U.S. Supreme Court Ruling: ATHEISM IS RELIGION

Obtenebrator said:
Why do you like to twist people's words to say what they didn't say? Just curious why this completely dishonest approach is OK with you but you sit on your high horse and bitch about everyone else who doesn't act perfectly honestly at all times.
Click to expand...

You're obviously reluctant to embrace reductionist materialism and a subjective morality based on opinion and popular vote. You have been tap dancing around it rather than warmly embracing it.

It sounds like you are actually an agnostic who is not really willing to pay the pricetag required for full blown atheism.
 
Cypress said:
You're obviously reluctant to embrace reductionist materialism and a subjective morality based on opinion and popular vote. You have been tap dancing around it rather than warmly embracing it.
Click to expand...

My position is perfectly clear. The fact that you, personally, are unhappy with it matters not one whit to me. But it doesn't really explain why you always go for the most dishonest response to any point I make.

Cypress said:
It sounds like you are actually an agnostic who is not really willing to pay the pricetag required for full blown atheism.
Click to expand...

I have made my position quite clear and supported it with external citations so you know I'm not just making it all up. Why do you think you have the right or even the ability to tell me what my position is when I've already explained it to you?

But I understand; you don't like atheism and you don't like me so you can't actually discuss the topic rationally. Instead you always play this dishonest "thank you for agreeing with me" ploy alternating with non-stop personal attacks on me.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
unlike you, I don't try to explain it to him,,,,,,
Click to expand...

Couple points:

1. You witness every single day on this forum whether you realize it or not and your witness is pretty vile (calling everyone "cunts").

2. There is no legitimate case of using several commas in a row. Perhaps you are thinking of ellipses which is a series of periods in a row (...). The way you write makes it clear you barely got your GED.
 
Obtenebrator said:
Couple points:

1. You witness every single day on this forum whether you realize it or not and your witness is pretty vile (calling everyone "cunts").

2. There is no legitimate case of using several commas in a row. Perhaps you are thinking of ellipses which is a series of periods in a row (...). The way you write makes it clear you barely got your GED.
Click to expand...
3 I've corrected a life time of atheist errors........
 
Alter2Ego said:
Obtenebrator:

The lack of belief in a God or gods is classified as RELIGION when that lack of belief is of overwhelming importance in one's life. Notice the definition below that I previously gave in this thread. Focus on definition #5.

DEFINITION OF "RELIGION:"

Collins
World English Dictionary
religion (rɪˈlɪdʒən)
— n
1. belief in, worship of, or obedience to a supernatural power or powers considered to be divine or to have control of human destiny

2. any formal or institutionalized expression of such belief: the Christian religion

3. the attitude and feeling of one who believes in a transcendent controlling power or powers

4. chiefly RC Church the way of life determined by the vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience entered upon by monks, friars, and nuns: to enter religion

5. something of overwhelming importance to a person: football is his religion

6. archaic

a. the practice of sacred ritual observances

b. sacred rites and ceremonies
Click to expand...
And when it is not, which is the case for almost every single person who does not believe in God, it is not a religion. See how that works?
 
Concart said:
Alter2Ego said:
DEFINITION OF "RELIGION:"
Collins World English Dictionary
5. something of overwhelming importance to a person: football is his religion
Click to expand...
And when it is not, which is the case for almost every single person who does not believe in God, it is not a religion. See how that works?
Click to expand...

Whatever you say, Concart the Atheist Religionist. You need to stop pretending.

Every single atheist I've ever debated indicates, by his or her behavior, that their atheism is of overwhelming importance to them. That's why they show up on debate forums announcing, for anyone willing to listen, that anyone who believes in a God is not very bright. Then when they realize that their obsession with disputing the existence of a God or gods is itself RELIGION, they then try to back pedal and claim atheism is not important to them.
 
Last edited:
Obtenebrator said:
Alter2Ego said:
Obtenebrator: The lack of belief in a God or gods is classified as RELIGION when that lack of belief is of overwhelming importance in one's life. Notice the definition below that I previously gave in this thread. Focus on definition #5.
Collins World English Dictionary religion (rɪˈlɪdʒən)

5. something of overwhelming importance to a person: football is his religion
Click to expand...
This is a "turn of phrase" and not an actual definition of religion per se. No one who loves football believes it is a real religion. This is juvenile and absurd.
Click to expand...

Obtenebrator:

The key phrase is "something of overwhelming importance to a person." The term "football is his religion" used by the dictionary is merely an example. In the case of atheists, the example that Collins Dictionary would have used instead of "football is his religion" would be "Atheism is his religion." You follow?
 
Alter2Ego said:
Whatever you say, Concart the Atheist Religionist. You need to stop pretending.

Every single atheist I've ever debated indicates, by his or her behavior, that their atheism is of overwhelming importance to them. That's why they show up on debate forums announcing, for anyone willing to listen, that anyone who believes in a God is not very bright. Then when they realize that their obsession with disputing the existence of a God or gods is itself RELIGION, they then try to back pedal and claim atheism is not important to them.
Click to expand...
I am not the one preaching their religion here. My bright line is teaching Intelligent design and passing it off as science. YOU are the one posting multiple threads on multiple websites. I simply responded to your assertions. You are the obsessed one. I have never stated that atheism is important to me. I challenge you to find one post in which I expressed that. You are making it up. You are intellectually dishonest. You do not speak for me. I do. Get it yet?
 
Cypress said:
PostmodernProphet said:
...choose to believe if you want........or burn in hell........
Click to expand...
^^^ the kind of fire and brimstone Christianity that alienates a lot of people from the religion.
Click to expand...

Cypress:

I wrote a response to PostmodernProphet at post 391 over 24 hours ago, informing him that literal hellfire torment is not supported by scripture. He ignored my message because he chooses to believe false religions dogma.
Post 391: https://www.justplainpolitics.com/t...heism-is-religion.217646/page-20#post-6041838

In fact, I even started a thread on the topic several days ago. Most of the Christians who believe in literal hellfire torment are not willing to discuss the topic. They prefer to believe what their religious leaders told them rather than reason on the scriptures. Below is the weblink to my "Literal Hellfire Torment Not a Bible Teaching" thread.

LITERAL Hellfire Torment—Not A Bible Teaching

The teaching of literal hellfire torment is commonplace in Christendom and non-Christian religions. This teaching defames the Creator and portrays him as a sadist who tortures people in literal flames of fire for all eternity—as punishment for wrongdoings committed during the relatively brief...
www.justplainpolitics.com www.justplainpolitics.com

Alter2Ego
 
Concart said:
I am not the one preaching their religion here. My bright line is teaching Intelligent design and passing it off as science. YOU are the one posting multiple threads on multiple websites. I simply responded to your assertions. You are the obsessed one. I have never stated that atheism is important to me. I challenge you to find one post in which I expressed that. You are making it up. You are intellectually dishonest. You do not speak for me. I do. Get it yet?
Click to expand...
Concart:

I discuss the same topics at different websites because these are topics that people are interested in. I've been discussing these topics for over a decade. And what has any of that to do with what the U.S. Supreme said regarding Atheist Religionists in the Torcaso v. Watkins case? Nothing.

BTW: If you think Torcaso v. Watkins is the only lawsuit involving an atheist who sued for his religionist rights, think again. I will post another one, maybe tomorrow, where another atheist filed suit because he claimed his atheist religious rights were being violated.
 
Alter2Ego said:
Concart:

I discuss the same topics at different websites because these are topics that people are interested in. I've been discussing these topics for over a decade. And what has any of that to do with what the U.S. Supreme said regarding Atheist Religionists in the Torcaso v. Watkins case? Nothing.

BTW: If you think Torcaso v. Watkins is the only lawsuit involving an atheist who sued for his religionist rights, think again. I will post another one, maybe tomorrow, where another atheist filed suit because he claimed his atheist religious rights were being violated.
Click to expand...
Why is what I believe so important to you that you demand it be called a religion? That’s the real question here, and one you seem unable to answer. Courts do not speak for Gid. You are discussing a legal case and trying to turn it into a theological discussion. It’s just one of your logical flaws, of which there are many. Bottom line; what is the point you are attempting to make. You again seem to articulate that point.
 
Alter2Ego said:
Concart:

I discuss the same topics at different websites because these are topics that people are interested in. I've been discussing these topics for over a decade. And what has any of that to do with what the U.S. Supreme said regarding Atheist Religionists in the Torcaso v. Watkins case? Nothing.

BTW: If you think Torcaso v. Watkins is the only lawsuit involving an atheist who sued for his religionist rights, think again. I will post another one, maybe tomorrow, where another atheist filed suit because he claimed his atheist religious rights were being violated.
Click to expand...
Over a decade?

You are a newcomer to the debate.

Atheism is not a religion. It is a position about the REALITY of existence based on a blind guess...just as most "religions" are also positions taken about the REALITY of existence based on blind guesses.

The strong defenses offered for the blind guesses of both atheism and theism are laughable...with their only virtue being that one of them, accidentally, is correct.

We MAY NEVER know if the essential guess of theism is correct...that there is a GOD of some kind. We WILL NEVER know if the essential guess of atheism is correct...that there are no gods.

The logical and reasonable default for the essential question is: I do not know.

I suspect the world would be a much better place if that were (closer to universally) acknowledged.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top