• 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!

New York Atheists Angry Over 'Heaven' Street Sign Honoring Sept. 11 victims

tessaesque said:
The thing about offense is that it's a choice. Whether they're actually trying to be offended or not, you're making a choice about whether you will be or not. I believe that much of the bible is fiction. I'm not trying to offend you when I say that; I'm expressing my belief. If my belief is offensive to you that is beyong my control.
Click to expand...

They are making a choice as well, and they made the choice first. So why is the onus on me regarding the offense? Hmmm?
 
tessaesque said:
The thing about offense is that it's a choice. Whether they're actually trying to be offended or not, you're making a choice about whether you will be or not. I believe that much of the bible is fiction. I'm not trying to offend you when I say that; I'm expressing my belief. If my belief is offensive to you that is beyong my control.
Click to expand...
He's not talking about the choice to be offended, he's talking about the choice to try to be offensive. People can and do, in fact, choose words and phrases in order to offend other people. One can recognize these choices without actually being offended.
 
American said:
When atheists tell you that your beliefs are fiction and ridiculous or joke about a sky daddy, I think they're trying to be offensive. I don't think there is any doubt about it.
Click to expand...

What is your opinion of other Holy Books? Are you being offensive if you don't accept them as truth?
 
American said:
When atheists tell you that your beliefs are fiction and ridiculous or joke about a sky daddy, I think they're trying to be offensive. I don't think there is any doubt about it.
Click to expand...

Oh, cmon now. Comparing God to Unicorns is JUST LIKE comparing apples to apples.
 
American said:
They are making a choice as well, and they made the choice first. So why is the onus on me regarding the offense? Hmmm?
Click to expand...

How can I express my beliefs without somebody being offended if that person decides that having a personal opinion is offensive? If we're discussing religious belief and I express that I personally believe the bible is fiction, how is that intentionally offensive? It can only be if you cannot separate my ideology from your own. So long as you can separate them, there is no cause for offense. It is your choice to make.
 
Last edited:
American said:
They are making a choice as well, and they made the choice first. So why is the onus on me regarding the offense? Hmmm?
Click to expand...

Because you're supposed to be the one to take the high road. You know, offer the other cheek. Isn't that what you Christians are taught?
 
tessaesque said:
How can I express my beliefs without somebody being offended if that person decides that having a personal opinion is offensive? If we're discussing religious belief and I express that I personally believe the bible is fiction, how is that intentionally offensive? It can only be if you cannot separate my ideology from your own. So long as you can separate them, there is no cause for offense. It is your choice to make.
Click to expand...

If that's as far as it goes, Not a Problem. If you go on to point out I may be mentally unhinged if I do believe the Bible to be the inspired Word of God? Now you're showing your ass.
 
BDBoop said:
If that's as far as it goes, Not a Problem. If you go on to point out I may be mentally unhinged if I do believe the Bible to be the inspired Word of God? Now you're showing your ass.
Click to expand...

Not an implication I've ever made, or tried to make....with anybody who appeared sane. I guess the point I was making is when you say every atheist is offensive, part of what you're saying is that you're offended by every atheist. That's like saying I'm offended by every Christian. Perhaps the problem is with me, not them, at that point.
 
Erod said:
New York Atheists Angry Over 'Heaven' Street Sign Honoring Sept. 11 Victims - FoxNews.com



Ah, yes, here's your American atheist in full form.

Question: If you truly believe there is no such thing as God, and therefore our lives and deaths don't really mean anything, why do you care? Why is this such a big deal? Is this not like scolding people for watching vampire movies, or children for watching Barney?

Or is it......you crave worth and attention and must be acknowledged no matter what.

Atheists are funny. They've created an existence out of nothing. I don't believe in unicorns, but I didn't fashion a title for myself, nor do I practice within a group, to acknowledge that I don't believe in unicorns.
Click to expand...

That's funny. Talk about taking it personally...and it kinda flies in the face of saying Atheism is not a religion. If it weren't why would a sign indicating a different view be so offensive? After all, it's really just a name....the name of a street. How does it differ from these when you think about it:
15 Funniest Street and Roads Names - Oddee.com
 
The Barbarian said:
Okay .. you seem like someone I can at least ask questions of ..
So you believe in evolution … .
Click to expand...

I believe that the scientific method as the best way to determine how the world works. Saying that I "believe in" evolution implies that it is some kind of religious philosophy.

The Barbarian said:
the point I was trying to make .. and apparently failed … is why don't we continue to see forms of evolution from where ever it is that it's claimed we evolved from. What I'm asking .. is once the big brained human formed .. was it just a one shot deal … or did more form 100 … 500 .. 1000 years later .. and why isn't it a continuous cycle.
Click to expand...

It is a continuous set of gradual changes. I'm not so sure that "cycle" is the best term, as that implies a repeating process, like the water cycle.

The Barbarian said:
I'm not taking your post as putting me down .. and your right .. I don't understand evolution because to my simple mind .. it doesn't make sense I look at evolution as a process so why isn't that process repeating it's self ???
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you mean by repeating itself. Evolution is a continuous process that has been going on for an incomprehensible length of time, and has not stopped. There is no reason to expect that human beings are the end result and that evolution is therefore finished. There is some evidence, in fact, that human evolution is accelerating.



The Barbarian said:
I'm not sure you understand what I'm saying . And perhaps I'm using the wrong time frame .. so lets take your genus Astralopithecus example a quick look up . puts that back 4 million years ago .. .so why haven't we found and example of it that is 3 million years old .. then another that is 2 million years old .. yet another that is 1 million years old . Or did the evolution just stop with the appearance of genus Astralopithecus ? If not why didn't something continue to evolve into genus Astralopithecus ??
Click to expand...

The evolution you're talking about is a gradual change, and yes, hominids from 4 million years ago are more primitive - meaning less like modern humans - than are ones from 2 million years ago. Here is some information about the evolution of hominids.

The Barbarian said:
I'm not a religious nut case .. and I question a lot of things .. usually when someone who believes starts pressing me on my believes or the bible .. I have question for them as well . Not because I think they are wrong . . just because I like to question things I don't understand, and when pressed I will freely admit that I don't understand all that is in .. or isn't in the bible, as well.
Click to expand...

Mostly, when people try to refute the theory of Evolution, it is based on an insistence that the Bible must be taken literally, or on a lack of understanding of what evolution is all about.

There is nothing in the theory of evolution that disproves the existence of god. It does run contrary to the idea of taking the Bible literally and insisting that the Earth is only a few thousand years old, and the humans and dinosaurs once co existed. That notion is no more supportable than is the geocentric model of the universe.


The Barbarian said:
just a note on this .. why is it called a theory .. rather then a scientific fact ??
Click to expand...

Here is an explanation of the terms.

Hypothesis: This is an educated guess based upon observation. It is a rational explanation of a single event or phenomenon based upon what is observed, but which has not been proved. Most hypotheses can be supported or refuted by experimentation or continued observation.

Theory: A theory is what one or more hypotheses become once they have been verified and accepted to be true. A theory is an explanation of a set of related observations or events based upon proven hypotheses and verified multiple times by detached groups of researchers. Unfortunately, even some scientists often use the term "theory" in a more colloquial sense, when they really mean to say "hypothesis." That makes its true meaning in science even more confusing to the general public.

In general, both a scientific theory and a scientific law are accepted to be true by the scientific community as a whole. Both are used to make predictions of events. Both are used to advance technology.
Click to expand...
 
tessaesque said:
How can I express my beliefs without somebody being offended if that person decides that having a personal opinion is offensive? If we're discussing religious belief and I express that I personally believe the bible is fiction, how is that intentionally offensive? It can only be if you cannot separate my ideology from your own. So long as you can separate them, there is no cause for offense. It is your choice to make.
Click to expand...
"I believe the Bible is fiction" is separate from "The bible is fiction, you believe in a sky daddy." Let's not pretend that many atheists choose their words with the intent to offend.
 
theplaydrive said:
"I believe the Bible is fiction" is separate from "The bible is fiction, you believe in a sky daddy." Let's not pretend that many atheists choose their words with the intent to offend.
Click to expand...

Has anyone ever said "sky daddy" in the history of DP?

*searching*... EDIT: Thats a negative, only you and American (Christian)

I've heard "invisible man in the sky" or "great surveilance camera in the sky" maybe....
 
Last edited:
Dittohead not! said:
I believe that the scientific method as the best way to determine how the world works. Saying that I "believe in" evolution implies that it is some kind of religious philosophy.



It is a continuous set of gradual changes. I'm not so sure that "cycle" is the best term, as that implies a repeating process, like the water cycle.



I'm not sure what you mean by repeating itself. Evolution is a continuous process that has been going on for an incomprehensible length of time, and has not stopped. There is no reason to expect that human beings are the end result and that evolution is therefore finished. There is some evidence, in fact, that human evolution is accelerating.





The evolution you're talking about is a gradual change, and yes, hominids from 4 million years ago are more primitive - meaning less like modern humans - than are ones from 2 million years ago. Here is some information about the evolution of hominids.



Mostly, when people try to refute the theory of Evolution, it is based on an insistence that the Bible must be taken literally, or on a lack of understanding of what evolution is all about.

There is nothing in the theory of evolution that disproves the existence of god. It does run contrary to the idea of taking the Bible literally and insisting that the Earth is only a few thousand years old, and the humans and dinosaurs once co existed. That notion is no more supportable than is the geocentric model of the universe.




Here is an explanation of the terms.
Click to expand...

Okay .. either I'm still not asking this properly, or for some reason you are avoiding what I am asking.

I'm not asking about man, I'm asking about the species that evolved into man. From what little I know.. most seem to think that we evolved from apes. But you can pick any species you care to, but for the sake of clarity lets stay with apes ..

Now .. we have man .. and we have apes still roaming this planet, so why isn't there apes in some form of that evolutionary process being found even today. Now I understand this is a very long process, but shouldn't that process be continuing? If it's not .. then why ? Did the apes just decide that seeing some had evolved into a higher life form .. that no more needed to? Why did or does the chain of evolution suddenly end? Now understand I'm not talking about man .. I'm talking about apes .. or whatever species anyone chooses to think that man came from.
 
The Barbarian said:
Okay .. either I'm still not asking this properly, or for some reason you are avoiding what I am asking.

I'm not asking about man, I'm asking about the species that evolved into man. From what little I know.. most seem to think that we evolved from apes. But you can pick any species you care to, but for the sake of clarity lets stay with apes ..

Now .. we have man .. and we have apes still roaming this planet, so why isn't there apes in some form of that evolutionary process being found even today. Now I understand this is a very long process, but shouldn't that process be continuing? If it's not .. then why ? Did the apes just decide that seeing some had evolved into a higher life form .. that no more needed to? Why did or does the chain of evolution suddenly end? Now understand I'm not talking about man .. I'm talking about apes .. or whatever species anyone chooses to think that man came from.
Click to expand...

We share a common ancestor with apes, we did not evolve from modern apes.

 
Last edited:
Erod said:
Ah, yes, here's your American atheist in full form.

Question: If you truly believe there is no such thing as God, and therefore our lives and deaths don't really mean anything, why do you care? Why is this such a big deal? Is this not like scolding people for watching vampire movies, or children for watching Barney?

Or is it......you crave worth and attention and must be acknowledged no matter what.

Atheists are funny. They've created an existence out of nothing. I don't believe in unicorns, but I didn't fashion a title for myself, nor do I practice within a group, to acknowledge that I don't believe in unicorns.
Click to expand...

Who said atheists believe that our lives don't mean anything?
 
Lachean said:
Has anyone ever said "sky daddy" in the history of DP?

*searching*... EDIT: Thats a negative, only you and American (Christian)

I've heard "invisible man in the sky" or "great surveilance camera in the sky" maybe....
Click to expand...

In my recollection, it's always been unicorn or some variation thereof.
 
BDBoop said:
In my recollection, it's always been unicorn or some variation thereof.
Click to expand...

In reference to this post and the one you quoted (I'm sorry, too lazy to look on my phone!!) I think Kali said it in the thread about hating liberals or hating conservatives (can't remember which ideology it was).
 
The Barbarian said:
Now .. we have man .. and we have apes still roaming this planet, so why isn't there apes in some form of that evolutionary process being found even today. Now I understand this is a very long process, but shouldn't that process be continuing? If it's not .. then why ? Did the apes just decide that seeing some had evolved into a higher life form .. that no more needed to? Why did or does the chain of evolution suddenly end? Now understand I'm not talking about man .. I'm talking about apes .. or whatever species anyone chooses to think that man came from.
Click to expand...

We share a common ancestor with chimpanzees. Chimps evolved from that common ancestor just as we did. You are arguing some sort of silliness that evolution must continue in one straight line and so you seem to think that evolution should lead to chimps evolving into humans. That just a really bad understanding of evolutionary processes.
 
The Barbarian said:
Okay .. either I'm still not asking this properly, or for some reason you are avoiding what I am asking.

I'm not asking about man, I'm asking about the species that evolved into man. From what little I know.. most seem to think that we evolved from apes. But you can pick any species you care to, but for the sake of clarity lets stay with apes ..

Now .. we have man .. and we have apes still roaming this planet, so why isn't there apes in some form of that evolutionary process being found even today. Now I understand this is a very long process, but shouldn't that process be continuing? If it's not .. then why ? Did the apes just decide that seeing some had evolved into a higher life form .. that no more needed to? Why did or does the chain of evolution suddenly end? Now understand I'm not talking about man .. I'm talking about apes .. or whatever species anyone chooses to think that man came from.
Click to expand...

That isn't exactly the case. We did not evolve from apes as we know them.

We are part of the Great Ape family which is one part of the primate family, much like there are 2 types of feline families. The word "ape" can mean a lot of different things.

In the past, there was a member of the historic Great Ape family who is the common ancestor of humans, and other modern Great Apes. But it was not the same as either. It was a different species that split off into many other species as a result of different adaptive mutations.

So the process is on-going. And there are many ways of classifying organisms. For example, we are most broadly part of Animalia, and more specifically Chordata (having spines), and more specifically Mammalia (mammals), etc.
 
Last edited:
Lachean said:
Has anyone ever said "sky daddy" in the history of DP?

*searching*... EDIT: Thats a negative, only you and American (Christian)

I've heard "invisible man in the sky" or "great surveilance camera in the sky" maybe....
Click to expand...

Yes.

ManofthPeephole said:
I'm not the one demanding you respect my invisible sky-daddy
Click to expand...

but let's not quibble over the details. i'm talking about atheists who clearly choose words and phrases with the intent to offend. this is just one of many.
 
Ikari said:
Because you're supposed to be the one to take the high road. You know, offer the other cheek. Isn't that what you Christians are taught?
Click to expand...

Yeah right, let the atheist take the high road.
 
Erod said:
Question: If you truly believe there is no such thing as God, and therefore our lives and deaths don't really mean anything, why do you care?
Click to expand...

That is the most convoluted tripe I've heard on these boards. Atheist are typically Humanist who believe every life is important, they just don't think God makes those lives important.

Why is this such a big deal? Is this not like scolding people for watching vampire movies, or children for watching Barney?

Or is it......you crave worth and attention and must be acknowledged no matter what.

Atheists are funny. They've created an existence out of nothing. I don't believe in unicorns, but I didn't fashion a title for myself, nor do I practice within a group, to acknowledge that I don't believe in unicorns.
Click to expand...

The reason these people care is the same reason I care. Showing religious favoritism by the state is unconstitutional PERIOD. Its not debatable, its simply a fact.
 
Lachean said:
Has anyone ever said "sky daddy" in the history of DP?

*searching*... EDIT: Thats a negative, only you and American (Christian)

I've heard "invisible man in the sky" or "great surveilance camera in the sky" maybe....
Click to expand...

...flying spaghetti monster, unicorn....
 
Dittohead not! said:
...flying spaghetti monster, unicorn....
Click to expand...

The flying spaghetti monster is not a label for your god, it is an example to show that the inability to disprove a notion is in no way a reason to believe said claim.

I dunno about this unicorn thing, you'll have to quote someone using it in context as a pejorative for your god.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom