If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Q13 FOX News Seattle)   Atheist sign disappears from Capitol, turns up at local radio station. Nope, nothing suspicious there   (q13fox.com) divider line 921
    More: Followup  
•       •       •

11922 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Dec 2008 at 1:46 PM (5 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



921 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | » | Last | Show all
 
2008-12-05 02:54:25 PM
Samsaran: WarpZone: yeah, I can. one has testable hypotheses and conclusions drawn by evidence. the other, to put it kindly, doesn't.

You are incredibly misinformed if you believe that most scientific ideas explaining the true nature of the universe, matter and time are "testable". They are not. That does not mean they do not have merit because they certainly do. You atheists, if you are going to chant the "science" mantra really must move into the 21st century with respect to your understanding of Theoretical Physics and current thought in Theology. You would be far less certain and far less smug.


To quote a popular phrase..........bullshiat
 
2008-12-05 02:54:30 PM
DamnYankees: Which goes back to the question I asked the other guy:

How are atheists supposed to honestly express their beliefs without leaving people pissed off?


I kinda liked the beer offer. Me, I'd go for something diet, though; no religious reason, biological (hypoglycemic).

My discussions have always gone something like this:
Atheist: I don't believe in God, or any mythological fairies.
Me: I believe in God. Fairies? Meh, once dated a girl with green hair and yellow eyes. Does that count? (San Diego, interesting story. Lady died her hair, wore contacts... met her when she and her friends were holding a "take a picture with freaks, $1" sign).
Atheist: ... what?
Me: ... huh? Wha? Oh, yeah. Anyway.
Then we usually argue about something important, like taxes.
 
2008-12-05 02:54:40 PM
i86.photobucket.com

Wanted for questioning
 
gad
2008-12-05 02:54:44 PM
cthellis: Samsaran

Does being an atheist make you a douchebag or do douchebags just gravitate to atheism?

Do egotists with nothing to contribute just like to hear themselves speak, or...?


4.bp.blogspot.com
Hard ti GIS atheist douchbags, theses guys though .... low hanging fruit.
 
2008-12-05 02:55:21 PM
PH Neutral: Why do you need to "spread your belief?" Isn't that what you find annoying about religious people? Their need to pass along their beliefs and badger other people (thos who do so, that is)?

No. What annoys me about religious people is that they spread crap. People who spread good thing - Neil DeGrasse Tyson, David Sedaris, Neil Patrick Harris - are fine.
 
2008-12-05 02:55:27 PM
LandOfChocolate: "It seems silly to think that Atheists would gather every Sunday to discuss the non-existence of God but maybe they should if they need an outlet."

Humanists have churches. Ordinary atheists have political meetings, mainly. If you think that they simply sit around chanting "I don't believe in God" it's probably because you don't prsonally know any atheists wel enough to realize that they are not robots or caricatures. Consider attending such a service or meeting to find out whether your preconceptions about atheists are correct.
 
2008-12-05 02:55:51 PM
rustylite: To quote a popular phrase..........bullshiat

Care to elaborate on this? No? I thought not.
 
2008-12-05 02:56:03 PM
HeartBurnKid: So, what you're saying is that an atheist should be free to express his or her opinion, as long as he's only "preaching to the choir"? And meanwhile, Christians should be free to display their symbols, like the nativity, on government grounds without any counterpoint from anybody?

Double standard. You have one.


I'm not arguing against atheist symbols being alongside religious ones. Furthermore, I'm not even arguing that religious symbols should be allowed on government grounds.

What I am arguing against is a sign that is designed to be inflammatory on government grounds.
 
2008-12-05 02:56:06 PM
Zamboro: Hack of all trades: "the worst part about atheist fundies is that they don't see themselves as atheist fundies."

"Atheist fundamentalist"? What are the fundamentals of atheism? Words have definitions, man. If by "fundie" you mean "personally annoys me" that's fine, but you should probably use a different word.


Ass Machine Jones: Hack of



Yes. But there are ways of pushing back without being a dick or bringing undue prickishness to your cause. Telling people they believe in fairy tales is NOT the way to go about it. The realization and understanding comes from within - not from a cheaply made sign.

And yes, I probably should have used the term 'people who annoy me'
 
2008-12-05 02:56:37 PM
MadAsshatter: I'm curious how someone gets fired for being an atheist. Do they come to work wearing big signs that say "I'm an atheist"? I can't think of a single time my religious views have been brought up at work.

People can't be fired because of their atheism, because that would be discrimination. They can, however, be fired for any reason in "right to work states," including no reason at all.

I was forced out of a job for being an atheist. My boss started praying before company meetings. In private, I said that I didn't think it was appropriate. He replied "Well, you better thank Jesus you have a job." Within three months I went from employee of the year to getting the worst review, and not even a cost of living raise. So I started looking for another job.

I would have sued, but the case was pretty flimsy, and I would have hurt my friends who still worked there, and who agreed with me about the impropriety of praying before meetings.
 
2008-12-05 02:57:41 PM
LandOfChocolate: What I am arguing against is a sign that is designed to be inflammatory on government grounds.

You've yet to prove intent.

I say "the truth hurts."
 
2008-12-05 02:57:56 PM
George Washington: "The United States is in no sense founded upon Christian Doctrine"

Thomas Jefferson: "It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg."

Thomas Paine: I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish Church, by the Roman Church, by the Greek Church, by the Turkish Church, by the Protestant Church, nor by any Church that I know of. My own mind is my own Church.

Roger Williams: God requireth not a uniformity of religion.

Thomas Jefferson: The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the Supreme Being as his Father, in the womb of a virgin, will be classified with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter. But we may hope that the dawn of reason and the freedom of thought in these United States will do away with this artificial scaffolding, and restore to us the primitive and genuine doctrines of this most venerated Reformer of human errors.

James Madison: During almost fifteen centuries the legal establishment known as Christianity has been on trial, and what have been the fruits, more or less, in all places? These are the fruits: pride, indolence, ignorance, and arrogance in the clergy. Ignorance, arrogance, and servility in the laity, and in both clergy and laity, superstition, bigotry, and persecution.

Thomas Jefferson: I do not find in orthodox Christianity one redeeming feature.

John Adams: The divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for absurdity. Nowhere in the Gospels do we find a precept for Creeds, Confessions, Oaths, Doctrines, and whole carloads of other foolish trumpery that we find in Christianity.

Thomas Paine: Of all the tyrannies that affect mankind, tyranny in religion is the worst."

Abraham Lincoln: The Bible is not my Book and Christianity is not my religion. I could never give assent to the long complicated statements of Christian dogma.

And finally....

Benjamin Franklin: As to Jesus of Nazareth, I think the system of Morals and his Religion, as he left them to us, the best the World ever saw or is likely to see; but I apprehend it has received various corrupting Changes, and I have, with the most of the present Dissenters in England, some doubts to his divinity.
 
2008-12-05 02:58:36 PM
Resident Lurker:
Those are some pretty broad strokes you're painting there. For a "reasonably enlightened person", "capable of critical thinking" you present yourself as narrow minded. How does your supposition differ from those who claim all atheists are [insert far reaching personal attacks here]

There are brilliant people on both sides of the line. People who have very persuasive arguments and evidence to support their position. If you haven't met a critical thinking Christian, my first question would be, have you looked for one?

Ironically, you make a strong mention of morality, which has always been a strong contention for Christians as to the evidence of God. I suggest you read the book, Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis. I won't promise it will change your mind on the existence of God, but you will at least be treated to the experience of learning that intelligent, critical thinking religious people do exist.


The main thrust of my point here is that those people who are thoughtful, enlightened, and capable of critical thinking, Do not need a religious framework to make them good people in life. They choose to believe in it because the ritual makes them comfortable.

Those who NEED to fear a vengeful god to be a good person in life are bound to be trouble, and most religions, Xtianity especially, rarely does anything to promote critical thinking if they can instead keep you in line by saying you will burn in hell for all eternity when you die. This leads to people committing violence in the name of God. This is why Westboro Baptist Church exists. This is why Islam says all polytheistic religions need to do be razed to the ground along with all their idols. This is why the inquisisiton happened.
 
2008-12-05 02:58:37 PM
kronicfeld: Does this "oversoul" still demand unyielding fealty and issue edicts about day to day behavior such as eating shellfish

You obviously were not paying attention.
 
2008-12-05 02:58:44 PM
LandOfChocolate: What I am arguing against is a sign that is designed to be inflammatory on government grounds.

I would be (and most Christians would be) against an "All you unbelievers are going to HELL" sign.

and if said sign was posted, I would not be surprised if someone absconded with it.
 
2008-12-05 02:59:52 PM
LandOfChocolate: HeartBurnKid: So, what you're saying is that an atheist should be free to express his or her opinion, as long as he's only "preaching to the choir"? And meanwhile, Christians should be free to display their symbols, like the nativity, on government grounds without any counterpoint from anybody?

Double standard. You have one.

I'm not arguing against atheist symbols being alongside religious ones. Furthermore, I'm not even arguing that religious symbols should be allowed on government grounds.

What I am arguing against is a sign that is designed to be inflammatory on government grounds.


This sign was posted in response to the nativity being displayed on government grounds. If anybody suggested taking down the nativity, I missed it, but everybody seems to be up in arms over this sign, including you.

For my part, I'd be fine with both going away.
 
2008-12-05 03:00:26 PM
whidbey: You've yet to prove intent.

I say "the truth hurts."


"The truth hurts" is inflammatory in itself. By its definition it means that your definition of the truth is harmful to someone else.

Anyways, I've done the best I can. If you still believe otherwise, that is your business.
 
2008-12-05 03:01:02 PM
fluffy2097: Xtianity especially,

I like how you used the cross in the name. To remind us all of Jesus, and how he paid for our sins.
 
2008-12-05 03:01:02 PM
Pro Zack: "All you unbelievers are going to HELL"

and if said sign was posted, I would not be surprised if someone absconded with it.


Or give it a good kick. That particular wording would be nothing short of a dare...
 
2008-12-05 03:01:20 PM
Samsaran: kronicfeld: Does this "oversoul" still demand unyielding fealty and issue edicts about day to day behavior such as eating shellfish

You obviously were not paying attention.


He was paying attention fine. This is one of the great jokes of modern theology - they argue for the existence of gods no on believes in, and believe in the existence of gods no one can argue for.
 
2008-12-05 03:01:29 PM
Zamboro

Then let's have the evidence that they justify it with.

Go ask them, not me. I've made my beliefs clear.

Not unless words mean whatever we wish them to.

How can you quote a book in your profile and not read it? The passage I am alluding to in the introduction, the same introduction from the same book you quote in your profile. I suggest a further perusing of your study material.


Certainly. Nothing I've said is inconsistent with the views he has expressed, at least to the best of my knowledge.

His whole p = q shtick is about faith. Go check it out again.


Don't patronize me by implying that my motivation for shunning faith is so petty. I've explained my reasons and they hinge on a definition of faith that you don't recognize.


Patronize you? Who is patronizing you? Now you are getting defensive.

I recognize your definition of faith, but it is not the only one there is, which YOU fail to recognize. I think the vast majority of our disagreements are over this.


Wrong, it is faith. That may not be what faith means to you, but that is what it functionally amounts to.

Evidence of my last post.


If I present the evidence that the brain is the seat of consciousness to a theist and they do not amend their views accordingly, no matter how politely they decline, they are being unreasonable.

Ok. No problem here.

All faith is blind so long as it constitutes belief without evidence. I wouldn't be blind if it were based upon evidence, but then it would no longer be faith.

See pretty much everything I have said to you up to this point.

Arguing semantics is pointless. I doubt we will ever agree on what faith is.


Nocens

True enough, maybe you should also point this answer at the atheists who keep bringing science up too.


I have many, many times. In a way, I am right now.
 
2008-12-05 03:02:00 PM
biomajor: You must be trollin'.
/Muslim extremists anyone?


Oh yes.. I understand. The people who believe in that god are evil, while those people that believe in my god are universally virtuous.
 
2008-12-05 03:03:08 PM
LandOfChocolate: "The truth hurts" is inflammatory in itself. By its definition it means that your definition of the truth is harmful to someone else.

Oh please. Grow a hide?

Anyways, I've done the best I can. If you still believe otherwise, that is your business.

The issue is insecurity about one's faith. A strong faith would laugh off even the most vile, /b/-tarded insult with a smile.

Do you subscribe to the oft-quoted "Turn the other cheek?"

Not a Christian, but I would think that one would be up there with the Golden Rule...
 
2008-12-05 03:03:41 PM
Pro Zack: Zamboro: It's a provincial god, a parochial god like all others, and you're talking about it in the same breath as 21st century science.

Yes I am. I don't know why you would think it surreal.

Zamboro: I don't see how you could think that. If a god did exist it would represent an enormous opportunity for science, open up multiple new fields of study and revamp everything we thought we knew about reality.

That is true - but so far, God has remained the God who hides himself.


1 - here's why I think the notion of the whole Bible story is surreal in one word: copypasta (new window).

The whole story of Mary being visited, being a virgin, having a King for a son? Copypasta from the Egyptians. Inscribed about 3,500 years ago on the walls of the Temple at Luxor were images of the Annunciation, Immaculate Conception, Birth and Adoration of Horus, with Thoth announcing to the Virgin Isis that she will conceive Horus; with Kneph, the "Holy Ghost," impregnating the virgin using an Ankh (a cross symbol of life); and with the infant being attended by three kings, or magi, bearing gifts. In addition, in the catacombs at Rome are pictures of the baby Horus being held by the virgin mother Isis - the original "Madonna and Child."

The Israelites were slaves of the Egyptians. Some stories just rubbed off.

2 - The God who hides himself? That's very convenient, for a God who formerly rained ten plagues down on Egypt, rolled back the programming on water and gravity, destroyed whole cities, talked and appeared to people. If what you believe is The Bible, you might want to read into what the First Council of Nicaea (new window) did because there was no solid story about Christ. They basically sat down and decided what was 'canon'. They were the ones that placed Easter on the calendar (on the first Sunday after the first full moon following the vernal equinox... phew!). God's word was so exact, his will and wants so clear, people had to vote like fans at a Star Wars convention deciding what parts of the Holiday Special should be considered canon.

God would seem to be quite like UFOs. Lots of them UFOs around, abducting people and turning cows inside out... until cameras became cheaper, more portable, and more commonplace. And you can't disprove UFOs either, but I know where I stand on that issue too.
 
2008-12-05 03:04:26 PM
HeartBurnKid: For my part, I'd be fine with both going away.

Or, more being added. Best scene on religion I've ever watched, came from an episode of Babylon 5. In it, a commander of a space station was required to show off the religion of earth to a mess of aliens. What occured was a progression of handshaking with all the religions, including representatives of those who were not religious.

Guy who wrote the episode is areligious. I don't remember if he was an actual atheist or not, but in general, seems like a good idea.

Remove all, or show all (at least, that which is in the demographic of the area represented) seems like a good idea, if the folks being shown are interested in being shown.

Then again, I'm a Baptist that is in favor of homosexual marriage.
Heck, I'm even in favor of *gay* marriage. All marriages should be happy.
 
2008-12-05 03:05:18 PM
trumpethope19.files.wordpress.com
 
2008-12-05 03:05:22 PM
hienekenftw: Remember folks! Discrimination is fine unless it hurts white Christians!

FTFY
 
2008-12-05 03:05:56 PM
It is laughable that the atheists chanting "science ... science ... science", generally on this forum at least, have the same limited understanding of science as they do of theology. Absent an understanding of science they take their "science" as a matter of faith and this faith is like the faith of a child ... naive and simplistic.

When I read many of the comments I am impressed by the effort they put into their debate but unimpressed by the level of sophistication shown in their arguments. Some of the commentary is so childish and ignorant, that I would be embarrassed for these folks if I thought them capable of seeing this.
 
2008-12-05 03:05:58 PM
Samsaran: You obviously were not paying attention.

I was paying quite a bit of attention. You spent two paragraphs talking about a completely different "god" than the organized religions are talking about. The "god" that you're talking about is not the God of Christian, Jewish or Muslim dogma; it's an abstract, non-denominational philosopher's concept of "god." And while that's all well and good, it's not the concept of "god" or religion that is really at issue here.
 
2008-12-05 03:07:04 PM
whidbey: motobvious: lulz.

You're so easily amused.


Everyone should be easily amused. Life is better that way.
 
2008-12-05 03:07:17 PM
LandOfChocolate: whidbey: You've yet to prove intent.

I say "the truth hurts."

"The truth hurts" is inflammatory in itself. By its definition it means that your definition of the truth is harmful to someone else.

Anyways, I've done the best I can. If you still believe otherwise, that is your business.


i16.photobucket.com

Whidbey always right
 
2008-12-05 03:07:30 PM
whidbey: Your opinion. People don't change things by keeping a low profile.

And for that matter, it sends the message that there are some of us that do not respect said "treasured holiday" as sacrament.



Who farking died and gave you the right, power, or purpose to change anything? What the hell are you out to change anyway? If you have a problem with policy or implementation then say so. Instead, you're supporting a broad attack on a belief system which is idiotic since one could easily turn it against you which would no doubt result in a great deal of whine and butthurt.

Athiests and Christians would get along so much better if both parties stopped pissing on each other and just left it well enough alone. Stop caring about what other people believe, it isn't your damn business anyway.
 
2008-12-05 03:08:07 PM
Mort_Q: hienekenftw: Remember folks! Discrimination is fine unless it hurts some one other than white Christians!

FTFY
 
2008-12-05 03:08:19 PM
Zamboro: sewiusproductions: "Yet you are attacking faith like you were fondled by a priest."

Perhaps my views are nuanced and you haven't bothered to understand them. Perhaps I and others have excellent reasons for holding faith in contempt that you do not understand because you have not exposed yourself to books advancing the argument.


Quite the contrary, I have read many books that promote nonchristian beliefs, as well as nonbelief, actually I've read more books about nonreligion than books that promote religion, I like to understand other people's views, it helps me better understand my own. It just seems to me that you are vehemently attacking faith, if I'm wrong, I'm sorry. I understand that you have some strong feelings against faith, I'm just trying to understand why.

I just don't agree with religions, simply because most are very hypocritical. (judge not, nonbelievers will burn in hell)

/I understand that blind faith is always a bad thing
//I do think that faith has inspired many good things as well
///I believe it has done me good and will do me good, so I say, God bless it!
 
2008-12-05 03:08:41 PM
Samsaran: It is laughable that the atheists chanting "science ... science ... science", generally on this forum at least, have the same limited understanding of science as they do of theology. Absent an understanding of science they take their "science" as a matter of faith and this faith is like the faith of a child ... naive and simplistic.

When I read many of the comments I am impressed by the effort they put into their debate but unimpressed by the level of sophistication shown in their arguments. Some of the commentary is so childish and ignorant, that I would be embarrassed for these folks if I thought them capable of seeing this.


You sound like David Koresh or Jim Jones.
 
2008-12-05 03:08:42 PM
Devin172: whidbey: Your opinion. People don't change things by keeping a low profile.

And for that matter, it sends the message that there are some of us that do not respect said "treasured holiday" as sacrament.


Who farking died and gave you the right, power, or purpose to change anything? What the hell are you out to change anyway? If you have a problem with policy or implementation then say so. Instead, you're supporting a broad attack on a belief system which is idiotic since one could easily turn it against you which would no doubt result in a great deal of whine and butthurt.

Athiests and Christians would get along so much better if both parties stopped pissing on each other and just left it well enough alone. Stop caring about what other people believe, it isn't your damn business anyway.


Yea!!
 
2008-12-05 03:08:48 PM
whidbey: The_Sponge: IMHO, that sign was put up as a trolling attempt.

One man's troll is another's unvarnished truth.


Whidbey, gaddamnit, move to the fundy side.
I'm not so happy that you are in my camp.

Of course you liked the sign, it was a troll.

Mean spirited troll, too.

If you want to put up a Solstice party pole, have at it, but not a rant.

Bad form.
 
2008-12-05 03:08:54 PM
Devin172: Stop caring about what other people believe, it isn't your damn business anyway.

As long as it affects politics and policy, it damn well is.
 
2008-12-05 03:09:12 PM
Jackpot777: 2 - The God who hides himself?

I am aware of both of the stories you mention, and many besides.

here's the scoop. people were probably wrong.

if you can find where "the God who hides himself" comes from, I'll give you a cookie.
 
2008-12-05 03:09:25 PM
kronicfeld: I was paying quite a bit of attention. You spent two paragraphs talking about a completely different "god" than the organized religions are talking about. The "god" that you're talking about is not the God of Christian, Jewish or Muslim dogma; it's an abstract, non-denominational philosopher's concept of "god." And while that's all well and good, it's not the concept of "god" or religion that is really at issue here.

That was my point. Few theologians take scripture literally and our view of "God" has evolved over the past 5000 years. Why would you take umbrage over one conception of God and not another?
 
2008-12-05 03:09:49 PM
Tommy Moo: I am going to here attempt to concoct the most mildly worded atheist holiday greeting sentiment that still unapologetically conveys our beliefs:

May the spirit of community and fraternity bring you comfort and joy in this winter season. As we reflect on our triumphs and disappointments of the last year, let us affirm our commitment to reasonable discourse, peaceful conflict resolution, and a sustainable society that embraces empiricism and the free exchange of ideas. Working together we can escape the restraints of tradition and progress toward a world better equipped to face today's challenges, leaving our children with many happy winter seasons to come.

My estimate is that plenty of people would still have gotten huffy over a placard that said this, though not as many. Thoughts? Is this good enough to not be "ass-holey?"


That was very well done, though you're right, I'm sure the fundies will still get all in a huff.
 
2008-12-05 03:09:52 PM
DamnYankees: PH Neutral: Why do you need to "spread your belief?" Isn't that what you find annoying about religious people? Their need to pass along their beliefs and badger other people (thos who do so, that is)?

No. What annoys me about religious people is that they spread crap. People who spread good thing - Neil DeGrasse Tyson, David Sedaris, Neil Patrick Harris - are fine.


Okay, I can understand that. But I have learned to roll my eyes and move on with my life. I mean, if you let yourself get sucked into that you become what they are. To them, espousing your beliefs is spreading crap. Because that is what they BELIEVE. And let's face it, according to their actual beliefs, they have a lot more to lose than you do. If you don't tell someone there is no such thing as god, do you go to hell? No, you simply die and decay at the same normal rate you would if you ran around the world kicking puppies and crapping in a nun's shoe for a living.

But to them it is a different story. Not arguing in defense of their lord is frowned upon. It is denying their faith. It's tantamount to religious treason. So they feel bound to do this.

The burden of being an atheist is the fact that the religious live with the smug feeling (yes, religious folk are just as smug as they claim atheists are) that they will get the biggest fark-you "I told you so!" moment the world has ever seen. Atheists don't have that benefit. If we're right as atheists, they won't even know it.

Anyhow, this is why I don't care about the "crap" they spread. Because the die is cast. I don't need to do any more prep work during life. I simply do not believe there is any final judgement, afterlife, higher power, or anything. I can get on with the business of living my life in a good, peaceful manner without any overhead. And that alone gives me peace.
 
2008-12-05 03:10:25 PM
DamnYankees: You sound like David Koresh or Jim Jones.

I do? Here have some Kool-Aid it's very refreshing.
 
2008-12-05 03:10:58 PM
I can only assume that all the atheists are gonna work on December 25th at regular wage.
 
2008-12-05 03:11:05 PM
Devin172: Who farking died and gave you the right, power, or purpose to change anything?

Nobody had to "die" to grant me, you or even vonster said rights and purposes.

The beliefs stated in the words on the sign have a right to be heard.

Athiests and Christians would get along so much better if both parties stopped pissing on each other and just left it well enough alone. Stop caring about what other people believe, it isn't your damn business anyway.

Your opinion. Obviously, there is a backlash against myth being presented as fact. This incident is proof enough.

I merely said I understand why.
 
2008-12-05 03:11:14 PM
Samsaran: Few theologians take scripture literally and our view of "God" has evolved over the past 5000 years.

Good for them. Most religious people aren't theologians, and theologians aren't most religious people.
 
2008-12-05 03:12:33 PM
DamnYankees: You sound like David Koresh or Jim Jones.

I doubt that Jones or Koresh spent much time discussing String Theory.
 
2008-12-05 03:12:58 PM
PH Neutral: Okay, I can understand that. But I have learned to roll my eyes and move on with my life.

As long as they try to force their religion into government, prevent kids from learning about evolution, stir up wars based on cosmic battles of good and evil, and stir up diviseness, this argument doesn't fly. We live in a society, and unless you stand up and argue your position, the people who oppose you will win.
 
2008-12-05 03:13:13 PM
loki see loki do: Whidbey, gaddamnit, move to the fundy side.
I'm not so happy that you are in my camp.


Obviously I'm not in your camp. I'm in my camp. And it's way too cold to be camping in December. Goddamn it.

Of course you liked the sign, it was a troll.

Your opinion. I happen to agree with what was said, and the reaction only belies others' insecurities.
 
2008-12-05 03:13:13 PM
"If the arguments of the present chapter are of any validity, there ought to exist the fullest liberty of professing and discussing, as a matter of ethical conviction, any doctrine, however immoral it may be considered."

"If all mankind minus one were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."


- John Stuart Mill is just sayin', you know.
 
Displayed 50 of 921 comments

First | « | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report