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.

(Google)   Obama to atheists: "get thee to church, yo"   (google.com) divider line 234
    More: Cool, Obama, President Hu Jintao, China, uranium enrichment, dangerous weapons, U.S. debt, national security adviser, Shanghai  
•       •       •

10639 clicks; posted to Politics » on 15 Nov 2009 at 6:10 PM (4 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



234 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2009-11-16 12:14:15 AM
Mordant: The only thing we can learn from them is how much starch to put in our shirts. USA !! USA !! USA !!! Jesus Rules !!

You forgot the other ancient Chinese secret. (new window)
/Though even if we learn it, we'll outsource production back to them.
 
2009-11-16 12:14:37 AM
sprawl15: If they considered all variations on their literal Truth to be blasphemy, they'd consider the church next door to be as great a Satan as Islam

Being friendly to other Christian sects is not the same thing as pluralism. Besides which, the internal correspondence and documents from various Fundamentalist organizations all pretty implicitly, and often explicitly state that they get along with the other Christian sects only because they're stronger that way. Remove the external competition and they'd be at each others throats within minutes.
 
2009-11-16 12:16:10 AM
Swampthing in Korea: Gordon Bennett: GoDawgs!: ninjakirby: The Government officially restricts legal religious practice to the five (Buddhist, Taoist, Muslim, Catholic, and Protestant) state-sanctioned "patriotic religious associations.

suck it jews?

I think Judaism is also permitted (new window)

I don't think their are Jewish people native to China.


That is incorrect, SiK.

"Organisation," indeed...
 
2009-11-16 12:19:54 AM
ninjakirby: sprawl15: If they considered all variations on their literal Truth to be blasphemy, they'd consider the church next door to be as great a Satan as Islam

Being friendly to other Christian sects is not the same thing as pluralism. Besides which, the internal correspondence and documents from various Fundamentalist organizations all pretty implicitly, and often explicitly state that they get along with the other Christian sects only because they're stronger that way. Remove the external competition and they'd be at each others throats within minutes.


This is true, especially considering the Catholics and Mormons grouping up on Prop 8, but they still have to make that distinction and instead of questioning the truth of similar beliefs its just easier to have a level of pluralism. It wouldn't do any good to have a technical bible fight over wearing earrings since they might both find out things they don't like.
 
2009-11-16 12:21:23 AM
God will provide (in lieu of what we do with what God has provided, if you believe in that) is an absolute claim, it is not an absolute reality.

Faith is easy, reality isn't.
 
2009-11-16 12:38:42 AM
Bevets: We are primarily single issue voters (anti abortion) and along for the ride on everything else (and the Republicans have been more than happy to take us for a ride)

I'm glad a few of you are beginning to notice what I have been saying for some years now: politicians will promise you anything to get your vote, then do nothing and insist it is due to the obstructionism of the other party, so you must turn out even stronger and vote more of them into office.

I'm not even anti-abortion, and I have felt sorry for those who are and voted Republican and got the shaft.

/Not pro-abortion, either. Being a male, I figure the women sould decide this amongst themselves.
 
2009-11-16 12:43:21 AM
DevideByZer0: A lot of people like the choice that presents absolutes. Right or wrong, absolutes are comforting to people.

Nothing is absolute.
That is an absolute.

There went your whole absolute rant.
 
2009-11-16 12:47:00 AM
Britney Spear's Speculum: Nothing is absolute.
That is an absolute.

There went your whole absolute rant.


It should be, but that would only be so if no one was claiming to know absolutes.

I can name at least a few groups of people who claim absolutes.

Are there not a few groups of people who speak in terms of having absolute knowledge, supported or not?
 
2009-11-16 12:48:51 AM
You label what I said as a rant.

Are there people who absolutely believe in God, or not?
 
2009-11-16 12:49:46 AM
If there is a God, is it absolute, or not?
 
2009-11-16 12:49:46 AM
Is Death the Final High?
 
2009-11-16 12:54:10 AM
WTF? That headline is just stupid.

Stop it, Drew. I've been around and developed a taste for Fark. Don't go changing it with this type of shiat.
 
2009-11-16 12:59:56 AM
Atheisms absolutes do not result in eternal life in a paradise. But, it does provide an endless insight to what will be discovered during your short time here.

Atheisms absolutes? most of settled science. Gravity, to be lazy.

Is there a lot of dispute over gravity.

Flight is another, are we disputing that flight is possible?

How about the internet, are we all here in our imaginations?

How about the modern world being science based?
 
2009-11-16 01:00:00 AM
Although the headline was a bit misleading, I find it disappointing that in 230+ years of existence, and for the foreseeable future, Americans have never and will not elect an atheist as President.

Despite one of our most basic tenets of freedom and independence, which is that religion and government should be separated and not overlap or influence each other, our country still holds religion as a major factor in judging the character of a person. That makes me sad.
 
2009-11-16 01:04:40 AM
DevideByZer0: Atheisms absolutes?

What does the conclusion that there is no god have to do with
absolutes about gravity?

DevideByZer0: Is there a lot of dispute over gravity.


How so?
 
2009-11-16 01:12:15 AM
Britney Spear's Speculum: DevideByZer0: Atheisms absolutes?

What does the conclusion that there is no god have to do with
absolutes about gravity?

DevideByZer0: Is there a lot of dispute over gravity.


How so?


It comes down to the acceptance of new and previously unknown (science derived,)often having to deal with religions acceptance or denial of the matter. Gay marriage.

And Atheists ability to more quickly realize and adapt to new information as opposed to those who need to run it through the filter of religion. Was Copernicus wrong? why was Copernicus persecuted.

Stem cell research.

Atheists are often encouraged to take a back seat until others realize the value of new information.
 
2009-11-16 01:17:57 AM
God, or no God.

That's one area where Atheists are perceived as being implicitly wrong, despite the evidence.

That's one area, as an Atheist, where you have to have strength, despite the status quo. That's one area where you are challenged to evaluate reality and take a stand, no matter what percentage of worlds population believes in a deity(s).
 
2009-11-16 01:28:02 AM
DevideByZer0: That's one area where Atheists are perceived as being implicitly wrong, despite the evidence.

Atheists, by definition, don't have any evidence to support their claims.
 
2009-11-16 01:31:54 AM
DevideByZer0: Britney Spear's Speculum: DevideByZer0: Atheisms absolutes?

What does the conclusion that there is no god have to do with
absolutes about gravity?

DevideByZer0: Is there a lot of dispute over gravity.


How so?

It comes down to the acceptance of new and previously unknown (science derived,)often having to deal with religions acceptance or denial of the matter. Gay marriage.

And Atheists ability to more quickly realize and adapt to new information as opposed to those who need to run it through the filter of religion. Was Copernicus wrong? why was Copernicus persecuted.

Stem cell research.

Atheists are often encouraged to take a back seat until others realize the value of new information.


This has nothing to do with your claims about gravity. This has nothing to do with gravity at all.

DevideByZer0: God, or no God.

That's one area where Atheists are perceived as being implicitly wrong, despite the evidence.

That's one area, as an Atheist, where you have to have strength, despite the status quo. That's one area where you are challenged to evaluate reality and take a stand, no matter what percentage of worlds population believes in a deity(s).


The burden of proof is on the believers to prove the existence to god. Not for Atheists to prove the non-existence of god or disprove the existence of god.....when there is no evidence for either side (believers and non believers) to present, those believing in the non-existent are obligated to provide objective evidence.


We have to accept the null hypothesis, the default position, that there is no god until presented with this objective evidence.
 
2009-11-16 01:32:48 AM
DevideByZer0: Britney Spear's Speculum: DevideByZer0: Atheisms absolutes?

What does the conclusion that there is no god have to do with
absolutes about gravity?

DevideByZer0: Is there a lot of dispute over gravity.


How so?

It comes down to the acceptance of new and previously unknown (science derived,)often having to deal with religions acceptance or denial of the matter. Gay marriage.

And Atheists ability to more quickly realize and adapt to new information as opposed to those who need to run it through the filter of religion. Was Copernicus wrong? why was Copernicus persecuted.

Stem cell research.

Atheists are often encouraged to take a back seat until others realize the value of new information.


It's like the anti-Bevets bot.
 
2009-11-16 01:36:25 AM
sprawl15: Atheists, by definition, don't have any evidence to support their claims.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Again, believers are obligated to prove their claims when there is no evidence. Non-believers or Atheists, aren't obligated to prove/disprove anything.

What you're saying is like me saying I'm the king of a non existent land and I claim you're wrong because you can't disprove/prove my claims. While I'm sitting over here just making unsubstantiated claims to try to obfuscate the truth making you do all the hard work.
 
2009-11-16 01:38:01 AM
Therein lies the reason why wrong succeeds when right should. Wrong does whatever is needed to get by while right restrains itself to what is right.

Every generation eventually realizes why right is right, and why wrong was left behind.

It's so much easier to believe in the promises of wrong, because they're willing to promise what is not deliverable.

Even as an Atheist, after having read the bible, I realize that it was written largely by people who realized the same thing long before I did, God or not.

That's the paradox where Atheists can agree with some religious people. We just attribute the reasons to different things.

However, there are different requirements, and religion is far more malleable than Atheism is.

/Unless you're a Libertarian, where rules go out the window.
 
2009-11-16 01:41:35 AM
sprawl15: DevideByZer0: That's one area where Atheists are perceived as being implicitly wrong, despite the evidence.

Atheists, by definition, don't have any evidence to support their claims.


Other than all that is, I guess. As compared to singling out a single God, I would say evidence is in our favor.

RemyDuron: It's like the anti-Bevets bot.

Ouch, you didn't even give me the opportunity to present my point.
 
2009-11-16 01:44:11 AM
Britney Spear's Speculum: Again, believers are obligated to prove their claims when there is no evidence. Non-believers or Atheists, aren't obligated to prove/disprove anything.

Exactly. Which is why I stated that Atheists, by definition, don't have any evidence to support their claims. Just like my position that you aren't the king of a non existent land. I don't have any evidence. The fact that I (or Atheists, for that matter) don't actually need it is completely irrelevant since I was responding to a person who claimed there was some kind of evidence that proves a negative (which would be very interesting to see).
 
2009-11-16 01:44:49 AM
Divide By Zer0: Therein lies the reason why wrong succeeds when right should. Wrong does whatever is needed to get by while right restrains itself to what is right.

In many instances, wrong is simply much easier.

I learned this lesson early, when I realized how easy it was to toss everything in my drawers and closet all over the room, and how comparatively difficult it was to put that shiat back.
 
2009-11-16 01:46:25 AM
Britney Spear's Speculum: when there is no evidence for either side (believers and non believers) to present, those believing in the non-existent are obligated to provide objective evidence.

If such a thing could be proven, I would be awed, amazed, and curious as to how. I would be first in line to try and understand. That is the nature of the curious.
 
2009-11-16 01:47:49 AM
Salt Lick Steady: In many instances, wrong is simply much easier.

Right or wrong, people like absolutes. Do this, and __________ will happen.

Easiest bargain the world.
 
2009-11-16 01:49:40 AM
DevideByZer0: Other than all that is, I guess. As compared to singling out a single God, I would say evidence is in our favor.

Show me evidence that a divine being doesn't exist. Let me stop you before you respond and claim that a lack of evidence for a divine being existing is proof enough. It's not. That isn't evidence of any sort. You are just as likely to have 'evidence' against Sagan's garage dragon than any religious diety.
 
2009-11-16 01:53:39 AM
sprawl15: Exactly. Which is why I stated that Atheists, by definition, don't have any evidence to support their claims.

This is a stunning and sad logical fallacy. While it is impossible to prove the nonexistence of (a) god(s), there is most certainly evidence that a god (in the senses that term has been used by people) does not exist.
 
2009-11-16 01:54:25 AM
sprawl15: Show me evidence that a divine being doesn't exist. Let me stop you before you respond and claim that a lack of evidence for a divine being existing is proof enough. It's not. That isn't evidence of any sort. You are just as likely to have 'evidence' against Sagan's garage dragon than any religious diety.

Go ahead and don't, okay.

There's enough information available for you to decide on what you want to be. What you choose to be is your choice. Atheism's not the easy choice, so be it.
 
2009-11-16 01:57:19 AM
sprawl15: DevideByZer0: Other than all that is, I guess. As compared to singling out a single God, I would say evidence is in our favor.

Show me evidence that a divine being doesn't exist. Let me stop you before you respond and claim that a lack of evidence for a divine being existing is proof enough. It's not. That isn't evidence of any sort. You are just as likely to have 'evidence' against Sagan's garage dragon than any religious diety.


How about the divine being does not exists until it steps up and introduces itself. Of course I wont buy it until I see the birth certificate.

Oh and proving the existence of "Sagan's garage dragon" would probably be as easy as looking in the garage. Of course if its Carl Sagan you are referring to , then as he is dead, and the dead have no ownership rights apparently. That being the case then there can be no such thing as "Sagan's garage dragon" now a generic Garage Dragon perhaps, but his specifically, not so much.
 
2009-11-16 02:10:54 AM
DivideByZer0: Right or wrong, people like absolutes. Do this, and __________ will happen.

Is that some sort of absolute? ;)
 
2009-11-16 02:12:43 AM
Really the only thing Atheists have to worry about is their challenge the orthodoxy.

Despite what is discovered, it has to (currently) gain the acceptance of how it fits into existing explanations provided by religions, depending on the most influential religion of the time and place.

Religion chooses to play this role, and it holds a majority. So, for the time being, as long as people choose to believe that some outer entity holds their destiny, we rely on the approval of church leaders to endorse acceptance.

Which requires the most knowledgeable to wait on the least knowing. Great system.
 
2009-11-16 02:16:27 AM
Salt Lick Steady: Is that some sort of absolute? ;)

Yes, and if God disagrees he'll fry me where I sit.

/Any moment now.
//I play this card weekly.
///Okay, now?
////When?
//endorsement?
//strike me down.
//slashies don't sway God.
//the bastard just won't smite me.
 
2009-11-16 02:17:06 AM
sprawl15: Show me evidence that a divine being doesn't exist.

OK, which one? Jesus?

I think there's plenty of evidence that a virgin cannot give birth.
 
2009-11-16 02:17:28 AM
Fark auto edits slashies, who knew?
 
2009-11-16 02:18:06 AM
DevideByZer0: Ouch, you didn't even give me the opportunity to present my point.

Eh, I'm kind of drunk, but you kind of leap from point to vaguely related point. It seems disjointed. But it could just be those shots of whiskey.
 
2009-11-16 02:20:40 AM
DivideByZer0: //the bastard just won't smite me.

You play "he smites me, he smites me not" too?
 
2009-11-16 02:20:50 AM
RemyDuron: Eh, I'm kind of drunk, but you kind of leap from point to vaguely related point. It seems disjointed. But it could just be those shots of whiskey.

I'll put in a good word for you. Really.
 
2009-11-16 02:20:59 AM
Salt Lick Steady: sprawl15: Show me evidence that a divine being doesn't exist.

OK, which one? Jesus?

I think there's plenty of evidence that a virgin cannot give birth.


Oh ya, tell that to Zoroaster and Surya.
 
2009-11-16 02:23:38 AM
Salt Lick Steady: You play "he smites me, he smites me not" too?

May as well, if God doesn't bother religious people may take note.

On a biblical level God regularly smited bad people.
 
2009-11-16 02:25:43 AM
God, I am for the environment you provided and rights for all people, smite me if you disagree.

Reasonable enough.
 
2009-11-16 02:29:43 AM
gothelder: Oh ya, tell that to Zoroaster and Surya.

I can't. I'm preparing for their new year.

/obscure weak press joke?
 
2009-11-16 02:32:06 AM
Nothing yet. How about if I start claiming you're endorsing me, God?


What about that?
 
2009-11-16 02:36:01 AM
I'd just like to tell everybody who is gushing over the PRC's religious tolerance to look up the falun gong.

And also that reincarnation is not essential to either buddhism or taoism. The taoist books I've read seem to mock it more than posit it. and for buddhism it was added in later to fit in nicely with local beliefs rather than actually being the teachings of the buddha.
 
2009-11-16 02:37:41 AM
Well, there you go. God still won't smite me, and my ego will never allow me to believe that I could ever represent a God.

I guess I'll just keep keeping on.
 
2009-11-16 03:03:14 AM
Obdicut: DamnYankees: It used to be. Maoists were very hardline anti-religion. But its really not that way anymore.

China is still grossly intolerant of most forms of religion. That they're tolerant of a few expressions of it is not religious tolerance, in the least.

This is one area where China sucks hardcore. I do not like religion, I am not in favor of religion, but I am definitely in favor of freedom of religion.

mattharvest: Of course, neither Buddhism nor Taoism require the actual existence of any deities.

Deity is a subset of the supernatural; both Buddhism and Taoism require the supernatural.


Uh, citation needed. Taoism does not, in any way, require the supernatural. In fact, it usually relies on metaphor of the natural world for explanation.
 
2009-11-16 03:13:26 AM
supercooldragn: I'd just like to tell everybody who is gushing over the PRC's religious tolerance to look up the falun gong.

Yes.
But it is also a good idea to look up the Taiping Rebellion to see just what it is that scares the Chinese about cults with charismatic leaders.
 
2009-11-16 03:22:09 AM
DevideByZer0: Well, there you go. God still won't smite me, and my ego will never allow me to believe that I could ever represent a God.

I guess I'll just keep keeping on.


My ego allows me to believe that I represent God. But since I'm pretty sure I am God, that's not really surprising. The only bad part about believing you're God is you have no one to blame but yourself.

Actually...kinda wish everyone thought they were God. Be better than whining about 'The Devil made me do it'.
 
2009-11-16 03:30:04 AM
kasmel: My ego allows me to believe that I represent God. But since I'm pretty sure I am God, that's not really surprising. The only bad part about believing you're God is you have no one to blame but yourself.

Actually...kinda wish everyone thought they were God. Be better than whining about 'The Devil made me do it'.


Thou art God, brother.

/God is that groks.
 
Displayed 50 of 234 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report