't know I'm a guy.
b) I don't hate the Bible.
c) Why capitalise the word metaphor?
It might have been reported differently if he'd asked this guy for help instead..
😀
[img] 
[/img]
The USA separates Church and State in its constitution. Yet would you describe it as a secular country? I wouldn't.
The US [i]government [/i]separates church and state. First Amendment. It basically prevents Congress from passing a law either making a religion mandatory or making it illegal; ie, it provides religious freedom to its populace.
The US as a country is, as I'm sure you've heard many many times, "one nation under god".
I would call that agnosticism. Atheism is the belief that there is no God. Look it up in the OED.
What you'd call it is irrelevant. You can call it a tuna sandwich if you like.
Agnostics neither believe nor disbelieve in a god or gods. Atheists reject a belief in god.
Isn't Metaphor the reason you guys hate the Biblea) You don't know I'm a guy.
b) I don't hate the Bible.
c) Why capitalise the word metaphor?
a) I don't care, in modern parlance "Guys" can refer simply to a bunch of people irrespective of gender (and to try and get points for that is pretty desperate)
b) Good
c) It was the main subject of the sentence.
Agnostics neither believe nor disbelieve in a god or gods. Atheists reject a belief in god.
I agree.
Look it up in the OED.
Ok.
[b]atheism[/b] Disbelief in, or denial of, the existence of a god.[b]disbelieve[/b] 1. trans. Not to believe or credit; to refuse credence to: a. a statement or (alleged) fact: To reject the truth or reality of.
Next?
is not collecting stamps a hobby then?
It is for me. I am a stamp collector who doesn't collect stamps. I haven't collected any stamps since I was a kid - but I've still got my stamp albums.
I'm not sure if that helps, amongst the multitude of challenging and thorny questions, but I felt it was important to clear that one up - specially as it was one which I could easily answer.
I agree.
Good. Now we're getting somewhere.
For completeness, here's the OED's definition of agnostic.
[b]agnostic [/b]A. sb. One who holds that the existence of anything beyond and behind material phenomena is unknown and (so far as can be judged) unknowable, and especially that a First Cause and an unseen world are subjects of which we know nothing.
Interestingly perhaps, the OED definition covers the whole spectrum of atheist belief, from weak atheism (those who do not believe in or credit the existence of one or more gods) to strong atheism (those who assert the contrary position, that a god does not exist).
Look it up in the OED.
Ok.atheism Disbelief in, or denial of, the existence of a god.
disbelieve 1. trans. Not to believe or credit; to refuse credence to: a. a statement or (alleged) fact: To reject the truth or reality of.Next?
Thank you for that - you are more diligent than me. Doesn't that prove my point though - that Atheists refuse / do not believe in God. I just wonder what evidence you can produce to substantiate that claim. Please produce.
[i]It is for me. I am a stamp collector who doesn't collect stamps. I haven't collected any stamps since I was a kid - but I've still got my stamp albums[/i]
That explains a lot; I've always thought that behind that rational controlled persona there is a torrent of passion waiting to break through.
[i]Doesn't that prove my point though - that Atheists refuse / do not believe in God[/i]
Are you Sherlock Holmes?
Speaking of the secular US, here's a quote from George Bush.
I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God.
Interestingly perhaps, the OED definition covers the whole spectrum of atheist belief, from weak atheism (those who do not believe in or credit the existence of one or more gods) to strong atheism (those who assert the contrary position, that a god does not exist).
Does it? There are two separate entries for Atheism and Agnosticism, implying two different concepts.
Are you Sherlock Holmes?
Please explain. For all of us.
you are more diligent than me
No, I just prefer evidence to making stuff up and presenting it as fact. You should try it.
Are we back to "fundamentalist Atheists" yet
I just wonder what evidence you can produce to substantiate that claim. Please produce.
We don't need to produce evidence that soemthing doesnt exist, its evidence that it does exist that proves its existence.
Please explain. For all of us.
We think you are on drugs
Speaking of the secular US, here's a quote from George Bush.I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God.
Exactly! This was my point! People were trying to define Secularism as the separation of Church and State. This is written into the constitution of the USA yet still you hear statements like this. So by implication the separation of Church and State is a limited definition of Secularism.
For what it is worth, I would say it is the idea that religion should have no influence on the political life of a nation.
So by implication the separation of Church and State is a limited definition of Secularism.
But in the case of the UK its a good start
We don't need to produce evidence that soemthing doesnt exist, its evidence that it does exist that proves its existence.
I'm a Christian, as you may have worked out by now. And I should try to live an upright life, but WTF are you on about?
[i]For what it is worth, I would say it is the [b]most excellent[/b] idea that religion should have no influence on the political life of a nation.[/i]
I've fixed that for you.
Doesn't that prove my point though - that Atheists refuse / do not believe in God. I just wonder what evidence you can produce to substantiate that claim. Please produce.
Well, that's not what you said.
But no, it doesn't work like that, sorry. You're the one making wild claims about the supernatural, you're the one that needs to provide proof. Or, y'know, in lieu of absolute proof I'd settle for a shred of evidence that would suggest that the christian idea of a god might be anything other than an old fairy story.
See earlier discussion about pink unicorns. (Summary: Do you believe that there are pink unicorns hiding in your skirting board? No? Can you prove it?)
WTF are you on about?
We've explained this many, many times, including several times on this very thread.
[i]I'm a Christian[/i]
Ooooh! You kept that quiet, you little monkey!
Do we know how many angels are on the head of that pin yet?
I'm a ChristianOoooh! You kept that quiet, you little monkey!
Again, what is your point? Is this a debate or just (desperate, rather sad) sledging?
But of course I deserve this, because people who believe in God should not be tolerated.
but WTF are you on about?
Well, luckily, earlier I defined anyone who believes in a god/gods as either stupid, emotionally retarded, mentally ill, very poorly informed/brainwashed or just disingenuous.
So your inability to understand that proof of soemthing existing is not disproved by trying to proove it doesnt exist appears to fit one of these, take your pick.
Now I think you should naff off before someone accuses me of creating you as a dual login to proove my own point.
Live and let live tonight at 8pm
The religious can turn on BBC2 and watch Chaplains: Angels of Mercy
The anti (rather than non) religious can turn on BBC4 and watch Inside the Medieval Mind: how the church preached hatred of the felsh and condemned women as the sinful heirs of Eve
And the non-TV watchers can do the Torygraph cryptic crossword including:
15d: One girl I converted to the faith (8)
But no, it doesn't work like that, sorry. You're the one making wild claims about the supernatural, you're the one that needs to provide proof.
I admit I find Genesis the best explanation for Creation.
But I entered this debate with a question: how does something come from nothing?
That is all. I think the belief that there is a naturalistic solution to that question (God of the Gaps) is hugely limited. Again, look up John Lennox.
Badnewz - can you give us one shred of evidence for the existance of any god? In the absence of evidence the rational position is the the is no god.
And I should try to live an upright life
that's what evolution will do to a guy..
In the absence of evidence the rational position is the the is no god.
[img] 
[/img]
yunki. v good.
teamhurtmore - MemberLive and let live tonight at 8pm
The religious can turn on BBC2 and watch Chaplains: Angels of Mercy
The anti (rather than non) religious can turn on BBC4 and watch Inside the Medieval Mind: how the church preached hatred of the felsh and condemned women as the sinful heirs of Eve
I hate the Felsh.
Gits, the lot of them.
I'm never going to Feles again.
how the church preached hatred of the felsh and condemned women as the sinful heirs of Eve
Not really history though, what with the wonderful, inclusive attitudes of the modern day Abrahamic religions.
Badnewz - can you give us one shred of evidence for the existance of any god? In the absence of evidence the rational position is the the is no god.
I don't agree. I still think the issue of Creation (you might realise this is a big thing for me by now!) will not go away. I cannot prove that God exists to anybody else, it is a hugely personal experience. But I know that other people cannot prove that God does not exist until they can show how something comes from nothing without a Creator (who/what is eternal and self-creating).
.....Are scientologists stupid?
Having met a LOT of scientologists (I used to work at Saint Hill Manor regularly) I wouldn't say that they are stupid.
However they do [b]ALL [/b]seem to have switched off the part of their brains that allows them to think rationally about one particular subject.
Everything else works fine. If they were intelligent before Scientology, they still are. If they weren't, they are still not.
But they ignore the massive weight of evidence that their chosen "religion" is a proven scam.
(not a lack of evidence that it's real, but [b] actual documented evidence that it's all made up to make money[/b] )
So I wouldn't say they are stupid, but there is certainly an element of Brain Washing involved (again, that's not wild speculation, I know this from someone who was involved first hand)