No God

Posted on
Page
of 12
  • I find all superstition nonsensical, I don't take exception to Christianity in any way.

    You would have to say what it is you feel I am ignorant of, and qualify this opinion, before I could consider you had a point to make, otherwise I will just take this as just an emotive response.

    I never meant to imply you put more weight on christianity, in this thread your cases have mostly been aimed there.

  • I find all superstition nonsensical, I don't take exception to Christianity in any way.

    You would have to say what it is you feel I am ignorant of, and qualify this opinion, before I could consider you had a point to make, otherwise I will just take this as just an emotive response.

    Damn it's like Kirk and Spock tonight...

  • Let's all go and hide before Tynan wakes up.

    damn you, he heard that!

  • I wonder if this will become the longest thread on the forum

  • there's no need to defend another person's belief tynan

    In conversation if someone makes a fallacious claim I feel compelled to challenge that, regardless of who or what it is levelled at.

    If someone were to say that every Muslim is intent on subjugating women's rights I would challenge that idea, If someone were to say that all Christians believe that homosexuals should be hung I would equally challenge that idea as wrong.

    I have no vested interest in defending ether Christianity or Islam, to need a vested interest in defending an idea or statement is, to me, intellectual dishonesty.

  • Cheers for the quick answer, I think your post:

    "but why defend him if you don't support him.
    I won't defend any belief or proponent of any beleif unless i have a vested interest in it."

    . . . pretty much ends any meaningful conversation between us, make of that what you will.

    He's got a point, eyebrows. Do you really believe what you wrote? To use tynan's most used scenario, woud you not step in to try and help (or at least voice your opinion at some point) a homosexual being hanged by religious fundamentalists, or anyone a bit mental for that matter (I mean the persecutors, not the persecuted!)?

    Even if you weren't gay, didn't know any gays, and were ambivalent about the whole issue of differing sexualities, i.e. had no vested interest in homosexuality?

  • Ha! In the time it took me to quote tynan's favourite scenario, he quoted it himself.

    But I used the correct form of the verb 'to hang'. And for that reason, I want to see him deaded up.

  • saying that you don't have a vested interest in something you are so violently defending is to me intellectual dishonesty

    I see it simply, no one- and read enough of dawkins and you'll end up understanding this too, defends someone without a vested interest, even if that vested interest is to either correct a mistake or to put one intellectually over the other.

    therefore you're argument is entirely without merit, in my mind, and so i'm out.

    @ BMMF- i believe my rebuttal is within this post, which came after yours.

  • First they came for the gays...

  • Ha! In the time it took me to quote tynan's favourite scenario, he quoted it himself.

    But I used the correct form of the verb 'to hang'. And for that reason, I want to see him deaded up.

    Sorry I will rewrite that:

    "If someone were to say that all Christians believe that homosexuals should be hang"

    Better ?

    :P

  • First they came for the gays...

    Then the gay cyclists.

  • @hippy, you cnut!

  • Sorry I will rewrite that:

    "If someone were to say that all Christians believe that homosexuals should be hang"

    Better ?

    :P

    Yeah, thats purfikt. ill now prey for you're rezurekshun.

  • but i was not a gay tweed-wearing cyclist, so i did not speak out.

  • saying that you don't have a vested interest in something you are so violently defending is to me intellectual dishonesty

    You are drifting into the realm of nonsense now ! :)

    Who is violently defending anything here ?

    I see it simply, no one- and read enough of dawkins and you'll end up understanding this too, defends someone without a vested interest, even if that vested interest is to either correct a mistake or to put one intellectually over the other.

    therefore you're argument is entirely without merit, in my mind, and so i'm out.

    I will take that as your opinion.

  • Then the gay cyclists.

    According to my (ex) pool team's vice captain,

    "all guys that ride a bike in spandex or whatever must be fucking benders, look how gay he looks".

  • According to my (ex) pool team's vice captain,

    "all guys that ride a bike in spandex or whatever must be fucking benders, look how gay he looks".

    That's the voice of a man with a very clear idea about what gay looks like...

  • That's the voice of a man with a very clear idea of what he'd secretly like to get up to with other men

    arse fixed

  • That's the voice of a man with a very clear idea about what gay looks like...

    he called me gay, after accusing me of failing to chat up the barmaid....very odd logic.

  • arse fixed

    That's what I meant. No need to ram it down people's throats :p

  • he called me gay, after accusing me of failing to chat up the barmaid....very odd logic.

    He wants you badly.

  • He wants you baldy.

    premature hair loss is a cruel subject for a joke.

  • saying that you don't have a vested interest in something you are so violently defending is to me intellectual dishonesty

    I see it simply, no one- and read enough of dawkins and you'll end up understanding this too, defends someone without a vested interest, even if that vested interest is to either correct a mistake or to put one intellectually over the other.

    Is this straight outta Dawkins, then? Forgive my ishnorance, but is this some sort of argument from, like, a Vested Interest Gene (VIG) that determines us to defend vested interests?

  • You are drifting into the realm of nonsense now ! :)

    Who is violently defending anything here ?

    I will take that as your opinion.

    just like you I came back.

    good, i'm glad my lack of vocabulary skills is being used as a device to attack my arguments, i'm sure i'd be better if i had time to read something other than scientific journals.

    yes the second part is my opinion. The point about vested interest, is more scientific fact.

    arguing with you tynan is infuriatingly dull, all you do is repeat your islam homosexual argument and expect that to cover all bases.
    I'm taking everything you've said as your opinion, because its all i ever hear from you on this forum.

    and that is an opinion

  • Is this straight outta Dawkins, then? Forgive my ishnorance, but is this some sort of argument from, like, a Vested Interest Gene (VIG) that determines us to defend vested interests?

    no, but vested interest = self interest= selfishness= selfish gene.

  • Post a reply
    • Bold
    • Italics
    • Link
    • Image
    • List
    • Quote
    • code
    • Preview
About

No God

Posted by Avatar for hippy @hippy

Actions