| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Bill McGinnis" |
| Date: |
30 Nov 2003 01:30:23 AM |
| Object: |
ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM |
ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM
By Bill McGinnis, Public Domain
A person's religion is the sum total of his beliefs about God and the
supernatural. Christianity, Judaism, and Islam are the three largest
"monotheistic" religions, with belief one God, Creator Of The
Universe.
Some religions are "polytheistic," with belief in many gods, each with
different functions.
Atheism is the religion whose belief about God is that there is no
God.
Some Atheists, for their own political reasons, assert that Atheism is
not a religion but instead is the total absence of religion. This
allows them to spread their Atheistic beliefs freely in societies
which insist on "separation of church and state."
But this is like saying that "black," (which physicists define as the
total absence of color) is not a color. The car I drive is a big, old
Chevrolet, whose color is black. In common practice throughout the
world, "black" is understood to be a color, despite the technical
definition of the physicists. Likewise, "Atheism" is a religion,
despite any technical definitions to the contrary.
If black is a color, then Atheism is a religion.
If Atheism is a religion, then it must be subject to the same legal
restrictions imposed by governments on all other religions. In
particular, in the United States, the teaching of Atheism must be
prohibited wherever the teaching of Christianity is prohibited.
But where is Atheism being taught? Atheism is being taught, by
default, in all places where other religions cannot be taught,
particularly in the public schools.
When the State mandates that the Theory of Evolution be taught as
fact, that is establishing the religion of Atheism, because the Theory
of Evolution asserts that all life forms are created not by God, but
by pre-existing natural processes. This is pure Atheism! If we are not
created by God, then there might as well be no God, for all the
difference He makes.
The mere fact that many scientists are Atheists does not entitle them
to establish Atheism as our State Religion!
When the State prohibits free discussion of God in the classroom, that
is establishing the religion of Atheism. Wherever the State permits
Atheistic ideas to be spread but prohibits Theistic ideas, that is
establishing the religion of Atheism.
Therefore I urge you to understand clearly in your mind that Atheism
is a religion, just as Christianity, Judaism, and Islam are religions.
And any restrictions placed on Christianity, Judaism, or Islam must
also be placed on Atheism. Atheism must not be allowed to slip through
its little loophole any longer, by pretending it is not a religion.
Blessings to you in the name of the One God, Creator of the Universe.
Rev. Bill McGinnis, Director
http://LoveAllPeople.org
http://PracticalDemocracy.org
. . . and related websites listed at
http://patriot.net/users/bmcgin/chapellinks.html
.
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM |
30 Nov 2003 02:26:23 AM |
|
|
"Bill McGinnis" <bmcgin@adams.patriot.net> wrote in message
news:vsj74fov37he7f@corp.supernews.com...
<major snipage>
I't's Saturday nitght. I'm drunk as a lord. But even so I can see how
utterly full of ***** you are. Reality check, Billy boy. You don't know what
the hell you're talking about.
.
|
|
|
| User: "\Clayton Driving His Temple Into The Money Changers" |
|
| Title: Re: ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM |
30 Nov 2003 08:34:32 PM |
|
|
"John Baker" <nunya@bizniz.net> wrote in message
news:PQhyb.50374$uw5.2069@fe2.columbus.rr.com...
"Bill McGinnis" <bmcgin@adams.patriot.net> wrote in message
news:vsj74fov37he7f@corp.supernews.com...
<major snipage>
I't's Saturday nitght. I'm drunk as a lord.
Actually I think by the timing of your post it would have been Sunday
afternoon. That's one hell of a bender. Ahhhh, to be young and ***** faced
again....I'm jealous.
But even so I can see how
utterly full of ***** you are. Reality check, Billy boy. You don't know
what
the hell you're talking about.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "the cutest atheist" |
|
| Title: Re: ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM |
01 Dec 2003 12:39:36 AM |
|
|
"John Baker" <nunya@bizniz.net> wrote in message
news:PQhyb.50374$uw5.2069@fe2.columbus.rr.com...
"Bill McGinnis" <bmcgin@adams.patriot.net> wrote in message
news:vsj74fov37he7f@corp.supernews.com...
<major snipage>
I't's Saturday nitght. I'm drunk as a lord. But even so I can see how
utterly full of ***** you are. Reality check, Billy boy. You don't know
what
the hell you're talking about.
m'lord, I agree, m'lord, very good, m'lord
<curtsies>
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM |
02 Dec 2003 11:00:05 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 30 Nov 2003 08:26:23 GMT, "John Baker" <nunya@bizniz.net>,
Message ID: <PQhyb.50374$uw5.2069@fe2.columbus.rr.com> wrote in
alt.atheism;
"Bill McGinnis" <bmcgin@adams.patriot.net> wrote in message
news:vsj74fov37he7f@corp.supernews.com...
<major snipage>
I't's Saturday nitght. I'm drunk as a lord. But even so I can see how
utterly full of ***** you are. Reality check, Billy boy. You don't know what
the hell you're talking about.
At least it's consistent.
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "\Clayton Driving His Temple Into The Money Changers" |
|
| Title: Re: ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM |
30 Nov 2003 08:32:01 PM |
|
|
"Bill McGinnis" <bmcgin@adams.patriot.net> wrote in message
news:vsj74fov37he7f@corp.supernews.com...
ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM
By Bill McGinnis, Public Domain
So you are just going to keep posting the exact same horse ***** over and
over again under different names, are you troll?
How about you just go and get a fucking life instead.
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM |
02 Dec 2003 11:34:28 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 1 Dec 2003 12:32:01 +1000, "\"Clayton Driving His Temple Into
The Money Changers\"" <cjfat@SPAMBLOCKoptusnet.com.au>, Message ID:
<3fcaa888$0$20185$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au> wrote in alt.atheism;
"Bill McGinnis" <bmcgin@adams.patriot.net> wrote in message
news:vsj74fov37he7f@corp.supernews.com...
ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM
By Bill McGinnis, Public Domain
So you are just going to keep posting the exact same horse ***** over and
over again under different names, are you troll?
How about you just go and get a fucking life instead.
'Jesus' won't let him have a life.
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Kilmir" |
|
| Title: Re: ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM |
30 Nov 2003 05:43:36 AM |
|
|
"Bill McGinnis" <bmcgin@adams.patriot.net> wrote in message
news:vsj74fov37he7f@corp.supernews.com...
ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM
By Bill McGinnis, Public Domain
<snip>
Buddhists are atheists.
Atheism is just that, without a belief in one or more gods. Any other
beliefs aside from that can be called religions but just being an atheist
does not signify being religious.
Oh and show me a lamp that emits black light :).
Kilmir
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michelle Malkin" |
|
| Title: Re: ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM |
30 Nov 2003 06:17:18 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 30 Nov 2003 12:43:36 +0100, "Kilmir" <nospam@hotmail.com>
wrote:
"Bill McGinnis" <bmcgin@adams.patriot.net> wrote in message
news:vsj74fov37he7f@corp.supernews.com...
ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM
By Bill McGinnis, Public Domain
<snip>
Buddhists are atheists.
Atheism is just that, without a belief in one or more gods. Any other
beliefs aside from that can be called religions but just being an atheist
does not signify being religious.
Oh and show me a lamp that emits black light :).
Kilmir
Not all Buddhists are atheists. Some of them believe that the Buddha
is a god and also believe in demons and all kinds of nonsense.
Michelle Malkin (Mickey)
^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
Hands that work are better than mouths that pray -
Robert Ingersoll
****************************************************
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "MrScience me@me" |
|
| Title: Re: ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM |
30 Nov 2003 02:05:47 PM |
|
|
"Bill McGinnis" <bmcgin@adams.patriot.net> wrote in message
news:vsj74fov37he7f@corp.supernews.com...
ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM
By Bill McGinnis, Public Domain
Apparently Mr. McGinnis is nothing more than a troll who would have us
believe every time we DON'T open our mouths to spread the word of his
unproved god - we are actually spreading atheism.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "ZenIsWhen" |
|
| Title: Re: ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM |
30 Nov 2003 01:19:58 PM |
|
|
"Bill McGinnis" <bmcgin@adams.patriot.net> wrote in message
news:vsj74fov37he7f@corp.supernews.com...
ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM
By Bill McGinnis, Public Domain
aka the toilet.
Atheism isn't a religion, moron!
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "MrScience me@me" |
|
| Title: Re: ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM |
30 Nov 2003 02:03:09 PM |
|
|
"Bill McGinnis" <bmcgin@adams.patriot.net> wrote in message
news:vsj74fov37he7f@corp.supernews.com...
ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM
While you appear to be trying to be serious, I shall try, in all
seriousness, to answer you.
First, tough, I must wonder about this strange need of yours to define
atheism as a religion..........
By Bill McGinnis, Public Domain
Is this supposed to indicate that your opinionated writings have more
importance than anyone else's in these news groups?
A person's religion is the sum total of his beliefs about God and the
supernatural. Christianity, Judaism, and Islam are the three largest
"monotheistic" religions, with belief one God, Creator Of The
Universe.
Some religions are "polytheistic," with belief in many gods, each with
different functions.
Atheism is the religion whose belief about God is that there is no
God.
You've already claimed that ... repeating it is not necessary.
That you erroneously lump atheism in with other "religions" is already
known.
Atheism is the lack of belief, not "disbelief". It's not the same thing.
Atheism is based in fact - the fact that no valid evidence has ever been
provided to support the claim that this, or any other god, exists.
It is, what you might call, "ground zero".
There is nothing to "believe in" because neither you, nor anyone else, has
provided any evidence that there is something to believe in.
That may put it in the "realm" of religion - because it is about religion -
but that does not MAKE it a religion.
Some Atheists, for their own political reasons, assert that Atheism is
not a religion but instead is the total absence of religion.
They state it because it's the truth.Despite many attempts, religious
zealots have yet to change that reality.
Obviously, you only try because this action fits in with YOUR
religious/political leanings.
This
allows them to spread their Atheistic beliefs freely in societies
which insist on "separation of church and state."
I have yet to see anyone try to "spread atheism" in a free society.
All that appears to be happening is that, along with atheists, many people -
including the religious - are attempting to stop ONE religious belief from
taking over the society and the government.
But this is like saying that "black," (which physicists define as the
total absence of color) is not a color.
Technically, it isn't.
The car I drive is a big, old
Chevrolet, whose color is black. In common practice throughout the
world, "black" is understood to be a color, despite the technical
definition of the physicists.
Ahhhhh..........there's your game.
You use, when necessary, the scientific description of "absence of color"
.... and the, when it suits you, turn another face and use the "common"
description.
Black, technically, is not a color.
Black, the "color" we use is not really black .. but just something we
associate with black.
Since scientific "black" is nothing - you cannot possibly spray the color of
"nothing" on your car.
Likewise, "Atheism" is a religion,
despite any technical definitions to the contrary.
Likewise, your argument falls apart........if you want to go in that
direction - it is the technical definitions that count - not your religious
and politically motivated descriptions.
If black is a color, then Atheism is a religion.
It isn't ... so it isn't.
This type of logic was used in the "Road Runner" cartoons where the hero
occasionally, when necessary, would bring out a "hole" .....past it on the
side of a mountain and use it as an escape route. Although the concept was
apparent to everyone who saw it, the reality is quite different.........as
the coyote found out when he tried to go through the "hole".
You are doing nothing more than playing the same irrational game ... a hole
is a hole (a substance that can be manipulated like any other substance) ..
but then it's not.
Black, technically, is not a color ... unless you want to paint your car
with (what we call) black.
If Atheism is a religion, then it must be subject to the same legal
restrictions imposed by governments on all other religions. In
particular, in the United States, the teaching of Atheism must be
prohibited wherever the teaching of Christianity is prohibited.
And where would that be?
understanding .. which apparently is confusing you ...that neutrality is not
atheism.
But where is Atheism being taught? Atheism is being taught, by
default, in all places where other religions cannot be taught,
particularly in the public schools.
Ahhhh... I thought so.
You are falsely claiming that neutrality IS atheism.
If I do not open my mouth about god, that is NOT the same as teaching
atheism.
Can you comprehend that?
When the State mandates that the Theory of Evolution be taught as
fact, that is establishing the religion of Atheism, because the Theory
of Evolution asserts that all life forms are created not by God, but
by pre-existing natural processes.
Atheism has nothing more to do with the theory of evolution than does tiddly
winks.
The theory of evolution is science - it teaches scientific facts, scientific
evidence and scientific conclusions.
That your religious beliefs have no basis in science means they are not
taught BY science.
That, again, does NOT mean science is teaching atheism.
The very MOMENT you can provide scientific evidence to support your
religious claims - they will, as science does, be included in scientific
teachings.
That you have not, and cannot, provide such evidence is not the fault of
science.
This is pure Atheism! If we are not
created by God, then there might as well be no God, for all the
difference He makes.
When you have ANY valid evidence or facts to support that, please get back
to us.
Believers have been trying for centuries, and scientists have been watching
for centuries, but, as yet, no one has provided anything other than claims.
Not finding facts to support your religious claims is not atheism.
Not teaching something that has no supportive facts is not atheism.
The mere fact that many scientists are Atheists does not entitle them
to establish Atheism as our State Religion!
The mere fact is most scientists believe in one religion or another.
Though more of them, than the average population, may be atheists - they
still do not hold a majority.
Either way - it is not the scientists who conspire to direct science - it is
the facts and evidence that run science. Again, you still have nothing.
When the State prohibits free discussion of God in the classroom, that
is establishing the religion of Atheism.
Wrong again.
Does your religion demand that you lie?
Wherever the State permits
Atheistic ideas to be spread but prohibits Theistic ideas, that is
establishing the religion of Atheism.
So every time I don't open up my mouth and spout "the word of god" .. I am
spreading atheism?
Your argument is silly!
.
|
|
|
| User: "It is season to be jolly" |
|
| Title: Re: ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM |
30 Nov 2003 09:02:43 PM |
|
|
Very well said.
It is worth repeating.
Following up on what "MrScience" <me@me> wrote on Sun, 30 Nov 2003 15:03:09
-0500:
"Bill McGinnis" <bmcgin@adams.patriot.net> wrote in message
news:vsj74fov37he7f@corp.supernews.com...
ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM
While you appear to be trying to be serious, I shall try, in all
seriousness, to answer you.
First, tough, I must wonder about this strange need of yours to define
atheism as a religion..........
By Bill McGinnis, Public Domain
Is this supposed to indicate that your opinionated writings have more
importance than anyone else's in these news groups?
A person's religion is the sum total of his beliefs about God and the
supernatural. Christianity, Judaism, and Islam are the three largest
"monotheistic" religions, with belief one God, Creator Of The
Universe.
Some religions are "polytheistic," with belief in many gods, each with
different functions.
Atheism is the religion whose belief about God is that there is no
God.
You've already claimed that ... repeating it is not necessary.
That you erroneously lump atheism in with other "religions" is already
known.
Atheism is the lack of belief, not "disbelief". It's not the same thing.
Atheism is based in fact - the fact that no valid evidence has ever been
provided to support the claim that this, or any other god, exists.
It is, what you might call, "ground zero".
There is nothing to "believe in" because neither you, nor anyone else, has
provided any evidence that there is something to believe in.
That may put it in the "realm" of religion - because it is about religion -
but that does not MAKE it a religion.
Some Atheists, for their own political reasons, assert that Atheism is
not a religion but instead is the total absence of religion.
They state it because it's the truth.Despite many attempts, religious
zealots have yet to change that reality.
Obviously, you only try because this action fits in with YOUR
religious/political leanings.
This
allows them to spread their Atheistic beliefs freely in societies
which insist on "separation of church and state."
I have yet to see anyone try to "spread atheism" in a free society.
All that appears to be happening is that, along with atheists, many people -
including the religious - are attempting to stop ONE religious belief from
taking over the society and the government.
But this is like saying that "black," (which physicists define as the
total absence of color) is not a color.
Technically, it isn't.
The car I drive is a big, old
Chevrolet, whose color is black. In common practice throughout the
world, "black" is understood to be a color, despite the technical
definition of the physicists.
Ahhhhh..........there's your game.
You use, when necessary, the scientific description of "absence of color"
... and the, when it suits you, turn another face and use the "common"
description.
Black, technically, is not a color.
Black, the "color" we use is not really black .. but just something we
associate with black.
Since scientific "black" is nothing - you cannot possibly spray the color of
"nothing" on your car.
Likewise, "Atheism" is a religion,
despite any technical definitions to the contrary.
Likewise, your argument falls apart........if you want to go in that
direction - it is the technical definitions that count - not your religious
and politically motivated descriptions.
If black is a color, then Atheism is a religion.
It isn't ... so it isn't.
This type of logic was used in the "Road Runner" cartoons where the hero
occasionally, when necessary, would bring out a "hole" .....past it on the
side of a mountain and use it as an escape route. Although the concept was
apparent to everyone who saw it, the reality is quite different.........as
the coyote found out when he tried to go through the "hole".
You are doing nothing more than playing the same irrational game ... a hole
is a hole (a substance that can be manipulated like any other substance) ..
but then it's not.
Black, technically, is not a color ... unless you want to paint your car
with (what we call) black.
If Atheism is a religion, then it must be subject to the same legal
restrictions imposed by governments on all other religions. In
particular, in the United States, the teaching of Atheism must be
prohibited wherever the teaching of Christianity is prohibited.
And where would that be?
understanding .. which apparently is confusing you ...that neutrality is not
atheism.
But where is Atheism being taught? Atheism is being taught, by
default, in all places where other religions cannot be taught,
particularly in the public schools.
Ahhhh... I thought so.
You are falsely claiming that neutrality IS atheism.
If I do not open my mouth about god, that is NOT the same as teaching
atheism.
Can you comprehend that?
When the State mandates that the Theory of Evolution be taught as
fact, that is establishing the religion of Atheism, because the Theory
of Evolution asserts that all life forms are created not by God, but
by pre-existing natural processes.
Atheism has nothing more to do with the theory of evolution than does tiddly
winks.
The theory of evolution is science - it teaches scientific facts, scientific
evidence and scientific conclusions.
That your religious beliefs have no basis in science means they are not
taught BY science.
That, again, does NOT mean science is teaching atheism.
The very MOMENT you can provide scientific evidence to support your
religious claims - they will, as science does, be included in scientific
teachings.
That you have not, and cannot, provide such evidence is not the fault of
science.
This is pure Atheism! If we are not
created by God, then there might as well be no God, for all the
difference He makes.
When you have ANY valid evidence or facts to support that, please get back
to us.
Believers have been trying for centuries, and scientists have been watching
for centuries, but, as yet, no one has provided anything other than claims.
Not finding facts to support your religious claims is not atheism.
Not teaching something that has no supportive facts is not atheism.
The mere fact that many scientists are Atheists does not entitle them
to establish Atheism as our State Religion!
The mere fact is most scientists believe in one religion or another.
Though more of them, than the average population, may be atheists - they
still do not hold a majority.
Either way - it is not the scientists who conspire to direct science - it is
the facts and evidence that run science. Again, you still have nothing.
When the State prohibits free discussion of God in the classroom, that
is establishing the religion of Atheism.
Wrong again.
Does your religion demand that you lie?
Wherever the State permits
Atheistic ideas to be spread but prohibits Theistic ideas, that is
establishing the religion of Atheism.
So every time I don't open up my mouth and spout "the word of god" .. I am
spreading atheism?
Your argument is silly!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Thinker2004" |
|
| Title: Re: ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM |
02 Dec 2003 11:25:52 AM |
|
|
It is season to be jolly <who@nowhere.invalid.com> wrote in message news:<rmblsv4m7mgao45iaivtn8608v2a9oj2nk@4ax.com>...
Very well said.
It is worth repeating.
I agree. Very well stated, MrScience.
Following up on what "MrScience" <me@me> wrote on Sun, 30 Nov 2003 15:03:09
-0500:
"Bill McGinnis" <bmcgin@adams.patriot.net> wrote in message
news:vsj74fov37he7f@corp.supernews.com...
ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM
While you appear to be trying to be serious, I shall try, in all
seriousness, to answer you.
First, tough, I must wonder about this strange need of yours to define
atheism as a religion..........
By Bill McGinnis, Public Domain
Is this supposed to indicate that your opinionated writings have more
importance than anyone else's in these news groups?
A person's religion is the sum total of his beliefs about God and the
supernatural. Christianity, Judaism, and Islam are the three largest
"monotheistic" religions, with belief one God, Creator Of The
Universe.
Some religions are "polytheistic," with belief in many gods, each with
different functions.
Atheism is the religion whose belief about God is that there is no
God.
You've already claimed that ... repeating it is not necessary.
That you erroneously lump atheism in with other "religions" is already
known.
Atheism is the lack of belief, not "disbelief". It's not the same thing.
Atheism is based in fact - the fact that no valid evidence has ever been
provided to support the claim that this, or any other god, exists.
It is, what you might call, "ground zero".
There is nothing to "believe in" because neither you, nor anyone else, has
provided any evidence that there is something to believe in.
That may put it in the "realm" of religion - because it is about religion -
but that does not MAKE it a religion.
Some Atheists, for their own political reasons, assert that Atheism is
not a religion but instead is the total absence of religion.
They state it because it's the truth.Despite many attempts, religious
zealots have yet to change that reality.
Obviously, you only try because this action fits in with YOUR
religious/political leanings.
This
allows them to spread their Atheistic beliefs freely in societies
which insist on "separation of church and state."
I have yet to see anyone try to "spread atheism" in a free society.
All that appears to be happening is that, along with atheists, many people -
including the religious - are attempting to stop ONE religious belief from
taking over the society and the government.
But this is like saying that "black," (which physicists define as the
total absence of color) is not a color.
Technically, it isn't.
The car I drive is a big, old
Chevrolet, whose color is black. In common practice throughout the
world, "black" is understood to be a color, despite the technical
definition of the physicists.
Ahhhhh..........there's your game.
You use, when necessary, the scientific description of "absence of color"
... and the, when it suits you, turn another face and use the "common"
description.
Black, technically, is not a color.
Black, the "color" we use is not really black .. but just something we
associate with black.
Since scientific "black" is nothing - you cannot possibly spray the color of
"nothing" on your car.
Likewise, "Atheism" is a religion,
despite any technical definitions to the contrary.
Likewise, your argument falls apart........if you want to go in that
direction - it is the technical definitions that count - not your religious
and politically motivated descriptions.
If black is a color, then Atheism is a religion.
It isn't ... so it isn't.
This type of logic was used in the "Road Runner" cartoons where the hero
occasionally, when necessary, would bring out a "hole" .....past it on the
side of a mountain and use it as an escape route. Although the concept was
apparent to everyone who saw it, the reality is quite different.........as
the coyote found out when he tried to go through the "hole".
You are doing nothing more than playing the same irrational game ... a hole
is a hole (a substance that can be manipulated like any other substance) ..
but then it's not.
Black, technically, is not a color ... unless you want to paint your car
with (what we call) black.
If Atheism is a religion, then it must be subject to the same legal
restrictions imposed by governments on all other religions. In
particular, in the United States, the teaching of Atheism must be
prohibited wherever the teaching of Christianity is prohibited.
And where would that be?
understanding .. which apparently is confusing you ...that neutrality is not
atheism.
But where is Atheism being taught? Atheism is being taught, by
default, in all places where other religions cannot be taught,
particularly in the public schools.
Ahhhh... I thought so.
You are falsely claiming that neutrality IS atheism.
If I do not open my mouth about god, that is NOT the same as teaching
atheism.
Can you comprehend that?
When the State mandates that the Theory of Evolution be taught as
fact, that is establishing the religion of Atheism, because the Theory
of Evolution asserts that all life forms are created not by God, but
by pre-existing natural processes.
Atheism has nothing more to do with the theory of evolution than does tiddly
winks.
The theory of evolution is science - it teaches scientific facts, scientific
evidence and scientific conclusions.
That your religious beliefs have no basis in science means they are not
taught BY science.
That, again, does NOT mean science is teaching atheism.
The very MOMENT you can provide scientific evidence to support your
religious claims - they will, as science does, be included in scientific
teachings.
That you have not, and cannot, provide such evidence is not the fault of
science.
This is pure Atheism! If we are not
created by God, then there might as well be no God, for all the
difference He makes.
When you have ANY valid evidence or facts to support that, please get back
to us.
Believers have been trying for centuries, and scientists have been watching
for centuries, but, as yet, no one has provided anything other than claims.
Not finding facts to support your religious claims is not atheism.
Not teaching something that has no supportive facts is not atheism.
The mere fact that many scientists are Atheists does not entitle them
to establish Atheism as our State Religion!
The mere fact is most scientists believe in one religion or another.
Though more of them, than the average population, may be atheists - they
still do not hold a majority.
Either way - it is not the scientists who conspire to direct science - it is
the facts and evidence that run science. Again, you still have nothing.
When the State prohibits free discussion of God in the classroom, that
is establishing the religion of Atheism.
Wrong again.
Does your religion demand that you lie?
Wherever the State permits
Atheistic ideas to be spread but prohibits Theistic ideas, that is
establishing the religion of Atheism.
So every time I don't open up my mouth and spout "the word of god" .. I am
spreading atheism?
Your argument is silly!
.
|
|
|
| User: "the cutest atheist" |
|
| Title: Re: ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM |
02 Dec 2003 07:53:42 PM |
|
|
"Thinker2004" <TheThinker2004@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:f7ff93e3.0312020925.4a122e4e@posting.google.com...
It is season to be jolly <who@nowhere.invalid.com> wrote in message
news:<rmblsv4m7mgao45iaivtn8608v2a9oj2nk@4ax.com>...
Very well said.
It is worth repeating.
I agree. Very well stated, MrScience.
<snip>
you quoted 9kb of post to say that? get out
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM |
05 Dec 2003 04:40:55 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 01:53:42 GMT, "the cutest atheist"
<herdofnerd(remove)@hotmail.com>, Message ID:
<Gmbzb.36947$aT.19672@news-server.bigpond.net.au> wrote in alt.atheism;
"Thinker2004" <TheThinker2004@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:f7ff93e3.0312020925.4a122e4e@posting.google.com...
It is season to be jolly <who@nowhere.invalid.com> wrote in message
news:<rmblsv4m7mgao45iaivtn8608v2a9oj2nk@4ax.com>...
Very well said.
It is worth repeating.
I agree. Very well stated, MrScience.
<snip>
you quoted 9kb of post to say that? get out
The mindless one had to spotlight it's lack of ability to think.
"Ignoramuses uber alles." They're both so proud of themselves at their
cleverness by naming themselves after what they lack.
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM |
05 Dec 2003 04:39:18 PM |
|
|
On 2 Dec 2003 09:25:52 -0800, (Thinker2004),
Message ID: <f7ff93e3.0312020925.4a122e4e@posting.google.com> wrote in
alt.atheism;
It is season to be jolly <who@nowhere.invalid.com> wrote in message news:<rmblsv4m7mgao45iaivtn8608v2a9oj2nk@4ax.com>...
Very well said.
It is worth repeating.
I agree. Very well stated, MrScience.
As both ignoramuses get down in a mutual '69.'
(snip)
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Adam Marczyk" |
|
| Title: Re: ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM |
30 Nov 2003 01:55:44 AM |
|
|
"Bill McGinnis" <bmcgin@adams.patriot.net> wrote in message
news:vsj74fov37he7f@corp.supernews.com...
[...]
When the State mandates that the Theory of Evolution be taught as
fact, that is establishing the religion of Atheism, because the Theory
of Evolution asserts that all life forms are created not by God, but
by pre-existing natural processes.
No, it does not. The theory of evolution claims that miracles are not
*required* to explain the development of life, but that it can be understood
in terms of natural processes. If your view of God is such that he cannot
work through natural processes, and that by showing that a miracle did not
happen you show that God was not involved, then good luck to you; you
believe in what is commonly known as the God of the Gaps, and the more
science advances, the smaller your god gets. However, many believers are not
so narrow-minded in their views, and see none of the atheistic implications
of evolution you clearly want so much to be there. If there is a god,
evolution tells us how he caused life to develop; if there is not, evolution
tells us how life developed in his absence. Like all sciences, however,
evolution itself is neutral with respect to the existence of God, neither
for that proposition or against it; you can accept it and then add whatever
theology you want to the mix. Therefore, your assertion that teaching about
evolution in schools constitutes a de facto establishment of atheism is
false. In a similar way, most theists do not believe - and I am betting you
do not believe - that meteorology is "atheistic" simply because it explains
weather patterns without explicit recourse to miracles. Would you advocate
putting a stop to theories of the godless jet stream?
[...]
Therefore I urge you to understand clearly in your mind that Atheism
is a religion, just as Christianity, Judaism, and Islam are religions.
And any restrictions placed on Christianity, Judaism, or Islam must
also be placed on Atheism. Atheism must not be allowed to slip through
its little loophole any longer, by pretending it is not a religion.
Tell you what - I'll agree that atheism is a religion on the day that we get
the tax break.
--
"We have loved the stars too fondly | a.a. #2001
to be fearful of the night." | http://www.ebonmusings.org
--Tombstone epitaph of | e-mail: ebonmuse!hotmail.com
two amateur astronomers, | ICQ: 8777843
quoted in Carl Sagan's _Cosmos_ | PGP Key ID: 0x5C66F737
----------------------------------------------------------------------
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Maverick" |
|
| Title: Re: ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM |
30 Nov 2003 03:59:57 AM |
|
|
2003-11-30, 08:30:23 AM, Bill McGinnis wrote:
ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM
Atheism is not a religion. This is easy to understand.
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM |
02 Dec 2003 11:01:16 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 30 Nov 2003 09:59:57 GMT, "Maverick"
<insensitive_clod@hotmail.com>, Message ID:
<xcjyb.6340$uv1.4639@nntpserver.swip.net> wrote in alt.atheism;
2003-11-30, 08:30:23 AM, Bill McGinnis wrote:
ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM
Atheism is not a religion. This is easy to understand.
Yes, but Bill's christian grasp of things lacks opposible thumbs. It's
also nothing but (lack of) brain and stem.
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "nullus fides" |
|
| Title: Re: ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM |
30 Nov 2003 07:59:24 AM |
|
|
And so upon Sun, 30 Nov 2003 07:30:23 +0000 didst Bill McGinnis speak
thusly:
Some Atheists, for their own political reasons, assert that Atheism is
not a religion but instead is the total absence of religion.
No, not "political reasons" but because it's NOT A RELIGION.
Frickin' moron.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ashland Henderson" |
|
| Title: Re: ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM |
01 Dec 2003 05:20:58 PM |
|
|
Bill McGinnis <bmcgin@adams.patriot.net> wrote in message news:<vsj74fov37he7f@corp.supernews.com>...
ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM
By Bill McGinnis, Public Domain
A person's religion is the sum total of his beliefs about God and the
supernatural. Christianity, Judaism, and Islam are the three largest
"monotheistic" religions, with belief one God, Creator Of The
Universe.
It is a theory. But with no more claim to be what religion really is
than any other theory. Less then many, actually, since it certainly is
not accepted by much of anybody else. Judaism is actually miniscule
compared to the other two religions mentioned. Of course there are other
very large religions which do not share the same beliefs.
Some religions are "polytheistic," with belief in many gods, each with
different functions.
Atheism is the religion whose belief about God is that there is no
God.
Only given the particular definition above. Atheism adheres to no
particular beliefs, is not organized, has no tenants, and is not in
any generally accepted way a religion.
Some Atheists, for their own political reasons, assert that Atheism is
not a religion but instead is the total absence of religion. This
allows them to spread their Atheistic beliefs freely in societies
which insist on "separation of church and state."
It's definately not a religion but it has nothing to do with political
reasons.
But this is like saying that "black," (which physicists define as the
total absence of color) is not a color. The car I drive is a big, old
Chevrolet, whose color is black. In common practice throughout the
world, "black" is understood to be a color, despite the technical
definition of the physicists. Likewise, "Atheism" is a religion,
despite any technical definitions to the contrary.
How silly. A very inept analogy. Physicists deal with reality.
Measurable reality. Religion is not measurable and the definition above
is no more valid than anyone elses.
If black is a color, then Atheism is a religion.
Nonsense.
If Atheism is a religion, then it must be subject to the same legal
restrictions imposed by governments on all other religions. In
particular, in the United States, the teaching of Atheism must be
prohibited wherever the teaching of Christianity is prohibited.
Perhaps, if it were a religion. Since it isn't, it isn't.
But where is Atheism being taught? Atheism is being taught, by
default, in all places where other religions cannot be taught,
particularly in the public schools.
Translation: They don't teach religion so they must teach atheism. How
stupid.
When the State mandates that the Theory of Evolution be taught as
fact, that is establishing the religion of Atheism, because the Theory
of Evolution asserts that all life forms are created not by God, but
by pre-existing natural processes. This is pure Atheism! If we are not
created by God, then there might as well be no God, for all the
difference He makes.
Remarkable stupid. Evolution is taught as fact because it is fact.
The mere fact that many scientists are Atheists does not entitle them
to establish Atheism as our State Religion!
They don't. And of course many scientists are Christians. Or even belong
to other religions. Indeed, evolution is considered fact by scientists
around the world no matter which religion they belong to.
When the State prohibits free discussion of God in the classroom, that
is establishing the religion of Atheism. Wherever the State permits
Atheistic ideas to be spread but prohibits Theistic ideas, that is
establishing the religion of Atheism.
Having started with a bad definition, compounded it with bad logic and
bad analogies, the above statement is essentially nonsense.
Therefore I urge you to understand clearly in your mind that Atheism
is a religion, just as Christianity, Judaism, and Islam are religions.
And any restrictions placed on Christianity, Judaism, or Islam must
also be placed on Atheism. Atheism must not be allowed to slip through
its little loophole any longer, by pretending it is not a religion.
See above. No such case has been made or particularly can be made.
Blessings to you in the name of the One God, Creator of the Universe.
Whatever.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "George Patton" |
|
| Title: Re: ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM |
30 Nov 2003 07:56:01 AM |
|
|
Bill McGinnis <bmcgin@adams.patriot.net> wrote in message news:<vsj74fov37he7f@corp.supernews.com>...
ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM
By Bill McGinnis, Public Domain
Here again we have another one of those who want there to be a atheism
religion - what ever in the world that is. I guess an atheism
religion would baptize with dry water and sing songs without words or
music. Maybe they will un-worship the no god and each service will
end and hour before it begins. Kind of like a religion that Alice
would find on the other side of the looking glass.
Bill, if you think atheism can be turned into a religion, you can try
to do that. I am not going to bet on your success. But, if you
can't make it, a bunch of you kooks can get your heads together and
un-pray to no one for no help and maybe after time, in such a
fertile environment, that which you can't make, will just naturally
evolve out of nothing!
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "George Patton" |
|
| Title: Re: ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM |
30 Nov 2003 07:56:58 AM |
|
|
Bill McGinnis <bmcgin@adams.patriot.net> wrote in message news:<vsj74fov37he7f@corp.supernews.com>...
ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM
By Bill McGinnis, Public Domain
Here again we have another one of those who want there to be a atheism
religion - what ever in the world that is. I guess an atheism
religion would baptize with dry water and sing songs without words or
music. Maybe they will un-worship the no god and each service will
end and hour before it begins. Kind of like a religion that Alice
would find on the other side of the looking glass.
Bill, if you think atheism can be turned into a religion, you can try
to do that. I am not going to bet on your success. But, if you
can't make it, a bunch of you kooks can get your heads together and
un-pray to no one for no help and maybe after time, in such a
fertile environment, that which you can't make, will just naturally
evolve out of nothing!
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "eyelessgame" |
|
| Title: Re: ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM |
01 Dec 2003 03:49:11 PM |
|
|
Bill McGinnis <bmcgin@adams.patriot.net> wrote in message news:<vsj74fov37he7f@corp.supernews.com>...
Sigh. Yet another person playing word-definition games.
ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM
By Bill McGinnis, Public Domain
A person's religion is the sum total of his beliefs about God and the
supernatural.
If that's how you *define* religion, then yes, of course atheism is a
"religion". So is meteorology.
Really. So long as one person somewhere in the world believes there's
a god who makes thunder, the position that thunder is *not* created by
gods is ipso facto a "religious" belief.
So in other words, if anyone in the world relates a god -- or
"supernature" -- to any phenomenon, all positions on that phenomenon
become religious.
Right? If not, please work more on your criteria for what constitutes
"religion".
On the other hand, if I simply *have no beliefs* about God and the
supernatural, that then is my "religion", and of course you and I have
nearly the same religion -- because neither of us think Thor, Crom,
Zeus, Unumbute, Allah, Buddha-nature, the wiccan God and Goddess, the
Thunderbird, Neptune, Coyote, Illuvatar, Valentine Michael Smith,
Zetans, Brahma, Shiva, Mohammed, Cu Cuchlainn, or Muad'dib are
responsible for any event, and every single one of those individual
statements -- about every single one of those gods *not* being
responsible -- is a religious statement, and part of our mutual
religion.
From any distance at all, then, you and I have the *same* religion.
Christianity, Judaism, and Islam are the three largest
"monotheistic" religions, with belief one God, Creator Of The
Universe.
Some religions are "polytheistic," with belief in many gods, each with
different functions.
Atheism is the religion whose belief about God is that there is no
God.
Very interesting. What is the name of the religion whose belief about
god(s) is that there is no Zeus?
Some Atheists, for their own political reasons, assert that Atheism is
not a religion but instead is the total absence of religion. This
allows them to spread their Atheistic beliefs freely in societies
which insist on "separation of church and state."
Since there exist beliefs among some people that states derive their
mandate from God, there cannot be a separation of religion and state
-- by your definition of religion, which one would hope is
increasingly suspect.
But this is like saying that "black," (which physicists define as the
total absence of color) is not a color. The car I drive is a big, old
Chevrolet, whose color is black. In common practice throughout the
world, "black" is understood to be a color, despite the technical
definition of the physicists.
This is elision of two separate properties, both lumped under the same
name "color". Color can be pigment or color can be photon frequency.
It all depends on your definition. If color is pigment, then yes one
can mix a sufficiently thick pigment that produces "black". If color
is photon frequency, *everything outside the visible spectrum*
registers as "black" to the human eye -- as does the absence of
photons; there is thus no photon frequency that maps specifically to
'black'.
It's nothing but semantics.
Likewise, "Atheism" is a religion,
despite any technical definitions to the contrary.
Depending on semantics. By your ludicrously overbroad definition of
'religion', atheism (like meteorology and gravity) is a religion.
If black is a color, then Atheism is a religion.
And whether black is a color depends on your definition of 'color'.
If Atheism is a religion, then it must be subject to the same legal
restrictions imposed by governments on all other religions. In
particular, in the United States, the teaching of Atheism must be
prohibited wherever the teaching of Christianity is prohibited.
I'd agree that teachers in public schools should refrain from telling
students 'there is no god'. That's an inappropriate lesson for a
public school teacher to teach.
But where is Atheism being taught? Atheism is being taught, by
default, in all places where other religions cannot be taught,
particularly in the public schools.
Lest anyone think I am misinterpreting Bill's definition of religion,
the above sentence should stand unshakeably in my support. Bill is
saying that any statement that does not support some "other" religion
is a statement in support of atheism. Meteorology, linguistics,
history, mathematics, and music are "religious" instruction, because
they don't mention any gods.
When the State mandates that the Theory of Evolution be taught as
fact, that is establishing the religion of Atheism, because the Theory
of Evolution asserts that all life forms are created not by God, but
by pre-existing natural processes.
Yep. Just as meteorology being taught "as fact" establishes the
religion of Atheism, because meteorology asserts that storms are
cretaed not by God, but by pre-existing natural processes.
This is pure Atheism! If we are not
created by God, then there might as well be no God, for all the
difference He makes.
Likewise, if storms, disease, terrestrial rotation, lunar phases,
taxes, political parties, the mandate of the state's power, etc. etc.,
are not created by God, there might as well be no God, for all the
difference He (or She) makes.
The mere fact that many scientists are Atheists does not entitle them
to establish Atheism as our State Religion!
When the State prohibits free discussion of God in the classroom, that
is establishing the religion of Atheism. Wherever the State permits
Atheistic ideas to be spread but prohibits Theistic ideas, that is
establishing the religion of Atheism.
Again, this stands in support of my interpretation. Every statement
that does not mention a god is atheistic, by Bill's ludicrous
definition of what a religion is.
Therefore I urge you to understand clearly in your mind that Atheism
is a religion, just as Christianity, Judaism, and Islam are religions.
And any restrictions placed on Christianity, Judaism, or Islam must
also be placed on Atheism. Atheism must not be allowed to slip through
its little loophole any longer, by pretending it is not a religion.
Can you come up with any sort of lesson that is *not* religious in
nature, given that a naturalistic alternative to a religious statement
is itself a religious statement, by your definition? I bet you
can't...
Blessings to you in the name of the One God, Creator of the Universe.
If you call it that, sure.
eyelessgame
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "ulTRAX" |
|
| Title: Re: ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM |
30 Nov 2003 09:16:36 PM |
|
|
Brainiac Bill McGinnis <bmcgin@adams.patriot.net> wrote in message news:<vsj74fov37he7f@corp.supernews.com>...
But this is like saying that "black," (which physicists define as the
total absence of color) is not a color. The car I drive is a big, old
Chevrolet, whose color is black. In common practice throughout the
world, "black" is understood to be a color, despite the technical
definition of the physicists. Likewise, "Atheism" is a religion,
despite any technical definitions to the contrary.
If black is a color, then Atheism is a religion.
So if someone WRONGLY ascribes a color name to the absence of light...
THAT is your basis for claiming that atheism is actually a religion...
a God-based belief system instead of the absence of a God-based belief
system?
You already admitted the logic was FAULTY. Then you ignore your own
correct conclusion and try to build a case by expanding on it? Doesn't
anyone screen these posts? ROTFLMAO.... I can't read any more of this
pretentious philosophical *****. Thanks for the laughs Einstein.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Corey" |
|
| Title: Re: ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM |
30 Nov 2003 05:47:03 AM |
|
|
Corey Says-
Your mostly right. Atheism is a religion. It is the belief that the Universe
came from nothing. All matter in this Universe, time, space and the laws of
physics, just somehow self created themselves.
Since this belief is even more of a faith than all of the wacky religions,
I don't believe in this religion. end.
.
|
|
|
| User: "the cutest atheist" |
|
| Title: Re: ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM |
01 Dec 2003 12:55:04 AM |
|
|
"Corey" <upyoursvirusgeek@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:XMkyb.28098$8z1.23414@newssvr29.news.prodigy.com...
Corey Says-
Your mostly right. Atheism is a religion.
it is not. it is the lack of a belief in a god.
It is the belief that the Universe
came from nothing.
you're getting science mixed up with atheism. lots of christians (and people
in slightly more sensible religions) accept the findings that suggest the
creation of this universe via the big bang. there's really no way to tell
how the energy and matter came into being
All matter in this Universe, time, space and the laws of
physics, just somehow self created themselves.
unlike fucking arrogant theists, whose puppet lord god supposedly does
everything and requires no explanation and is too much of a ***** to leave
traces of his deeds and existence to those able to question and think for
themselves, scientists don't claim they know all the answers. not all
scientists are atheists, and not all atheists accept the multitudes of
scientific theories that are out there.
but hey, god, who is more complex than the universe (apparently)somehow
created itself. riiiight. do you wear a bib or just change keyboards every
five minutes?
Since this belief is even more of a faith than all of the wacky
religions,
I don't believe in this religion. end.
you drooling, bleating, moronic, fear-mongering fearful prat. just because
you don't understand how science uses its instrumnets to measure and
discover, it does not mean that it does not do so. you suffer under the
fallacy of incredulity. it really isn't a measure of how correct something
is that you can't comprehend it, in fact, I daresay it's a recommendation of
its validity.
now stop parroting what your minister told you and go and open an idiot's
guide to cosmology or whatever they have to spoonfeed the basics to your
kind, and fucking learn something other than grovelling at the feet of an
invisible and pathetic excuse for a deity, and maybe you'll stop
compromising the dignity of the human species.
run along now
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "nullus fides" |
|
| Title: Re: ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM |
01 Dec 2003 08:05:42 AM |
|
|
And so upon Sun, 30 Nov 2003 11:47:03 +0000 didst Corey speak thusly:
Atheism is a religion. It is the belief that the Universe
came from nothing. All matter in this Universe, time, space and the laws of
physics, just somehow self created themselves.
Wrong.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Raymond" |
|
| Title: Re: ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM |
01 Dec 2003 08:19:54 AM |
|
|
"nullus fides" <dev@null.none> wrote in message
news:pan.2003.12.01.14.05.42.288558@null.none...
And so upon Sun, 30 Nov 2003 11:47:03 +0000 didst Corey speak thusly:
Atheism is a religion. It is the belief that the Universe
came from nothing. All matter in this Universe, time, space and the laws
of
physics, just somehow self created themselves.
Wrong.
Why is it wrong? Is what he said not true? It is the same as a religion
and ME.O'Hair made a atheist church and got it registered with the FED
government. The Atheist creed is there is no god, no faith, no here after,
and lots of other things, they are very evangelistic like the Church and go
out of their way to preach their ideas. They go out of their way to convert
people to their ideas, and even fight in court if a Christmas tree or sign
or manger is put up, that disagrees with their belief system. For all
practical purposes they are a religion.
If I am wrong, prove it, just done say it is wrong as that is Wrong.
Raymond
.
|
|
|
| User: "the cutest atheist" |
|
| Title: Re: ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM |
01 Dec 2003 08:28:52 AM |
|
|
"Raymond" <rwknapp[-no-scam]@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3fcb4e0e$1_5@storm.i-cable.com...
"nullus fides" <dev@null.none> wrote in message
news:pan.2003.12.01.14.05.42.288558@null.none...
And so upon Sun, 30 Nov 2003 11:47:03 +0000 didst Corey speak thusly:
Atheism is a religion. It is the belief that the Universe
came from nothing. All matter in this Universe, time, space and the
laws
of
physics, just somehow self created themselves.
Wrong.
Why is it wrong? Is what he said not true? It is the same as a religion
and ME.O'Hair made a atheist church and got it registered with the FED
government. The Atheist creed is there is no god, no faith, no here
after,
and lots of other things, they are very evangelistic like the Church and
go
out of their way to preach their ideas. They go out of their way to
convert
people to their ideas, and even fight in court if a Christmas tree or sign
or manger is put up, that disagrees with their belief system. For all
practical purposes they are a religion.
If I am wrong, prove it, just done say it is wrong as that is Wrong.
this whole thread is proof, fool. atheism is a lack of beliefs, not a belief
in lack. it's hard to decide whether you're more of a twit or a twat, so
I'll just have to think of you as both
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
Re: ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF ATHEISM
Re: Judge Moore is not the Congress, nor is he establishing religion
Re: Judge Moore is not Godly, nor is he establishing decency
Re: Judge Moore is not the Congress, nor is he establishing religion
Re: Judge Moore is not the Congress, nor is he establishing religion
Re: Judge Moore is not the Congress, nor is he establishing religion
Re: Judge Moore is not the Congress, nor is he establishing religion
Re: Judge Moore is not the Congress, nor is he establishing religion
| Re: Judge Moore is not the Congress, nor is he establishing religion
Re: Judge Moore is not the Congress, nor is he establishing religion
Re: Judge Moore is not the Congress, nor is he establishing religion
|
|
