Ahh yes! Take out the garbage! Now there is a comment that just oozes substance. Has it ever occurred to you that you are a caricature of yourself MCT?
Anywho, I'm just making accurate observations. I do not have as much free time as you to set up residence here and spend inordinate amounts of time each day debating abstract topics. Even if I did I'm not sure I would do it on an atheist site as I'd be much better served doing so on, say, scienceblogs where I would be conversing with actual scientists rather than a kid who took a class in epistemology. But I can understand your fear of debating such topics on places like those and your preference for doing it here.
I have plenty of substance on this thread. Your observations are anything but accurate. It is not a scientific issue. It is a philosophical one. I do not debate scientific findings, only their relevance to the nature of existence.
Pretty much everything I've read from MCT comes with an explanation, describing how he got to his position.
What more is needed from anybody?
"Useless" came from someone following me and doing nothing but throwing emotional based insults my way. Sorry you had to see that first. Did you really only read the last page and think that the last 142 have nothing to do with certainty? When it turned to politics we, well some of us, took it to here. I like debating all sort of issues, except if there is a god or not, with theists, so this place is often 'perfect' for me, since I don't have to bother with that kind of nonsense (well, to be honest, I still deal with mysticism of other sorts here).
We have a pretty serious difference of opinion, however. I do not think that human empathy demands that we help the less fortunate. I would like to and make a career out of helping less fortunate people, but do not think we should require it from others, by force. I think this leads to the very large mess we have for a government now.
I think the TRULY unfortunate deserve help, but the obligation to do so should not be forced upon someone.
You may have me mistaken for a vegan or vegetarian. I'm not. Animals are great. I love them. And I too, feel bad sometimes, when I eat their muscles. I have been trying to work out where I lie in the don't eat animals thing. I deplore, and often speak out against, hunting and fishing for entertainment, though. I do minimize the meat I eat, both because I love, and have a level of respect for, animals and because animal fat is not the most healthy source of nutrition. But I don't think that animals have or should have the rights that rational humans have, lest we should hold them accountable for their actions. I think local governments, which should have more powers, other than protection, than the federal government could enact wildlife preserves and restrictions on humans being ignoramuses and wasting good animal life.
Valerie, I understand your comment and share the question about where political/religious stuff should reside. If you know, please tell me.
As to finding another place to land, what I do when an individual gets tiresome is block him/her. Keep in mind there are 7,000,000,000 human beings with whom to have discourse and one does not have to put up with .... whatever. Especially on this site because there are some really bright, thoughtful minds at work here. I do hope to read your material and if you move, let me know.
I have also found that men spar differently than women, mostly ... that is a stereotype ... but also my experience.
whether or not we eat animals be on another site?
Preaching to the converted is a waste of time, what you should expect to find here is robust debate about topics that people feel are difficult to discuss within our mostly religious dominated communities. If you expect a bunch of back slapping about how good we are all for being atheist, then maybe some kind of group hug therapy session might be more appropriate for you.
Religion is so pervasive in society that the deeper you look the more of our dogmatic and indoctrinated culture is at least loosely linked to it. For example, Do you not consider that thinking animals are here for us to use, given to us by our generous creator, also that humans are the only creatures with a "soul", these are fairly good justifications for the type of animal abuse and slavery we see all over the world. Wether you agree with the position I hold as a Vegan or not is irrelevant as to weather or not these beliefs at least warrant discussions on an atheist forum. As they relate to this particular thread I would agree we have sometimes gone off on some interesting tangents, but you would have to read all 150 pages to judge the relevance and justification of each post.
Very well said, sir! I think I might be impressed.
There's nothing to suggest the godly being is anything more than strangely misguided wishful thinking.
Really? There is a god that exists in reality? And you have no doubt about this? Where? What is he or she or it like? People's imagination does not qualify as sufficient for the existence of a god, even in jest. Or hyperbole. Maybe in metaphor.
I understand your answer and the context. And by definition, I would say that god is something with supernatural powers. I would say that your definition might also be accurate. But at any rate there is no way an actual god exists, even one created by man. I know that you mean to say that god is necessarily imaginative. But what you wrote is that it exists. Something that exists, is more than an idea on one head. I can think of an invisible pink unicorn, but it cannot exist.
Again, people's imagination does not qualify as sufficient for the existence of a god, even in jest. Or hyperbole.