Modern English usage dictates that one who is an atheist denies the existance of God.
No it doesn't. Rabid psuedo-Christians have come up with that justification for the sole purpose of attempting to define atheism as a "religious" belief. The pathetic lacking in their own faith is the reason they have the entirely irrational need for this.
The fact is that believing that some invisible super hero in the sky made everything is a choice a lot of people make. Those of us who are not convinced by any particular interpretation of said super hero are not "believing" that any particular thing is true or not true.
We are all born atheists.
Some people choose to take the path of "belief" for some value of "invisible super hero in the sky".
I didn't
You are looking for the word "agnostic"
No, I am not.
I have no doubt about whether or not some magical invisible fairy is pulling strings in the world. I absolutely do not think that that is so. Were it so, then he would be either incredibly evil, or a very sick prankster. Just look around you. Don't even bother with some irrational "it's the devil" crap, because, by definition, god invented him, all his impulses, and every method by which he could promote them
Were there some evidence for someone's particular god, however small; I would take that into account. There isn't, though.
Believe what you will, but do it in good faith. Don't delude yourself by trying to say that not choosing to give any legitimacy to your beliefs indicates the same process that led to your own beliefs.
OK, I just have to ask because it's been bugging me for a while. When I think of a range, I think of going to the range in the hills and blowing up old TVs, textbooks, clay pigeons etc. I certainly wouldn't run out and pick up something we shot out there because there are other people out there, and they might not have noticed me. So, is it a joke, like your dog would be tied up, hence even more disapointed. Or maybe he's so fast he can dodge bullets. Or are there "bird dog" ranges where it works differently?
Ahhh, but you ignore the fact that Christianity is exactly the same. If not, explain the crusades, the inquisition, the salem witch trials, and the attitude of many (so called) Christians today.
The fundemental claims of an atheist or no more supportable by science than the claims of a theist.
You make a mistake here though. There are no fundamental claims of atheism. Theism is the statement that there is a god. Atheism is simply the lack of that belief (prefix 'a' means without). You, yourself might mean something different when you describe yourself as such, but I don't and that isn't what the word means in and of itself. The word really couldn't even exist if there wasn't already the other word for it to modify.
Schools? Even if you're an old fogey with no kids, educated children are less likely to become ruffians who you have to chase off your yard with a cane.
Thanks for taking away the one freaking thing about getting old that I'm actually looking forward to.
Oh Arlington Heights. In my day (well every day) I work in Vernon Hills, live in Wicker Park and drive even further. Uphill both ways. Through waist high snow;-)
Heh, this totally reminds me of a Bad Religion song:
See there's a girl who sits and watches the world from her blue screen. Also a boy who truly wants to destroy his hometown scene. They both want to travel to the land of competition. Southern California will destroy them, And they won't be the best, they'll be the poseurs who dress Like the plastic idiots who they can't be.
That last line is awesome. It's a big fuck you to everybody involved in the process;-)
I don't recall the name, (years ago), but it was on the East side of the main part of State Street in Santa Barbara. I do distinctly recall it had a wooden balcony covering part of the back of the place. The wooden staircase was on left side as you go in. I remember that because I had to holler for service from the balcony.
Seriously, though: Have you ever thought to yourself, "you know, if things are actually better in the Middle East in three years, I'd have to admit that maybe W was right"? Or is your cutoff 5 years? Or two years? Or is your reconsideration threshold based on a particular event or series of events
Nope. It doesn't matter in the least whether the situation improves or declines because that is totally irrelevant to our reasons for being there.
For me, it is entirely a question of integrity. Bush has none.
We went in because they pose an imminent threat to the US. because they have massive quantities of WMDs which we know exactly where are. Because within 45 minutes they can wipe us off the face of the earth.
Those are the resons Bush gave for the invasion. We know now, and anybody who actually pays attention knew then, that these were bald faced lies. So whatever the outcome matters not in the least. We still have no idea why we went in there, although enriching Bush's buddies seems to be the major result so far.
So the fact that you are throwing irrelevant potential side effects out as if they had anything to do with the situation completely destroys your credibility.
If you were confused about the mass murder/love thing in my sig, then you're just not paying attention either. Go check out the exit polls from the last election. The majority of people who voted *for* Bush disagree with his economic policies. They disagree with the war and his complete destruction of American integrity by his completely dishonest selling of it. The agree with him only because they hate fags. They hate them so much that they chose Bush even though the only difference between him and Kerry on that issue was that Kerry supported state's rights (one of the primary republican planks) while Bush pissed right in the face of it.
Yes, and they've been banned for a (relatively) short period of time. The question is did this "recovery" have more to do with the sun than with our ban of CFCs?
Well, since the article is based on events that happened over the last couple of years, and those events caused *more* ozone depletion, I'd have to say that it doesn't seem at all likely given the evidence.
My take on this is that both sides should be taken with a grain of salt.
And how exactly do you plan on taking out that many people with one grain of salt?!?
Oh...Taken..Not taken out. Well, sure. But if you do make significant progress on your salt grain of mass destruction, let me know. I'll probably contribute a buck to your research.
I think it stems from the back that ABC doesn't show those little commericals anymore, like how a Bill goes to Captial Hill to become a law.
Even if you were kidding, I think there is a lot of truth to this.
I haven't really watched Saturday morning TV for quite a while now, but is there anything even remotely comparable to Schoolhouse Rock being shown these days?
I mean that was real education slipped right past me as cartoons. It was a sneaky trick, but at least I know what conjunctions and interjections are as well as how a bill becomes a law.
Technically, the Moon-Japanese would have to find oil, then establish a dictatorship, kill off a bunch of their own moon-people, invade a neighboring moon-country
Yeah, but don't forget that they would have to do all of that with full US support.
Slashdot Mirror
Modern English usage dictates that one who is an atheist denies the existance of God.
No it doesn't.
Rabid psuedo-Christians have come up with that justification for the sole purpose of attempting to define atheism as a "religious" belief. The pathetic lacking in their own faith is the reason they have the entirely irrational need for this.
The fact is that believing that some invisible super hero in the sky made everything is a choice a lot of people make.
Those of us who are not convinced by any particular interpretation of said super hero are not "believing" that any particular thing is true or not true.
We are all born atheists.
Some people choose to take the path of "belief" for some value of "invisible super hero in the sky".
I didn't
You are looking for the word "agnostic"
No, I am not.
I have no doubt about whether or not some magical invisible fairy is pulling strings in the world.
I absolutely do not think that that is so. Were it so, then he would be either incredibly evil, or a very sick prankster. Just look around you. Don't even bother with some irrational "it's the devil" crap, because, by definition, god invented him, all his impulses, and every method by which he could promote them
Were there some evidence for someone's particular god, however small; I would take that into account.
There isn't, though.
Believe what you will, but do it in good faith. Don't delude yourself by trying to say that not choosing to give any legitimacy to your beliefs indicates the same process that led to your own beliefs.
Aha.
That makes much more sense, but I missed that.
Hopefully, the sig owner will bother to confirm this far off topic point just for closure.
but how can we be sure those little hominids were not capable of interbreeding with us?
At least that's an easy question to answer if we want to.
Clone 'em.
Fuck 'em.
Maths has the "Butterfly Effect" and irrational numbers.
<mathematical_pedantry>
A rational number is a *ratio* of two integers. An irrational number isn't.
</mathematical_pedantry>
I read it in Russian, in a collection of best French SciFi.
;-)
You are one strange Dude.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
OK, I just have to ask because it's been bugging me for a while.
When I think of a range, I think of going to the range in the hills and blowing up old TVs, textbooks, clay pigeons etc.
I certainly wouldn't run out and pick up something we shot out there because there are other people out there, and they might not have noticed me.
So, is it a joke, like your dog would be tied up, hence even more disapointed. Or maybe he's so fast he can dodge bullets.
Or are there "bird dog" ranges where it works differently?
The amjority of what you said seems very reasonable, but:
There hasn't been a hobbit living for at least 400 years, and they sure as shooting didn't leave any descendants.
Before these hobbits were found, I think most people would have been more sure than shooting that there were never any hobbits at all.
I just think that seems like an overly absolute statement.
Ahhh, but you ignore the fact that Christianity is exactly the same.
If not, explain the crusades, the inquisition, the salem witch trials, and the attitude of many (so called) Christians today.
The fundemental claims of an atheist or no more supportable by science than the claims of a theist.
You make a mistake here though.
There are no fundamental claims of atheism.
Theism is the statement that there is a god.
Atheism is simply the lack of that belief (prefix 'a' means without). You, yourself might mean something different when you describe yourself as such, but I don't and that isn't what the word means in and of itself.
The word really couldn't even exist if there wasn't already the other word for it to modify.
Let's also not forget that evolutionism has brought us such choice individiuals as Hitler and Stalin.
Only half right.
Hitler was religious. Stalin was (or at least promoted) atheism.
Schools? Even if you're an old fogey with no kids, educated children are less likely to become ruffians who you have to chase off your yard with a cane.
Thanks for taking away the one freaking thing about getting old that I'm actually looking forward to.
Oh Arlington Heights. In my day (well every day) I work in Vernon Hills, live in Wicker Park and drive even further. Uphill both ways. ;-)
Through waist high snow
Totally.
:-(
I live in Chicago, but I work in the burbs.
Most of the people I work with drive into the burbs from even farther out.
Screw Pace for cutting off my shuttle bus so I can't take Metra anymore
Know anyone who's hiring in the City? Blue line preferred.
I don't recall the name, (years ago), but it was on the East side of the main part of State Street in Santa Barbara. I do distinctly recall it had a wooden balcony covering part of the back of the place. The wooden staircase was on left side as you go in. I remember that because I had to holler for service from the balcony.
Calypso?
Seriously, though: Have you ever thought to yourself, "you know, if things are actually better in the Middle East in three years, I'd have to admit that maybe W was right"? Or is your cutoff 5 years? Or two years? Or is your reconsideration threshold based on a particular event or series of events
Nope.
It doesn't matter in the least whether the situation improves or declines because that is totally irrelevant to our reasons for being there.
For me, it is entirely a question of integrity. Bush has none.
We went in because they pose an imminent threat to the US. because they have massive quantities of WMDs which we know exactly where are.
Because within 45 minutes they can wipe us off the face of the earth.
Those are the resons Bush gave for the invasion.
We know now, and anybody who actually pays attention knew then, that these were bald faced lies.
So whatever the outcome matters not in the least.
We still have no idea why we went in there, although enriching Bush's buddies seems to be the major result so far.
So the fact that you are throwing irrelevant potential side effects out as if they had anything to do with the situation completely destroys your credibility.
If you were confused about the mass murder/love thing in my sig, then you're just not paying attention either.
Go check out the exit polls from the last election.
The majority of people who voted *for* Bush disagree with his economic policies. They disagree with the war and his complete destruction of American integrity by his completely dishonest selling of it.
The agree with him only because they hate fags.
They hate them so much that they chose Bush even though the only difference between him and Kerry on that issue was that Kerry supported state's rights (one of the primary republican planks) while Bush pissed right in the face of it.
These really are pretty simple concepts.
I think that Daiquiri Ice is the worst flavor there - but that's just me.
Dump it in the blender and add rum.
It really is better that way.
Saying otherwise is like saying that atoms don't exist.
;-)
But they don't.
They're just strings vibrating to look like that
Yes, and they've been banned for a (relatively) short period of time. The question is did this "recovery" have more to do with the sun than with our ban of CFCs?
Well, since the article is based on events that happened over the last couple of years, and those events caused *more* ozone depletion, I'd have to say that it doesn't seem at all likely given the evidence.
My take on this is that both sides should be taken with a grain of salt.
And how exactly do you plan on taking out that many people with one grain of salt?!?
Oh...Taken..Not taken out.
Well, sure.
But if you do make significant progress on your salt grain of mass destruction, let me know.
I'll probably contribute a buck to your research.
The difference is, when you and I were kids, Sat-morn was the only place in town to get that toon-fix.
That's a really good point I didn't think about.
I think it stems from the back that ABC doesn't show those little commericals anymore, like how a Bill goes to Captial Hill to become a law.
Even if you were kidding, I think there is a lot of truth to this.
I haven't really watched Saturday morning TV for quite a while now, but is there anything even remotely comparable to Schoolhouse Rock being shown these days?
I mean that was real education slipped right past me as cartoons. It was a sneaky trick, but at least I know what conjunctions and interjections are as well as how a bill becomes a law.
We demand a single government approved freespeech network with all DRM content and no way to turn it off !
Hey, let's also make sure it goes both ways so I can't even think bad thoughts without being called on it!
The idea that everything is Bush's fault got old just a little before the election.
Yes, but the far more ridiculous idea that nothing is his fault got old long before that.
Technically, the Moon-Japanese would have to find oil, then establish a dictatorship, kill off a bunch of their own moon-people, invade a neighboring moon-country
Yeah, but don't forget that they would have to do all of that with full US support.