Can Atheists be Moral?

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You consider Peterson a quack.

He absolutely is. And that is quite independent his beliefs. He is a quack who uses quack tactics. He prattles on and on about things he knows nothing about, and he tosses lies in that are easy to miss.

You don't have to take my word for it. Do a little searching....people have had fun analyzing his quackery and charlatan's tactocs..

I know it can be hard for a guy like you to take criticism of someone who says what you want to hear. But i assure you, he is a fraud. Any decent point he makes can be found elsewhere, without the accompanying, embarrassing nonsense.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

For many run of the mill atheists it isn't enough to reject the concept of God.

This is stupid. The "run of the mill" atheist simply does not accept a belief in any gods. You are just vomiting whatever pleases your own ears and fetishes.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

This is stupid. The "run of the mill" atheist simply does not accept a belief in any gods. You are just vomiting whatever pleases your own ears and fetishes.

It is stupid. I'm not complaining about atheists beliefs, per se but about the hubris and superior smugness many atheists display in places precisely like this one.

It's often not enough just to say I believe this or that. They have to ridicule and belittle while they are about it.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

He absolutely is. And that is quite independent his beliefs. He is a quack who uses quack tactics. He prattles on and on about things he knows nothing about, and he tosses lies in that are easy to miss.

You don't have to take my word for it. Do a little searching....people have had fun analyzing his quackery and charlatan's tactocs..

I know it can be hard for a guy like you to take criticism of someone who says what you want to hear. But i assure you, he is a fraud. Any decent point he makes can be found elsewhere, without the accompanying, embarrassing nonsense.

Okay. You have a bug up your ass about Jordan Peterson and I don't know why. There's no accounting for how people will love or detest someone.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

per se but about the hubris and superior smugness many atheists display in places precisely like this one.

Well that is stupid also. Infinitely more arrogant is the claim that magical sky daddies exist without a shred of evidence. Amd even more arrogant is the magical threats..."bekieve this or suffer forever"....both infinitely more arrogant than any atheist tenet or belief. So those must really, really bother you.

 

[ding]

per se but about the hubris and superior smugness many atheists display in places precisely like this one.

Well that is stupid also. Infinitely more arrogant is the claim that magical sky daddies exist without a shred of evidence. Amd even more arrogant is the magical threats..."bekieve this or suffer forever"....both infinitely more arrogant than any atheist tenet or belief. So those must really, really bother you.

There’s tons of evidence. It’s all around and in you. You just don’t accept it.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

per se but about the hubris and superior smugness many atheists display in places precisely like this one.

Well that is stupid also. Infinitely more arrogant is the claim that magical sky daddies exist without a shred of evidence. Amd even more arrogant is the magical threats..."bekieve this or suffer forever"....both infinitely more arrogant than any atheist tenet or belief. So those must really, really bother you.

There’s tons of evidence. It’s all around and in you. You just don’t accept it.

No, there isnt. You clearly have no concept of the meaning of that word.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Well that is stupid also. Infinitely more arrogant is the claim that magical sky daddies exist without a shred of evidence.

A really smart discerning person would infer God when noting the vast endless universe all around him. It didn't fall out of a box of Cracker Jacks one day.
But of course that's not you.

Amd even more arrogant is the magical threats..."bekieve this or suffer forever"....both infinitely more arrogant than any atheist tenet or belief. So those must really, really bother you.

So you think God is an imaginary
non being, yet you feel threatened by the threat of eternal suffering?

Well that's interesting....and intellectually wildly inconsistent. Whether you acknowledge the hubris and smug self superiority of many atheists or not I can assure you it exists.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

A really smart discerning person would infer God when noting the vast endless universe all around him

No he wouldn't. That's stupid.

So you think God is an imaginary
non being, yet you feel threatened by the threat of eternal suffering

Not at all. The intent, nonetheless, is a threat, so it is a threat. Dude, seriously, try to think this stuff through for at least a few seconds before you post.

 

[ding]

per se but about the hubris and superior smugness many atheists display in places precisely like this one.

Well that is stupid also. Infinitely more arrogant is the claim that magical sky daddies exist without a shred of evidence. Amd even more arrogant is the magical threats..."bekieve this or suffer forever"....both infinitely more arrogant than any atheist tenet or belief. So those must really, really bother you.

There’s tons of evidence. It’s all around and in you. You just don’t accept it.

No, there isnt. You clearly have no concept of the meaning of that word.

Let’s see who has no concept of the word evidence.

If you created something and I found it but didn’t know who created it, could I use it as evidence?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

per se but about the hubris and superior smugness many atheists display in places precisely like this one.

Well that is stupid also. Infinitely more arrogant is the claim that magical sky daddies exist without a shred of evidence. Amd even more arrogant is the magical threats..."bekieve this or suffer forever"....both infinitely more arrogant than any atheist tenet or belief. So those must really, really bother you.

There’s tons of evidence. It’s all around and in you. You just don’t accept it.

No, there isnt. You clearly have no concept of the meaning of that word.

Let’s see who has no concept of the word evidence.

If you created something and I found it but didn’t know who created it, could I use it as evidence?

That's a stupid, nonsensical question.

 

[ding]

per se but about the hubris and superior smugness many atheists display in places precisely like this one.

Well that is stupid also. Infinitely more arrogant is the claim that magical sky daddies exist without a shred of evidence. Amd even more arrogant is the magical threats..."bekieve this or suffer forever"....both infinitely more arrogant than any atheist tenet or belief. So those must really, really bother you.

There’s tons of evidence. It’s all around and in you. You just don’t accept it.

No, there isnt. You clearly have no concept of the meaning of that word.

Let’s see who has no concept of the word evidence.

If you created something and I found it but didn’t know who created it, could I use it as evidence?

That's a stupid, nonsensical question.

Actually it isn’t. Look up the definition of evidence. If you created something I could use it as evidence. Tell me how it’s not evidence.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Well that is stupid also. Infinitely more arrogant is the claim that magical sky daddies exist without a shred of evidence. Amd even more arrogant is the magical threats..."bekieve this or suffer forever"....both infinitely more arrogant than any atheist tenet or belief. So those must really, really bother you.

There’s tons of evidence. It’s all around and in you. You just don’t accept it.

No, there isnt. You clearly have no concept of the meaning of that word.

Let’s see who has no concept of the word evidence.

If you created something and I found it but didn’t know who created it, could I use it as evidence?

That's a stupid, nonsensical question.

Actually it isn’t. Look up the definition of evidence. If you created something I could use it as evidence. Tell me how it’s not evidence.

Ding, you aren't making any sense. Pure gibberish.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

No he wouldn't. That's stupid.

No. I said a thinking person would. A person who knows everything has a source and nothing is uncaused.

Not at all. The intent, nonetheless, is a threat, so it is a threat. Dude, seriously, try to think this stuff through for at least a few seconds before you post.

How come you are threatened by an imaginary character? Do you feel like Aquaman may be coming for you?
That's really really strange.

 

[ding]

There’s tons of evidence. It’s all around and in you. You just don’t accept it.

No, there isnt. You clearly have no concept of the meaning of that word.

Let’s see who has no concept of the word evidence.

If you created something and I found it but didn’t know who created it, could I use it as evidence?

That's a stupid, nonsensical question.

Actually it isn’t. Look up the definition of evidence. If you created something I could use it as evidence. Tell me how it’s not evidence.

Ding, you aren't making any sense. Pure gibberish.

Any tangible item can be used as evidence. What part of that doesn’t make sense to you?

 

[ding]

There’s tons of evidence. It’s all around and in you. You just don’t accept it.

No, there isnt. You clearly have no concept of the meaning of that word.

Let’s see who has no concept of the word evidence.

If you created something and I found it but didn’t know who created it, could I use it as evidence?

That's a stupid, nonsensical question.

Actually it isn’t. Look up the definition of evidence. If you created something I could use it as evidence. Tell me how it’s not evidence.

Ding, you aren't making any sense. Pure gibberish.

The reality is that you have never made a serious attempt at studying the evidence you have at your disposal? Why? Because you don’t believe it is evidence. That is circular logic and it led to intentional ignorance on your part.

 

[BreezeWood]

How come you are threatened by an imaginary character?

the tone of your threat is what is threatening, christian, your religion ...

.

 

[ding]

How come you are threatened by an imaginary character?

the tone of your threat is what is threatening, christian, your religion ...

.

You are swinging at windmills, Don Quixote.

But then again that’s what subversives do. They create drama and conflict where there is none.

No one is trying to force you to believe. No one is trying to convert you.

So you create a straw man to justify your aggression. Thus proving that you believe in right and wrong even as you violate it.

These are your steps.

1. Demoralize
2. Destabilize
3. Crisis
4. Normalization

 

[Mike Dwight]

Atheists just depend on things like illogical self-interest, organization, I mean they must be self-motivated, and then attack these same qualities when they see it with churches.

 

[BreezeWood]

How come you are threatened by an imaginary character?

the tone of your threat is what is threatening, christian, your religion ...

.

You are swinging at windmills, Don Quixote.

But then again that’s what subversives do. They create drama and conflict where there is none.

No one is trying to force you to believe. No one is trying to convert you.

So you create a straw man to justify your aggression. Thus proving that you believe in right and wrong even as you violate it.

These are your steps.

1. Demoralize
2. Destabilize
3. Crisis
4. Normalization

.

You are swinging at windmills, Don Quixote.

its been a while, Quixote ... the fact is christianity is not a windmill, the christian bible is a political document disguised as a religion and serves to undermine the prescribed religion of the Almighty and the stated goal for admission to the Everlasting. so, no it is not a dream.

No one is trying to force you to believe. No one is trying to convert you.

you have been called out before bing, the gal above is not forgotten nor the crucifixion nor that your type have never faced the justice you deserve.

Atheists just depend on things like illogical self-interest, organization, I mean they must be self-motivated, and then attack these same qualities when they see it with churches.

and then attack these same qualities when they see it with churches ...

if that were true of atheist to the extent of "churches" being the same the morality to triumph over evil would be for both the same as the spoken religion of antiquity prescribes.