Atheism: See Spot Laugh

[Hollie]

cool emotions

Don't you have some doll to molest?
Wack-job, retard.

What a shame more people aren’t Christian.

 

[rightwinger]

The point is that you do not know what you are talking about.

Prayer was taken out of schools. It was a wise decision

The point is that you're as obtuse as a box of rocks. Once again:

As for the concerns of natural and constitutional law, he and BreezeWood can't get past their hysterical hatred for Christianity to grasp the fact that I'm a classical liberal defending original intent, not arguing that the Lord's prayer be imposed on their children like lefty imposes his filth in the state schools.​

That aspect of the Court's decision—i.e., the removal of the imposition of certain trappings of the Christian religion—was correct! What have I written anywhere asserting that I disagree with that aspect of the decision?

crickets chirping

There is nothing profound about your observation, but, apparently, my point is light years above the altitude of your IQ. Either that or you're pretending not to grasp the point or are empathetically incapable of grasping the point. Which is it?

See link regarding the pertinent matter of natural and constitutional law: Revisions and Divisions: the subversion of the principle of the separation of church and state

By the way, I'm a member in a home-schooling association that raises funds to help folks get their kids into private schools of their choice or home school.

Now define God.

Home school

All I need to know

 

[BreezeWood]

The point is that you do not know what you are talking about.

Prayer was taken out of schools. It was a wise decision

The point is that you're as obtuse as a box of rocks. Once again:

As for the concerns of natural and constitutional law, he and BreezeWood can't get past their hysterical hatred for Christianity to grasp the fact that I'm a classical liberal defending original intent, not arguing that the Lord's prayer be imposed on their children like lefty imposes his filth in the state schools.​

That aspect of the Court's decision—i.e., the removal of the imposition of certain trappings of the Christian religion—was correct! What have I written anywhere asserting that I disagree with that aspect of the decision?

crickets chirping

There is nothing profound about your observation, but, apparently, my point is light years above the altitude of your IQ. Either that or you're pretending not to grasp the point or are empathetically incapable of grasping the point. Which is it?

See link regarding the pertinent matter of natural and constitutional law: Revisions and Divisions: the subversion of the principle of the separation of church and state

By the way, I'm a member in a home-schooling association that raises funds to help folks get their kids into private schools of their choice or home school.

Now define God.

.

Now define God.

the gatekeeper to the Everlasting - the Almighty ...

 

[Ringtone]

Home school

All I need to know

Yes, indeed. Homeschooled children are among the best educated in the country! My three-year-old girl, for example, reads at a first-grade level, my five-year-old boy, at a third-grade level. They also do first- and third-grade-level math, respectively, and are as fluent as children can be at that age in Spanish and English. In another few years, they're be better educated than you, rw.

Now define God.

 

[rightwinger]

Home school

All I need to know

Yes, indeed. Homeschooled children are among the best educated in the country! My three-year-old girl, for example, reads at a first-grade level, my five-year-old boy, at a third-grade level. They also do first- and third-grade-level math, respectively, and are as fluent as children can be at that age in Spanish and English. In another few years, they're be better educated than you, rw.

Social misfits

 

[JimBowie1958]

You are acting Triggered, Jimmothy. Chill out, pixie is watching you and christmas is coming

Speaking truthfully to you is not being triggered, idiot.

 

[Ringtone]

Social misfits

Not social misfits. . . . I'm raising them to be deplorables; you know, folks who cling to God, country, morality and guns, rw. The very opposite of Obama's spoiled brats.

Let's take a look at the "socialized" kids:



Now define God.

 

[Vandalshandle]

I think that a dialog of Dick and Jane discussing religion is probably about at the appropriate level for theist's to grasp.

 

[JimBowie1958]

I think that a dialog of Dick and Jane discussing religion is probably about at the appropriate level for theist's to grasp.

Well, there's your mistake, right out of the gate.

 

[BreezeWood]

Home school

All I need to know

Yes, indeed. Homeschooled children are among the best educated in the country! My three-year-old girl, for example, reads at a first-grade level, my five-year-old boy, at a third-grade level. They also do first- and third-grade-level math, respectively, and are as fluent as children can be at that age in Spanish and English. In another few years, they're be better educated than you, rw.

Now define God.

.

Yes, indeed. Homeschooled children are among the best educated in the country!

https://www.salon.com/2014/10/how_christian_fundamentalist_homeschooling_damages_children_partner/

How Christian fundamentalist homeschooling damages children

The religious right touts homeschooling as a viable educational alternative. Parents, grads tell a different story ...

the documentation for christian fundamentalist education homeschooling is replete with failure and lasting harm to the indoctrinated children.

- ringtone's answer for children is - christianity, the zealot leading the innocent.

 

[ding]

Now define God

I would be shocked if you ever had one atheist attempt to answer that question.

The fact that they can’t proves they have never seriously considered the possibility of God existing.

 

[Hollie]

Home school

All I need to know

Yes, indeed. Homeschooled children are among the best educated in the country! My three-year-old girl, for example, reads at a first-grade level, my five-year-old boy, at a third-grade level. They also do first- and third-grade-level math, respectively, and are as fluent as children can be at that age in Spanish and English. In another few years, they're be better educated than you, rw.

Now define God.

Which of the hundreds of gods should anyone attempt to define?

The gods have come and gone as various civilizations which created their gods have come and gone.

With enough weapons and ammo, you religious extremists should be able to settled the matter among yourselves.

 

[G.T.]

Now define God

I would be shocked if you ever had one atheist attempt to answer that question.

The fact that they can’t proves they have never seriously considered the possibility of God existing.

Thats super goofy, and biased.

The correct approach to any belief, before being presented with a case/argument... is the null hypothesis.

Since atheists arent the ones positing Gods, i.e. the "positive" case then which party is it up to...to define the God they're asserting exists?

The one(s) making the assertion.

Thats just common sense.


YOURE saying x...exists.

YOU define x, then.

Herpaaaaderp

 

[G.T.]

Home school

All I need to know

Yes, indeed. Homeschooled children are among the best educated in the country! My three-year-old girl, for example, reads at a first-grade level, my five-year-old boy, at a third-grade level. They also do first- and third-grade-level math, respectively, and are as fluent as children can be at that age in Spanish and English. In another few years, they're be better educated than you, rw.

Now define God.

Which of the hundreds of gods should anyone attempt to define?

Exactly.

 

[BreezeWood]

Now define God - “Well,” said Spot. “The atheist believes he knows what no human being can possibly known, don’t you see - “Laugh, Spot, Laugh!” Jane giggled.

christianity is in fact a mental disorder - they deny objective reasoning in substitution for their false messiah. by believing their messiah will know for them what they will not learn for themselves. and teach that to their children.

 

[rightwinger]

Social misfits

Not social misfits. . . . I'm raising them to be deplorables; you know, folks who cling to God, country, morality and guns, rw. The very opposite of Obama's spoiled brats.

Let's take a look at the "socialized" kids:



Now define God.

Sorry, board rules prohibit me from talking about your kids

Homeschoolers though, are social misfits with parents who are trying to shield them from society

 

[diver52]

Can you imagine how AWFUL it must be to be a faithless, heathen atheist? My sister is an atheist and she's sullen and disagreeable almost all the time. She has very little happiness in her life. I feel sorry for her.

In addition to pseudoscience, atheism breeds nihilism and despair, and leads to the oppression, deprivation and atrocity of collectivistic think, to the dehumanizing reductionism of rank statism. Atheism is the death of virtue, poetry, music, beauty, romance. Atheism is sheer madness.

And dandruff.

 

[diver52]

"You believe in an imaginary God and a dog that talks"

and he actually mocks people who are too sane and rational to believe in his moronic fairy tales!

"just deny the following things;
god, your eyes, common sense, probabilities, rationality and logic"

I'm sorry but if that actually makes sense to you then your brain is malfunctioning.

My eyes see no god.

Neither do yours.

common sense tells me there is no god

probabilities tell me there is no god

rationality tells me there is no god

logic tells me there is no god

and the very fact that you would use such deranged logic as PROOF is just more reason why I embrace atheism.

While I certainly agree the other argument has no validity, neither does yours. There is no evidence. You can't apply common sense, probabilities, rationality or logic when there is no evidence. I can't see the air between me and the wall, but that doesn't mean it isn't there. I can test for the presence of air because I have information as to the properties of air. I have no information of any kind to make any sort of determination as to the existence or non-existence of any deity. In the absence of evidence the only rational response is "I don't know". Otherwise, it is just an expression of faith.

 

[diver52]

Tyranny?
Shirley you jest

Are you actually trying to engage me in a serious discussion on the imperatives of the First Amendment, rightwinger? I've never seen you lift a thought heavier than a mindless slogan off the ground. I don't think you're up to it.

From the OP:

“Is that why humanists exclusively impose their ideology on us in the state schools and say that the teaching of the theological perspective and an open-ended, methodological naturalism for science in the same are unconstitutional?” Dick wondered.

“Yes, Dick,” Spot sighed. "I’m afraid so. You see, children, the way the principle of the separation of church and state works according to the humanist’s ‘logic’, Christians don’t have any inalienable rights in the state schools. The public education system is the humanist’s church and humanism is it’s religion.“​

You do understand that institutions of education do not and cannot exist in ideological vacuums, don't you?

Here's a novel idea for ya, lefty: the variously disparate, religious and philosophical views of the people are not unconstitutional!

Isn't that a daisy?

In the series of decisions of the 50s and 60s that saddled us with an education system that turns out dumbed-down socialists and sexual degenerates, the leftist Warren Court failed to declare the only constitutional remedy that would have satisfied the imperatives of the First Amendment for all: either the public education system in and of itself is unconstitutional or a public education system without universal school choice is unconstitutional.

One size does not and cannot fit all.

Having been one of the students in those classes in the 50's, I can tell you that the problem wasn't that an ideology was being taught, but that only one ideology was being taught. When you say you want this brought back, what you mean is you want your ideology. Not mine, or a Hindu's, or a Muslim, etc. You want Genesis taught, not the Vedas or the Sutras. You call for school prayer, but when the teacher starts handing out prayer mats for the kiddies to bow down to Mecca, that will be an entirely different story.

If you want this ideology taught to your kids, then teach them.

 

[ding]

Now define God

I would be shocked if you ever had one atheist attempt to answer that question.

The fact that they can’t proves they have never seriously considered the possibility of God existing.

Thats super goofy, and biased.

The correct approach to any belief, before being presented with a case/argument... is the null hypothesis.

Since atheists arent the ones positing Gods, i.e. the "positive" case then which party is it up to...to define the God they're asserting exists?

The one(s) making the assertion.

Thats just common sense.


YOURE saying x...exists.

YOU define x, then.

Herpaaaaderp

No. The correct approach is to identify the possible options and systematically work through each option. Something you haven’t done.