Is Obama a "closet" Muslim?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guns Guns Guns
  • Start date Start date

Is Obama a "closet" Muslim?


  • Total voters
    2
G

Guns Guns Guns

Guest
Do you perverts think Hussein would be cool with some friends and me scheduling a flip off session in the WH gallery? We'll start with the closet Muslim first, work our way to good ol' Slick Willey and then cover the rest of the Democrats.
.
 
I'd argue that Obama is actually a closet agnostic. I don't think he takes religion very seriously. Unfortunately, it is also impossible for a non-believer to get elected in the US, so otherwise rational politicians are forced to subscribe to superstition. But what can we expect in a country were almost half the population believes the earth is 6,000 years old?
 
But what can we expect in a country were almost half the population believes the earth is 6,000 years old?
Good question. And what can we expect when the other half of the population thinks a brainless mass somehow took form & garnished itself with trees, beautiful oceans, and complex life forms?
 
Good question. And what can we expect when the other half of the population thinks a brainless orb somehow formed itself & garnished itself with trees, beautiful oceans, and complex life forms?

Unfortunately, all of that is scientifically possible....
 
Unfortunately, all of that isn't provable.

There is more in the natural history book than you think.

And it's always interesting to me that some think any of it is completely impossible without a god, but they have no problem with a timeless, omniscient & all powerful being popping out of nowhere.
 
Unfortunately, all of that isn't provable.

Nothing can be proven 100%, but it is demonstrable. The evidence to support evolution is so strong that I am comfortable categorizing anyone who rejects it with the flat earthers. What I find interesting is how you criticize science for its inability to satisfy your requirements, but you offer no "proof" that your own "theory" is correct.
 
There is more in the natural history book than you think.
There is more in the Bible than you think.

And it's always interesting to me that some think any of it is completely impossible without a god, but they have no problem with a timeless, omniscient & all powerful being popping out of nowhere.
What interests me is how some think brainless activity created such a complex world. Your mind was created by an even greater mind. That makes a helluva lot more sense than the alternative. A timeless, omniscient & all powerful being popping "out of nowhere" as you put it, makes a whole lot more sense than brainless forces somehow possessing a sense of order & creativity.
 
Last edited:
Nothing can be proven 100%, but it is demonstrable. The evidence to support evolution is so strong that I am comfortable categorizing anyone who rejects it with the flat earthers.
Bold statement. Especially when considering your claim that nothing is 100% provable. Would you be willing to stake your life on that?

What I find interesting is how you criticize science for its inability to satisfy your requirements, but you offer no "proof" that your own "theory" is correct.
Don't get me wrong. I love the sciences. It's the atheists that give science a bad name. Somehow, these anti-theists hijacked the science community, and turned it on religion. That's the stupidest thing anyone can do. Science is best used for discovery, not destruction.
 
Science may someday prove the existence of a god, but it hasn't happened yet. Just yesterday, it was reported that the singularity that started the Big Bang - long thought to only have a god-like sort of explanation - could happen on its own, using the laws of physics as they are. That doesn't mean that there is NOT a god, just that there is nothing to indicate that there is.

It's not enough to point out a few things we're unable to explain, then say, "Well, it must be a god then." They used to do that with the sun, and with just about everything else.
 
Back
Top