Knowing is better than believing.

[BreezeWood]

So, I see a thread. I come onto the thread and post that "is like informing us the sun rises in the East". And I get attacked for it.

Apparently posting what is known, what is science, is not respectful? Come off it.

If someone really believes they had some kind of Godly experience and doesn't want to be told it's not a Godly experience, they can just keep it to themselves.

If they come onto a DEBATE FORUM and start a thread and all they expect is for people to write "well done mate" rather than actually have a conversation, then what's the point.

Really I'm confused. What is it you people want? For everyone to bow down to your views?

I do realize the religious right want their right to freedom of religion to be placed higher than any other right anyone else has, and it's ridiculous.

.

I do realize the religious right want their right to freedom of religion to be placed higher than any other right anyone else has, and it's ridiculous.

.
that's putting their obsession more than mildly when viewing the histories of such as those of the christian bible belt and their false religion's adherents that act to foil the true religion they have long ago abandoned.

 

[Meriweather]

Really I'm confused. What is it you people want? For everyone to bow down to your views?

A simple, "I agree with science that such events are due to brain chemistry" will suffice. No copying and pasting needed. No bowing down is needed either. If you are not interested in discussing the event, why not ignore the thread and start a thread called Brain Chemistry in Near Death Experiences? The two discussions can exist side by side quite nicely.

 

[frigidweirdo]

A simple, "I agree with science that such events are due to brain chemistry" will suffice. No copying and pasting needed. No bowing down is needed either. If you are not interested in discussing the event, why not ignore the thread and start a thread called Brain Chemistry in Near Death Experiences? The two discussions can exist side by side quite nicely.

So, you want my post to be how YOU WOULD HAVE WRITTEN IT?

I post my source, I take out the relevant information I want people to read so they don't have to click on the source, and I explain why the information I posted is relevant to my argument.

This is HOW IT SHOULD BE DONE.

Not the usual people telling you their information is correct without posting anything, or posting a youtube video 5 hours long and telling you that somewhere in this video is the information that proves their argument, if only you can find it nonsense.

Sorry that I debate in a proper manner. Next time when I discuss with you I'll make sure it's so vague and pointless the conversation ends instantly.

 

[Meriweather]

I do realize the religious right want their right to freedom of religion to be placed higher than any other right anyone else has, and it's ridiculous.

Actually, it has nothing to do with your statement. It has everything to do with a group getting together to discuss religious events/beliefs without being stampeded by the non-religious telling us how very wrong we are. Might be interesting to see what would happen with a thread called, Atheists, Let's Discuss Among Ourselves Why Those Who Believe Are Wrong. In the Opening Post you can note that those who believe can create their own thread about why they believe they are correct, but that your thread is for those who do not believe. Might be worth a try.

 

[Meriweather]

I post my source, I take out the relevant information I want people to read so they don't have to click on the source, and I explain why the information I posted is relevant to my argument.

Are you of the mind that every thread is an invitation to argue as opposed an an invitation to share?

 

[BreezeWood]

A simple, "I agree with science that such events are due to brain chemistry" will suffice. No copying and pasting needed. No bowing down is needed either. If you are not interested in discussing the event, why not ignore the thread and start a thread called Brain Chemistry in Near Death Experiences? The two discussions can exist side by side quite nicely.

.

Why is it in the religion forum? Because it is religious in nature most of the time. White light. Loved ones greeting them, sent back, etc.

In fact, the majority of us;have already squarely faced that possibility and reached the conclusion we truly did experience something extraordinary, which is why we are sharing our stories.

.
no, not one experience has been shared - by those claiming to have something to share - the o p in particular ... religious or secular is yet to be demonstrated.

 

[Meriweather]

I post my source, I take out the relevant information I want people to read so they don't have to click on the source, and I explain why the information I posted is relevant to my argument.

People can discuss without copying and pasting additional information. I am interested in you and what you have to say. I can check online myself if I want additional information.

 

[BreezeWood]

Are you of the mind that every thread is an invitation to argue as opposed an an invitation to share?

.

It has everything to do with a group getting together to discuss religious events/beliefs without being stampeded by the non-religious telling us how very wrong we are.

Are you of the mind that every thread is an invitation to argue as opposed an an invitation to share?

.
where has the above occurred ... is this a religious discussion - was that in the o p.
.
.

Knowing is better than believing.​

.
sorry, weather, that is a secular statement - not religious ...

 

[Meriweather]

Sorry that I debate in a proper manner. Next time when I discuss with you I'll make sure it's so vague and pointless the conversation ends instantly.

You are not a vague and pointless personality. You have no need to copy and paste other material. Besides, my point is to discuss the OP topic. Another thread can easily be created for the opposite topic that holds more interest to you and others--even those interested in the original thread.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Actually, it has nothing to do with your statement. It has everything to do with a group getting together to discuss religious events/beliefs without being stampeded by the non-religious telling us how very wrong we are. Might be interesting to see what would happen with a thread called, Atheists, Let's Discuss Among Ourselves Why Those Who Believe Are Wrong. In the Opening Post you can note that those who believe can create their own thread about why they believe they are correct, but that your thread is for those who do not believe. Might be worth a try.

Here's an idea. Go to a forum which isn't about people discussing your ideas from a non-religious point of view.

This particular page is about "Religion, Philosophy and the discussion of right and wrong"

As far as I know there isn't a page which is only for religious people to talk and avoid bumping into people with other views. But I'm sure there are plenty of websites.

I'm sure atheists will be willing to talk to you about the rights and wrongs of atheism. I'll be the first to say atheists are wrong.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Are you of the mind that every thread is an invitation to argue as opposed an an invitation to share?

You see my post as arguing, perhaps I see it as sharing. I SHARED my point of view. If the dude didn't want my point of view, he shouldn't have written his post here.

And yes, I do see a forum like this as a place where everyone can come in and "share" or "argue" their point of view. In fact people do it all the time from such a low level, no evidence to back up their arguments, usually line of logic that lack any logic at all, and they do it a thousand times a day.

That's what this webpage is.

 

[frigidweirdo]

You are not a vague and pointless personality. You have no need to copy and paste other material. Besides, my point is to discuss the OP topic. Another thread can easily be created for the opposite topic that holds more interest to you and others--even those interested in the original thread.

I have need to copy and paste. Because I want you to read it. I want you to read it instead of having to click on another website. I want to say "this is my argument, this is my evidence" so that you UNDERSTAND my point of view.

Seriously, this is how things are done properly.

This thread held interest for me. That's why I responded.

That you don't like my response is neither here nor there.

 

[K9Buck]

I do realize the religious right want their right to freedom of religion to be placed higher than any other right anyone else has, and it's ridiculous.

No man, we just opposed thread hijackings, which is true for any topic in any forum. You can't seem to get that through your head. For reasons unknown to me, you believe that you have the right to go into any thread and change the topic of the discussion. Be considerate of another's thread. That's all. Can you go along with that?

 

[Meriweather]

As far as I know there isn't a page which is only for religious people to talk and avoid bumping into people with other views. But I'm sure there are plenty of websites.

We discuss differing religious points of view all the time. That's the part I enjoy most.

 

[Meriweather]

I'm sure atheists will be willing to talk to you about the rights and wrongs of atheism. I'll be the first to say atheists are wrong.

If I am interested in religion, why would I enter a thread topic where atheists clearly wish to discuss non-belief, any more than I would enter a thread whose topic was flat earth?

 

[Meriweather]

As far as I know there isn't a page which is only for religious people to talk and avoid bumping into people with other views.

I am not talking about the page, I am talking about the thread topic. If the topic is near death experiences, why would I come into that thread to read about whey they don't really exist? I have already read all the subject on that, but I am interested in hearing about NDE I haven't yet come across.

 

[Meriweather]

Because I want you to read it.

I ignore all cut and pastes, because my interest lies in the poster's own views, not the cut and pastes from non-members. If I want information, I find my own sources.

 

[BreezeWood]

I ignore all cut and pastes, because my interest lies in the poster's own views, not the cut and pastes from non-members. If I want information, I find my own sources.

I post my source, I take out the relevant information I want people to read so they don't have to click on the source, and I explain why the information I posted is relevant to my argument.

.
surly then that would include quotes used from any religious document - they feel pertinent to the subject ... and must discuss religion otherwise.

... no more forgeries and fallacies - all in. that's a winner.

 

[frigidweirdo]

No man, we just opposed thread hijackings, which is true for any topic in any forum. You can't seem to get that through your head. For reasons unknown to me, you believe that you have the right to go into any thread and change the topic of the discussion. Be considerate of another's thread. That's all. Can you go along with that?

But I didn't hijack the thread.

I'm being considerate. I'm talking about the topic of the thread.

So yes, I can go along with that. Can you accept that any thread of here is open to different people's views?

 

[K9Buck]

Can you accept that any thread of here is open to different people's views?

Not a point in dispute.