• 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.

Acts of god

Tigerace117 said:
You aren't open minded; you aren't generous; you certainly aren't classy; and your beaver is pretty much the opposite of good looking.

Your opinion is noted; however, it remains exactly that--- your opinion.
Click to expand...

On behalf of Beaver's everywhere I protest! Compared to you, I am very open minded. Yours rusted closed the day you started believing in imaginary beings and events which never occurred. I am also rational, a claim you cannot honestly make.
 
Tigerace117 said:
There's no reason why. Which is exactly my point.
Click to expand...

That's what I figured. I cannot make and do not want to make anyone share my opinion. I merely express it and watch the close-minded protest the fact I have expressed it. :lamo
 
Realitywins said:
On behalf of Beaver's everywhere I protest! Compared to you, I am very open minded. Yours rusted closed the day you started believing in imaginary beings and events which never occurred. I am also rational, a claim you cannot honestly make.
Click to expand...

You really aren't though buddy. You've decided that your opinion is right, and that everybody else's is wrong, and that's the end of it. You have no actual way to know if the events "never happened"--- and indeed, even many of the people who don't think that God exists admit that there was a historical figure who became known as Jesus--- so you've taken the past of least resistance and declared that it didn't.

Perhaps on other subjects, but blatantly not on this one.

The Beavers can take it up with my Union.
 
Realitywins said:
That's what I figured. I cannot make and do not want to make anyone share my opinion. I merely express it and watch the close-minded protest the fact I have expressed it. :lamo
Click to expand...

You clearly do, hence your support of the actions of oppressive regimes such as Cuba.
 
Tigerace117 said:
You really aren't though buddy. You've decided that your opinion is right, and that everybody else's is wrong, and that's the end of it. You have no actual way to know if the events "never happened"--- and indeed, even many of the people who don't think that God exists admit that there was a historical figure who became known as Jesus--- so you've taken the past of least resistance and declared that it didn't.

Perhaps on other subjects, but blatantly not on this one.

The Beavers can take it up with my Union.
Click to expand...

Sadly for your close-minded view, history disagrees, science disagrees and archeology disagrees. I have posted many links proving this in other threads which you doubtless refused to read for fear you have to face the reality that your beliefs are unfounded in fact, history or science.
 
Realitywins said:
Sadly for your close-minded view, history disagrees, science disagrees and archeology disagrees. I have posted many links proving this in other threads which you doubtless refused to read for fear you have to face the reality that your beliefs are unfounded in fact, history or science.
Click to expand...

Science hasn't proven or disproven anything about God, so that's false.

History shows that your claims are inherently false, as I have repeatedly shown on several threads, so that's false.

As for archaeology.....only the lunatic fringe agrees with your claim. So that's false.

Unlike you, I feel no need to patronize the lunatic fringe in order to try to validate my opinion.
 
Tigerace117 said:
Science hasn't proven or disproven anything about God, so that's false.

History shows that your claims are inherently false, as I have repeatedly shown on several threads, so that's false.

As for archaeology.....only the lunatic fringe agrees with your claim. So that's false.

Unlike you, I feel no need to patronize the lunatic fringe in order to try to validate my opinion.
Click to expand...

One might be forgiven for observing your are part of what you claim not to patronize. You deny facts, science and history in favour of mythology. You admit it. That is not rational.
 
Realitywins said:
One might be forgiven for observing your are part of what you claim not to patronize. You deny facts, science and history in favour of mythology. You admit it. That is not rational.
Click to expand...

Hey to break it to you buddy, but no, pointing out the many flaws in your claims does not make one "part of the radical fringe". Claiming that Jesus never existed, however, patently does as those who study the subject--- even other atheists--- consider that claim to be false.

As I've stated before, neither science nor history has stated anything to support your claim.

You have decided your opinion is a fact, and you can't handle the fact that your opinion is nothing more than that--- an opinion.
 
Realitywins said:
Since there are demonstrably no gods, it is past time a class-action suite by people denied insurance coverage for "acts of god", took the matter to court. This would best be done in Canada where the courts are not stacked in favour of primitive superstitious beliefs.

Insurance companies then would be forced to prove the existence of gods or pay up.
Click to expand...
As if this joke doesn’t highlight the problems with our law system. Lawyers and judges more interested in technical language issues then the spirit of the law. It actually disgusts me.

But funny, funny ~ as a atheist you should be freed from your contracts.

As for your sentiment (insurance should pay up) I am so glad your in favour of making insurance premiums so high they are not available to 95% of your fellow citizens. That would be wonderful :roll:

Realitywins said:
While other people like me, open-minded, generous, classy and good looking have been murdered, raped torn to pieces through the ages by people like you for merely being right about your mythology.
Click to expand...
I just hope you remember it was moderate, open-minded, generous, classy and rational believers who argued and defended your rights to be open up about your beliefs or lack their of. And if you ever find yourself in a situation where the shoe is on the other foot, please extend the same curtesy and don’t put us all to the stake.
 
Tigerace117 said:
Hey to break it to you buddy, but no, pointing out the many flaws in your claims does not make one "part of the radical fringe". Claiming that Jesus never existed, however, patently does as those who study the subject--- even other atheists--- consider that claim to be false.

As I've stated before, neither science nor history has stated anything to support your claim.

You have decided your opinion is a fact, and you can't handle the fact that your opinion is nothing more than that--- an opinion.
Click to expand...

You are clearly not a reasoned and rational person.
 
In regards to this thread, I agree with the beaver in that a legal agreement should not have any vague references in it. And act of god is pretty damn vague. If I want to be covered for earthquakes, I have to specifically ask for and pay for a it. If one party wishes to exclude or include something from or in a policy or whatever kind of agreement it should be specifically named. How hard can that be?
Although I seem to remember some insurance companies in Katrina tried to deny claims for water damage as flood damage. Only there was no flooding, the hurricane torn the roof off and then the rain caused the water damage. Home insurance normally covers storm damage. Flood insurance is always purchased separately.
 
Conaeolos said:
As if this joke doesn’t highlight the problems with our law system. Lawyers and judges more interested in technical language issues then the spirit of the law. It actually disgusts me.

But funny, funny ~ as a atheist you should be freed from your contracts.

As for your sentiment (insurance should pay up) I am so glad your in favour of making insurance premiums so high they are not available to 95% of your fellow citizens. That would be wonderful :roll:


I just hope you remember it was moderate, open-minded, generous, classy and rational believers who argued and defended your rights to be open up about your beliefs or lack their of. And if you ever find yourself in a situation where the shoe is on the other foot, please extend the same curtesy and don’t put us all to the stake.
Click to expand...

Nice xian attitude. Rather see people left destitute through no fault of their own, get screwed by insurance companies than get what they contracted for.

Non-believers had had to fight tooth and nail for the right to speak their mind about primitive superstitions and those who believe them. Throughout history, non-believer have been the subject of genocide (as some are today), murder, rape, torture, in short all the vile and repugnant things which the xian bible, among other primitive belief books, advocates, encourages and promotes. So don't give me that clap-trap abut believers standing up for the rights of non-believers. You and your associates are doubtless that gullible, but I am not.
 
Realitywins said:
You are clearly not a reasoned and rational person.
Click to expand...

You clearly base "reasoned and rational" on whether or not somebody supports your opinion. Which is the exact opposite of that.
 
Realitywins said:
Since there are demonstrably no gods, it is past time a class-action suite by people denied insurance coverage for "acts of god", took the matter to court. This would best be done in Canada where the courts are not stacked in favour of primitive superstitious beliefs.

Insurance companies then would be forced to prove the existence of gods or pay up.
Click to expand...

"Acts of God" however have a legal definition under the law and any decent lawyer would know that defending their client against a frivolous lawsuit. Your home owner's or business property insurance won't exclude all "Acts of God" because you then would not be insured against fire caused by lightning or wind, hail, or many of the things you buy insurance to cover.

I doubt any insurance policy includes the phrase 'acts of God'.

The best insurance policies cover 'all perils" other than what they specifically state will not be covered. What they normally exclude would be:

--Ordinance or law: such as demolition or construction required to bring your house up to code.
--Earth movement: such as earthquakes, shockwaves, sinkholes, landslides and mudflows.
--Water damage: such as floods, sewer back-ups and water that seeps through the foundation.
--Power failure
--Neglect: meaning you failed to take reasonable means to save your property during or after a loss.
--War: including undeclared war and civil war.
--Nuclear hazard
--Intentional loss: meaning something you did on purpose with the intent to cause a loss.
--Governmental action: such as the destruction, confiscation or seizure of covered property by any governmental or public authority.
--Loss to property: resulting from faulty zoning, bad repair or workmanship, faulty construction materials and defective maintenance.

You can buy supplemental insurance such as flood insurance or earthquake insurance however.
 
Realitywins said:
See people left destitute through no fault of their own, get screwed by insurance companies than get what they contracted for.
Click to expand...
If the event is spelled out in the contract then it is by definition not an “act of God”. So I am not sure how see my claim as leaving people getting screw by what they are contracted about. I just also don’t think people should be let out of a good faith contracts without extenuating circumstances or illegality. If insurance companies were mandated to cover every disasters without limitation then the premiums would have to reflect that. I don’t think good people should ever be barred from insurance for the risks they take on. It is moral to offer people the ability to make good faith contracts.

As for people left destitute through no fault of their own. That is a reason we have charity. Tragedy is apart of the human condition, whether you believe in god or not as such we help each other out when there is an act of God. All Voluntarily!

Non-believers had had to fight tooth and nail for the right to speak their mind
Click to expand...
As did we all. In case you don’t know some people have a similar attitude as you toward belief that are different than their own. If they do not see them as logical then anyone who holds them is stupid and not deserving as the respect of a fellow who does.(It works the same for non-belief)

Throughout history, non-believer have been the subject of genocide (as some are today), murder, rape, torture, in short all the vile and repugnant things which the xian bible, among other primitive belief books, advocates, encourages and promotes.
Click to expand...
As are x-ians. Your equating a human condition to your sub-group. Atheists are no more oppressed than say Jews as an example. Human get obsessed with a variety of justifications.

So don't give me that clap-trap abut believers standing up for the rights of non-believers. You and your associates are doubtless that gullible, but I am not.
Click to expand...
No I and many other believers stand for your right to believe or not believe whatever strikes your fancy . That is a fact. You will be judged on your actions not your beliefs. Now there are many people who believe and don’t believe that are thought police…a common foe although I starting to get the impression you may be part of that camp.
 
Conaeolos said:
If the event is spelled out in the contract then it is by definition not an “act of God”. So I am not sure how see my claim as leaving people getting screw by what they are contracted about. I just also don’t think people should be let out of a good faith contracts without extenuating circumstances or illegality. If insurance companies were mandated to cover every disasters without limitation then the premiums would have to reflect that. I don’t think good people should ever be barred from insurance for the risks they take on. It is moral to offer people the ability to make good faith contracts.

As for people left destitute through no fault of their own. That is a reason we have charity. Tragedy is apart of the human condition, whether you believe in god or not as such we help each other out when there is an act of God. All Voluntarily!


As did we all. In case you don’t know some people have a similar attitude as you toward belief that are different than their own. If they do not see them as logical then anyone who holds them is stupid and not deserving as the respect of a fellow who does.(It works the same for non-belief)


As are x-ians. Your equating a human condition to your sub-group. Atheists are no more oppressed than say Jews as an example. Human get obsessed with a variety of justifications.


No I and many other believers stand for your right to believe or not believe whatever strikes your fancy . That is a fact. You will be judged on your actions not your beliefs. Now there are many people who believe and don’t believe that are thought police…a common foe although I starting to get the impression you may be part of that camp.
Click to expand...

Phooey. I don't care what you believe, just keep your unfounded beliefs out of my life and the lives of those who are more rational. xians were not persecuted and are not persecuted half so much as they have persecuted others through the centuries and through today where they hate people for the way they are born and want to tell women what to do with their bodies. Believe that primitive crap all you like, but stop trying to impose your hate-filled and hateful beliefs upon others. That goes for all other religions as well.
 
Realitywins said:
Phooey. I don't care what you believe
Click to expand...
That may well be true, but I am not the one posting in the affirmative accusing another of being stupid and "getting into my life" because they hold a belief I disagree with.

just keep your unfounded beliefs out of my life and the lives of those who are more rational.
Click to expand...
Well as nice as it would be to live in a world were everyone thinks like us. We don’t live in that world ,which means we interact and we have to come up with common rules of conduct. We need to work together and to interact. We need to share a society. So my beliefs are going to affect your life at times just as your belief are going to affect me at times. In that discourse I am sure come to an understanding even if it both of us end up a little unhappy.

xians were not persecuted
Click to expand...
That is so absurd as not to warrant a response, you even contradict it in your own next statement.

are not persecuted half so much as they have persecuted others
Click to expand...
So you want to hold me accountable for the actions of my ancestors who may or may not have believed what I do because we share a label?

Communism an atheistic system has killed what ~94 million. Are you suppose to be accountable for that just because you happen to not believe in god like them? That’s absurd.

If we counted every abortion as murder. How many babies have been murdered in the name “just being fetus” ~1.72 billion… are you accountable for that just because happen to be of an certain opinion on abortion? Of course not!

You are seeing a persecution which is not there.

they hate people for the way they are born
Click to expand...
I can assume your talking the belief “homosexuality is a sin”.

“Eating pork is a sin" in some religions does that mean people who believe that hate everyone who eats pork? That absurd.

Some people are born with disorders which we fix all the time. The only difference with homosexuality is that our modern century did a cost/benefit on the matter and it was concluded homosexuality was harmless, so we made law to protect the government from blocking it. Back in the day, people were a little more free to enforce their own perfect on others. The results were why we made laws to protect those we disagree with: to encourage peace.

If you think atheism is why “homosexuality” has been freed from the status of a mental disorder & being illegal. That absurd. There is nothing about a belief “homosexuality is sinful” that would make someone not support the ideals of laws which protect those conducting harmless behaviours. We may even find those behaviours immoral. That does not mean however we don't see value in a laws which protects peoples right of freewill.

want to tell women what to do with their bodies.
Click to expand...
I can assume your talking abortion.

A woman can do whatever she wants with her body. That thing she calls a fetus, we call a human being and we think killing that human being is murder. Currently legal murder, but murder none the less. If you are honestly saying that it makes you rational to declare a form of life superior to another your on the slipperiest slope ever. The fact you don't think there are atheists who believe abortion is wrong is naive.

There are many people in this world who disagree with laws legalizing abortion and you don't see them going on some upraising, do you? So back your horses, there is a difference between having zeal on a subject and being radical or a persecutor.

Believe that primitive crap all you like, but stop trying to impose your hate-filled and hateful beliefs upon others.
Click to expand...
Go make a nation outlawing religion [although I pretty sure some Scandinaviain country reports basically being atheistic, so you might just prefer it there]. Until then you stuck in a nation who has believers and unbelievers and it about time you stop framing having a different opinion and different values as making people who disagree with you a persecutor. That’s call a persecution complex. It use to be a christian/jewish thing. Guess you got jealous :2razz:
 
Last edited:
Conaeolos said:
That may well be true, but I am not the one posting in the affirmative accusing another of being stupid and "getting into my life" because they hold a belief I disagree with.


Well as nice as it would be to live in a world were everyone thinks like us. We don’t live in that world ,which means we interact and we have to come up with common rules of conduct. We need to work together and to interact. We need to share a society. So my beliefs are going to affect your life at times just as your belief are going to affect me at times. In that discourse I am sure come to an understanding even if it both of us end up a little unhappy.


That is so absurd as not to warrant a response, you even contradict it in your own next statement.


So you want to hold me accountable for the actions of my ancestors who may or may not have believed what I do because we share a label?

Communism an atheistic system has killed what ~94 million. Are you suppose to be accountable for that just because you happen to not believe in god like them? That’s absurd.

If we counted every abortion as murder. How many babies have been murdered in the name “just being fetus” ~1.72 billion… are you accountable for that just because happen to be of an certain opinion on abortion? Of course not!

You are seeing a persecution which is not there.


I can assume your talking the belief “homosexuality is a sin”.

“Eating pork is a sin" in some religions does that mean people who believe that hate everyone who eats pork? That absurd.

Some people are born with disorders which we fix all the time. The only difference with homosexuality is that our modern century did a cost/benefit on the matter and it was concluded homosexuality was harmless, so we made law to protect the government from blocking it. Back in the day, people were a little more free to enforce their own perfect on others. The results were why we made laws to protect those we disagree with: to encourage peace.

If you think atheism is why “homosexuality” has been freed from the status of a mental disorder & being illegal. That absurd. There is nothing about a belief “homosexuality is sinful” that would make someone not support the ideals of laws which protect those conducting harmless behaviours. We may even find those behaviours immoral. That does not mean however we don't see value in a laws which protects peoples right of freewill.


I can assume your talking abortion.

A woman can do whatever she wants with her body. That thing she calls a fetus, we call a human being and we think killing that human being is murder. Currently legal murder, but murder none the less. If you are honestly saying that it makes you rational to declare a form of life superior to another your on the slipperiest slope ever. The fact you don't think there are atheists who believe abortion is wrong is naive.

There are many people in this world who disagree with laws legalizing abortion and you don't see them going on some upraising, do you? So back your horses, there is a difference between having zeal on a subject and being radical or a persecutor.


Go make a nation outlawing religion [although I pretty sure some Scandinaviain country reports basically being atheistic, so you might just prefer it there]. Until then you stuck in a nation who has believers and unbelievers and it about time you stop framing having a different opinion and different values as making people who disagree with you a persecutor. That’s call a persecution complex. It use to be a christian/jewish thing. Guess you got jealous :2razz:
Click to expand...

Wow! Small wonder religion brings so much pain and suffering when it's slaves can rationalize it so easily. But there is good news on the phoney religion front: Empty Temples. Thanks in good part to the internet, more and more people are seeing through the lies all religions depend upon for their existence. Education has always been religion's greatest enemy.
 
Realitywins said:
Since there are demonstrably no gods, it is past time a class-action suite by people denied insurance coverage for "acts of god", took the matter to court. This would best be done in Canada where the courts are not stacked in favour of primitive superstitious beliefs.

Insurance companies then would be forced to prove the existence of gods or pay up.
Click to expand...

Stupid post. It is a figurative not literal term.

Don't like the term, then don't make a claim.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom