Survey: US voters would prefer Muslim president over an atheist

[

Good point, you can't walk a mile without seeing an atheist burning a church down.





Study a little history, comrade.

History simply says that state sponsored religion (including NON religion) is dangerous no matter what.

This has nothing to do with atheism. .



That is completely disingenuous bullshit and you know it. You can't have your cake and eat it too just because you think you can invent and alter definitions as it suits you. I know you atheists like to think you are god, but you don't have that power, champ. Dishonesty is not a position.
 
In the real world that's probably true. But of course the only ones that preach it online are by definition the dogmatic 'minority'.

Atheism (a full disassociation with any other religious position) is no better than any other religious persuasion. It will be adhered to by intelligent people, stupid people, knowledgeable people, ignorant people, rational people, dogmatic people, etc. It's true that certain religious positions have higher trends of certain things within their following. There's alot of reasons for each of those individual cases. But at the end of the day, the same reasons (good or bad) people follow whatever religion will also be reasons for some people to adhere to atheism.
 
[

Good point, you can't walk a mile without seeing an atheist burning a church down.





Study a little history, comrade.

Every group of people with certain religious beliefs and without religious beliefs have committed atrocities.

Even people who go to the same religious buildings as you do believe it or not. It's a human problem and I hate to reveal this to you, but you aren't one of the chosen people.
 
In the real world that's probably true. But of course the only ones that preach it online are by definition the dogmatic 'minority'.

Atheism (a full disassociation with any other religious position) is no better than any other religious persuasion. It will be adhered to by intelligent people, stupid people, knowledgeable people, ignorant people, rational people, dogmatic people, etc. It's true that certain religious positions have higher trends of certain things within their following. There's alot of reasons for each of those individual cases. But at the end of the day, the same reasons (good or bad) people follow whatever religion will also be reasons for some people to adhere to atheism.

Then the realization came that atheism is not defined as a lack of religion, but as a lack of belief in a deity.

They fall under atheism, true. But so many things do.

After all, we are all atheist, I just believe in one less God than you.

Or if you subscribe to multiple Gods, I believe in significantly less Gods than you, haha.
 
Atheists would like to see their religion the only religion recognized by the state. Sort of like China 20 years ago.
 
Atheists would like to see their religion the only religion recognized by the state. Sort of like China 20 years ago.

Lol is it your goal to look as stupid as you can in one day? You're doing a great job.




I want all religions protected by the law.
 
Then the realization came that atheism is not defined as a lack of religion, but as a lack of belief in a deity.

They fall under atheism, true. But so many things do.

I understand that. But as a matter of classification, I was trying to distinguish between the two. A Buddhist may be atheist, because it is part of their religion, and they are dogmatic in their approach to their religion. But I wanted to point out that being dogmatic is not specific to following religion, and that in fact it's separate from religious persuasion. There are plenty of atheists, who are so separate from adherence to any religion, who are also just as dogmatic about their disbelief in a deity, or their non-alignment with any religion.
 
Then the realization came that atheism is not defined as a lack of religion, but as a lack of belief in a deity.

They fall under atheism, true. But so many things do.

I understand that. But as a matter of classification, I was trying to distinguish between the two. A Buddhist may be atheist, because it is part of their religion, and they are dogmatic in their approach to their religion. But I wanted to point out that being dogmatic is not specific to following religion, and that in fact it's separate from religious persuasion. There are plenty of atheists, who are so separate from adherence to any religion, who are also just as dogmatic about their disbelief in a deity, or their non-alignment with any religion.

That is absolutely true.
 
Oh PUHLEEZE, the last thing I worry about is looking stupid to a lib! Someone who knows the alphabet in order is stupid to a lib.

Stating the obvious is nonsense to a liberal.

Meanwhile, the creature in the white house objects to reaqffirming in God We Trust as the national motto.
 
[

Good point, you can't walk a mile without seeing an atheist burning a church down.





Study a little history, comrade.

Every group of people with certain religious beliefs and without religious beliefs have committed atrocities.

Even people who go to the same religious buildings as you do believe it or not. It's a human problem and I hate to reveal this to you, but you aren't one of the chosen people.

Try that post again when you're sober.
 
Study a little history, comrade.

Every group of people with certain religious beliefs and without religious beliefs have committed atrocities.

Even people who go to the same religious buildings as you do believe it or not. It's a human problem and I hate to reveal this to you, but you aren't one of the chosen people.

Try that post again when you're sober.

Every group of people with certain religious beliefs and without religious beliefs have committed atrocities.

Even people who go to the same religious buildings as you do believe it or not. It's a human problem and I hate to reveal this to you, but you aren't one of the chosen people.
 
Oh PUHLEEZE, the last thing I worry about is looking stupid to a lib! Someone who knows the alphabet in order is stupid to a lib.

Stating the obvious is nonsense to a liberal.

Meanwhile, the creature in the white house objects to reaqffirming in God We Trust as the national motto.

Wrong.

There was a recent petition to remove it from our currency, and Obama actually responded saying that was unacceptable.

Try again.
 
Oh PUHLEEZE, the last thing I worry about is looking stupid to a lib! Someone who knows the alphabet in order is stupid to a lib.

Stating the obvious is nonsense to a liberal.

Meanwhile, the creature in the white house objects to reaqffirming in God We Trust as the national motto.

I'd love to line up my views against yours and see who's more liberal, I'm 1000% certain you're more liberal than me.

Obama is shit I agree.

I have no idea if what you said is true or not, but why is your faith so weak that you need government to reaffirm you?
 
Every group of people with certain religious beliefs and without religious beliefs have committed atrocities.

Even people who go to the same religious buildings as you do believe it or not. It's a human problem and I hate to reveal this to you, but you aren't one of the chosen people.

Try that post again when you're sober.

Every group of people with certain religious beliefs and without religious beliefs have committed atrocities..


Where have I claimed otherwise? Sober up, champ.
 
Every group of people with certain religious beliefs and without religious beliefs have committed atrocities..


Where have I claimed otherwise? Sober up, champ.

Just a few posts ago, where you equated atheism somehow with communism.

A) I did not do so

B) That does not address the claim in question in any case


Are you drunk too? Are you and Doctor Dopey partying together somewhere?
 

Forum List

Back
Top