Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zargabaath)
    No she doesn't, stop twisting it. She said she refuses to take it as evidence.
    So what type of evidence will placate her?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by StrawbAri)
    All right. Although it's best to actually read up on these things as it will help in future arguments. People should have an idea about the dogma they're arguing against. It's why I only respect people like Plantagenet Crown (There are others but I can't remember their names). Otherwise I don't really take the arguments of some atheists on here seriously.

    Also please keep in mind that human beings are inherently evil, selfish and greedy. Because there is no religion in a state that doesn't mean that everyone will live harmoniously and happily. There will still be murder, corruption, rape etc. Which is why secular states are much better imo. People get to keep their beliefs (so long as they aren't harming anyone or proselytising) and those beliefs don't interfere with the politics of the state. It's a win win for everyone.
    Agreed but wouldn't it be lovely to rule out the possibility of someone killing something because of their religion?




    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by StrawbAri)
    All right. Although it's best to actually read up on these things as it will help in future arguments. People should have an idea about the dogma they're arguing against. It's why I only respect people like Plantagenet Crown (There are others but I can't remember their names). Otherwise I don't really take the arguments of some atheists on here seriously.
    The same guy that believes in reincarnation, hasn't a shred of evidence for it (but there was a claim that he was previously a dung beetle), and then calls out religious people for believing in stuff without evidence? And then, on top of that, he labels them hypocrites?


    Are you sure we are talking about the same Planting Crows?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Plantagenet Crown)
    [/b]
    Nonsense, like many muslims here, you seem to be confusing criticism with hate, and they are clearly not the same thing. The ones who spew real hate (i.e. homosexuals are immoral, kuffar are evil and going to hell, adulterers will be punished, sex with slaves is allowed etc) are mostly muslims.



    What do you mean by ideals into place? Atheism isn't a religion or ideology and hence has no "ideals". And most atheists aren't for banning religion or deporting muslims, don't conflate the views of a loony few to everyone.

    And it's pointless to come onto a debate forum and then tell people to do something else. If you don't like what you read here than why are you here?
    There's very distinct difference between criticism and mockery/hate which is the common narrative on here so maybe you're the one who is confusing the 2.

    I know those loony people are the minority but since they want to do the 'paint everyone with the same brush' thing I will do the same to them.

    There is no debating going on most of the time, its usually the age old technique of throwing insults and accusations at each other from both parties, getting some reps here and there and repeating the same sh*t everyday.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by saeed97)
    There's very distinct difference between criticism and mockery/hate which is the common narrative on here so maybe you're the one who is confusing the 2.
    Mockery =/= hate. Mockery is in fact a very useful type of criticism and approved by freedom of speech, hate speech isn't.

    There is no debating going on most of the time, its usually the age old technique of throwing insults and accusations at each other from both parties, getting some reps here and there and repeating the same sh*t everyday.
    You must be reading a different forum then because in my experience the people who just come here and throw around insults are in the tiny minority. Most people come here and at least try to make coherent points. But many religious people seem to think that those who call an aspect of a religion illogical, hateful and backwards are just throwing insults, when in fact all those things are valid criticisms of religion.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Terry Tibbs)
    The religious sympathies you are spouting throughout the thread? Maybe those? What's absurd is that you're so hard pressed at defending religion and complain when someone doesn't "back up their facts", because backing up facts is so commonplace in religion isn't it. No need to backtrack on your assertions because tbh seems like the only one running away from a debate is you.
    I strongly defend that in which i believe in in the same way i hope you defend that in which you strongly believe in. And I am very well aware that both parties suck at debating and backing up statements simply because most people here thing they know more than they actually do (that most definitely includes me) but when someone is claiming that i am cherry picking and i asked for them to prove it they didnt lead to my disappointment, so stop making it out as if im running away. Thank you.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Errm16)
    So what type of evidence will placate her?
    I don't understand the question. Evidence is evidence, real observed data and calculations made from the data. Taken as part of a peer reviewed study. I shouldn't have to explain the scientific method to you, it's secondary school to GCSE level science.

    I believe is a hypothesis. A hypothesis isn't evidence, it's a claim.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Errm16)
    The same guy that believes in reincarnation, hasn't a shred of evidence for it (but there was a claim that he was previously a dung beetle), and then calls out religious people for believing in stuff without evidence? And then, on top of that, he labels them hypocrites?
    Incorrect. I have said, many times here, that I have no issue with people believing things due to faith, I do so myself. The issue comes when people claim there is empirical/scientific evidence for their claims.

    Are you sure we are talking about the same Planting Crows?
    With a name like loosestool, if anyone's a dung beetle here, it's you
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zargabaath)
    I don't understand the question. Evidence is evidence, real observed data and calculations made from the data. Taken as part of a peer reviewed study. I shouldn't have to explain the scientific method to you, it's secondary school to GCSE level science.

    I believe is a hypothesis. A hypothesis isn't evidence, it's a claim.
    So people shouldn't believe anything until it's been absolutely confirmed beyond any doubt?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Plantagenet Crown)
    Mockery =/= hate. Mockery is in fact a very useful type of criticism and approved by freedom of speech, hate speech isn't.



    You must be reading a different forum then because in my experience the people who just come here and throw around insults are in the tiny minority. Most people come here and at least try to make coherent points. But many religious people seem to think that those who call an aspect of a religion illogical, hateful and backwards are just throwing insults, when in fact all those things are valid criticisms of religion.
    Yes, but mockery very easily can become hateful which has occurred plenty of times. And people are free to spew hate speech but they should label it for what it is and not pretend its criticism.

    Nope, most people on here are young, ignorant people (me included) who think that we know best (which we dont). This lack of knowledge and wisdom is what has caused poor arguments to arise and soon turns into a sh*t fest real quick, criticise me to your hearts content but dont think that i will sit there and take it silently.
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by saeed97)
    I strongly defend that in which i believe in in the same way i hope you defend that in which you strongly believe in. And I am very well aware that both parties suck at debating and backing up statements simply because most people here thing they know more than they actually do (that most definitely includes me) but when someone is claiming that i am cherry picking and i asked for them to prove it they didnt hence my disappointment. So stop making it out as if im running away. Thank you.
    Appreciate the honesty but it's mainly one party.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Terry Tibbs)
    Appreciate the honesty but it's mainly one party.
    Lets be extra honest, its most defiantly both parties.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Plantagenet Crown)
    Incorrect. I have said, many times here, that I have no issue with people believing things due to faith, I do so myself. The issue comes when people claim there is empirical/scientific evidence for their claims.
    Defending reincarnation without any evidence and then calling out other people for doing the same.

    Yes, hypocrite (or should I say Munafiq - given how taken you are with Arabic at the minute) is not a word to describe you?

    With a name like loosestool, if anyone's a dung beetle here, it's you
    I hear dung beetles have poor eyesight. Guess that was a trait carried over from your previous incarnation?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by saeed97)
    Yes, but mockery very easily can become hateful which has occurred plenty of times. And people are free to spew hate speech but they should label it for what it is and not pretend its criticism.
    So people shouldn't be allowed to mock just because it may become hateful, but muslims should be allowed to post verses on the ISOC and elsewhere that are undeniably hateful, but that's OK because it comes from scripture?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Errm16)
    Defending reincarnation without any evidence and then calling out other people for doing the same.
    No it isn't. I have made no claim reincarnation is backed up by empirical evidence or that it's undeniable because it's "God's word".

    Yes, hypocrite (or should I say Munafiq - given how taken you are with Arabic at the minute) is not a word to describe you?
    You're a munafiq? Gosh, tell me stuff I didn't already know...

    I hear dung beetles have poor eyesight. Guess that was a trait carried over from your previous incarnation?
    Oops, you seem to be projecting again.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by saeed97)
    There's very distinct difference between criticism and mockery/hate which is the common narrative on here so maybe you're the one who is confusing the 2.

    I know those loony people are the minority but since they want to do the 'paint everyone with the same brush' thing I will do the same to them.

    There is no debating going on most of the time, its usually the age old technique of throwing insults and accusations at each other from both parties, getting some reps here and there and repeating the same sh*t everyday.
    Critisism, mockery and hate speech are all different.

    Critisism - "Your belief is incorrect, here is some evidence to show that creationism is false." Nothing wrong here

    Mockery - "Your a moron for following this belief." Nothing wrong here

    Hate speech - "Anyone who holds this belief should be murdered, shunned and/or is an inferior being to those who don't". This is where the problem begins.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Plantagenet Crown)
    No it isn't. I have made no claim reincarnation is backed up by empirical evidence or that it's undeniable because it's "God's word".

    You're a munafiq? Gosh, tell me stuff I didn't already know...

    Oops, you seem to be projecting again.
    The lady do doth protest too much, me thinks.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChickenMadness)
    you're being silly =)
    no I'm really not - communitarian values don't come from a government forcing people to pay more taxes in exchange for welfare. in that kind of system you may even harbour less communitarianism if people aren't happy with paying people they don't want to
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Errm16)
    The lady do doth protest too much, me thinks.
    More projecting :mmm:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Plantagenet Crown)
    So people shouldn't be allowed to mock just because it may become hateful, but muslims should be allowed to post verses on the ISOC and elsewhere that are undeniably hateful, but that's OK because it comes from scripture?
    Of course not, this is not a political/religious site so imo all kinds of mockery and hate speech, and other things of the sorts which will most likely cause tensions and divisions here should be banned completely. Should people want to do such things then there are plenty of other forums which cater for their needs.
 
 
 
Poll
Is the Big Bang theory correct?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.