• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Interesting read...

It is interesting in the way it is constructed, but it is based upon some false assumptions and hubris.

People who question the existence of God are perfectly capable of living moral, and even exemplary lives based upon kindness and charity towards others, so characterizing them as somehow inherently greedy, selfish and immoral is dishonest.

I reject the dishonesty.
 
Gardener said:
It is interesting in the way it is constructed, but it is based upon some false assumptions and hubris.

People who question the existence of God are perfectly capable of living moral, and even exemplary lives based upon kindness and charity towards others, so characterizing them as somehow inherently greedy, selfish and immoral is dishonest.

I reject the dishonesty.
Click to expand...

And I reject your rejection by reading far to much into an interesting play on words.
 
Black Dog said:
And I reject your rejection by reading far to much into an interesting play on words.
Click to expand...

and I reject your rejection of my rejection, because it is quite clearly written from the standpoint of a theist who is out to tar non theists. For instance, the notion "the more you have the happier you will be" is hardly the inevitable byproduct of a mind that questions the existence of God, and the statement "people can do whatever they please" suggests something that is downright sociopathic. It is quite possible to engage in moral reasoning without the belief of God.

One could just as easily write something similar from the standpoint of a non theist implying theists are silly and superstitious, and pieces such as this act to lay gown a gauntlet rather than really encourage respectful discussion. Sure, there is some cleverness to it, but the intent is disrespectful.
 
Gardener said:
It is interesting in the way it is constructed, but it is based upon some false assumptions and hubris.

People who question the existence of God are perfectly capable of living moral, and even exemplary lives based upon kindness and charity towards others, so characterizing them as somehow inherently greedy, selfish and immoral is dishonest.

I reject the dishonesty.
Click to expand...

It works if you believe atheists are the opposite of Christians. That's not the case though.
 
Gardener said:
and I reject your rejection of my rejection, because it is quite clearly written from the standpoint of a theist who is out to tar non theists. For instance, the notion "the more you have the happier you will be" is hardly the inevitable byproduct of a mind that questions the existence of God, and the statement "people can do whatever they please" suggests something that is downright sociopathic. It is quite possible to engage in moral reasoning without the belief of God.

One could just as easily write something similar from the standpoint of a non theist implying theists are silly and superstitious, and pieces such as this act to lay gown a gauntlet rather than really encourage respectful discussion. Sure, there is some cleverness to it, but the intent is disrespectful.
Click to expand...

No...

sawyerloggingon said:
Oh boy, more Christian bashing.:roll:
Click to expand...

Mountains out of mole hills. It is not an attack on anyone.
 
Aren't you busy bashing Christians on the pope Francis thread?
 
Gardener said:
and I reject your rejection of my rejection, because it is quite clearly written from the standpoint of a theist who is out to tar non theists. For instance, the notion "the more you have the happier you will be" is hardly the inevitable byproduct of a mind that questions the existence of God, and the statement "people can do whatever they please" suggests something that is downright sociopathic. It is quite possible to engage in moral reasoning without the belief of God.

One could just as easily write something similar from the standpoint of a non theist implying theists are silly and superstitious, and pieces such as this act to lay gown a gauntlet rather than really encourage respectful discussion. Sure, there is some cleverness to it, but the intent is disrespectful.
Click to expand...

Kind of a knee-jerk reaction to this. I have made bold two parts of your reply so that I may address them both. First, both uses of "the more you have the happier you will be" are meant to be negative. Up, down, or sideways, it always reads that way. Second, "people can do whatever they please" was followed by "eternal consequences" for a reason. It's not suggesting atheists believe they can do whatever they please, they just don't believe there are "eternal consequences", which is just factually true. Nowhere was it implying that atheists can't/don't engage in moral reasoning.

Put down the pitchfork, the beast of Christianity isn't coming after our atheist village.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
"It is ridiculous to think" is not Christian bashing?
Click to expand...


Not the way it is read.

I think the fact that you and Gardener has two completely different viewpoints on just whom this writing offends or mocks is an example of just how great the writing is.
 
Chaddelamancha said:
Not the way it is read.

I think the fact that you and Gardener has two completely different viewpoints on just whom this writing offends or mocks is an example of just how great the writing is.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I found it intresting and even entertaining in the way it plays with both philosophies.
 
Chaddelamancha said:
Kind of a knee-jerk reaction to this. I have made bold two parts of your reply so that I may address them both. First, both uses of "the more you have the happier you will be" are meant to be negative. Up, down, or sideways, it always reads that way. Second, "people can do whatever they please" was followed by "eternal consequences" for a reason. It's not suggesting atheists believe they can do whatever they please, they just don't believe there are "eternal consequences", which is just factually true. Nowhere was it implying that atheists can't/don't engage in moral reasoning.

Put down the pitchfork, the beast of Christianity isn't coming after our atheist village.
Click to expand...

The more you have, the happier you will be is a seperate statement between two other statements when read from the top. It's a declarative statement by the hypothetical atheist.
 
If anything, the "atheists" view is completely wrong.
 
Chaddelamancha said:
Not the way it is read.

I think the fact that you and Gardener has two completely different viewpoints on just whom this writing offends or mocks is an example of just how great the writing is.
Click to expand...

How can you read, "it is ridiculous to think" as anything but Christian bashing? How do you interpret that in a way that is not negative?
 
Have you even read beyond that line? It reads:

"It is ridiculous to think that everything is fine. But with God, there is freedom to be who I want to be."

Show me where the Christian bashing is in those lines.


sawyerloggingon said:
How can you read, "it is ridiculous to think" as anything but Christian bashing? How do you interpret that in a way that is not negative?
Click to expand...
 
sawyerloggingon said:
How can you read, "it is ridiculous to think" as anything but Christian bashing? How do you interpret that in a way that is not negative?
Click to expand...




Moderator's Warning:
The OP has been mod-reviewed and has been determined to NOT be Christian-bashing. We now return you to your regularly scheduled programming. On BBC 2, there is a documentary on the invention of irony...
 
I find both those who believe in God or not both tend to mischaracterize the other. I likely notice the comments by atheists more given I believe in God, and I always say that is not me when they describe those who believe in God's mindset. The OP is sort of clever but it doesn't fit me either. I don't walk around feeling I am lost or all of us are deserving of hell.
 
Chaddelamancha said:
Have you even read beyond that line? It reads:

"It is ridiculous to think that everything is fine. But with God, there is freedom to be who I want to be."

Show me where the Christian bashing is in those lines.
Click to expand...


I stopped reading at the line that said "It is ridiculous to think" and you can't defend that can you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom