Originally posted by Wonder ManI think people should stop fighting and start working together.
Originally posted by DigiYou should write to your Congressman ...
mmm
That's more like who people should write if they want to take the fighting up a notch and stop working together.
Neil de Grasse Tyson explained the inherent problem of Congress quite well in the following interview clip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tKdaRcptVz8&feature=related
(1 minute 55 second mark to 3 minute 42 second mark)
Originally posted by bluewaterrider
mmmThat's more like who people should write if they want to take the fighting [b]up
a notch and stop working together.Neil de Grasse Tyson explained the inherent problem of Congress quite well in the following interview clip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tKdaRcptVz8&feature=related
(1 minute 55 second mark to 3 minute 42 second mark) [/B]
You realize I was being sarcastic in that response about writing Congress, yeah?
Originally posted by DigiYou arbitrarily decided I'm a Dawkins follower, despite explicit statements otherwise. And instead of seeing my last couple posts for what they were - positive statements about the nature of critical thought, and documentation of my attempts to separate beliefs from the people who believe them when I am attacking an idea - you instead decide to plow past that to further whatever point you're trying to push here. Which, again, have nothing to do with anything I've posted and have completely ignored my posts.
Digi, when you're done laughing with Rob, please let me know exactly what posts you think I've ignored from you that you asked an answer to.
I really don't think I've missed any.
Then, too, I think you missed the fact that the posts about Dawkins were not just to you but also responses to Stealth Moose and others.
Not that I would have any reason to think you were NOT a follower of Dawkins, by the way -- I'd be interested in seeing what "explicit statements" you made disavowing him before my response to you -- I just want to make the point that you were not the only one being addressed.
Originally posted by Stealth Moose
Since the evidence against my mysterious photo is very weak, I must reassert conclusively that it exists./debate.
It does exist. It exists in the waveform of the universe. Unfortunately, it is only virtual, and only manifests itself in your imagination.
Prove that isn't true. 😉
Moose, when you're done playing with your KMC best friend, you can come and admit my bolded quote from much earlier was and is correct, and admitted even by fervent atheists of Richard Dawkins' caliber.
Originally posted by Stealth MooseYou have chosen to interpret the non-Christian beliefs as dangerous without giving the same ruling to Christians, which is a baffling kind of selective judgment on your part.
Originally posted by bluewaterrider
The simple fact is, there IS a difference among religions, there IS a difference among belief systems and what manifests from them, there IS cause for judging among those belief systems, and the man that ignores this fact is ignoring reality.
Originally posted by bluewaterriderRavi Zacharias ... points out the flaw in Stealth Moose's reasoning that all religions are equal ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPlqjziNFdA
(2 minutes 40 seconds)
Originally posted by bluewaterriderDawkins' thinking has evolved to the point that he himself illustrates one reason why Stealth Moose is wrong if he equates one religious belief equivalent to one another ...
Interestingly enough, it is a near complete reversal of the content of [Dawkins'] earlier "mock them with ridicule" speech shown in the [Ravi Zacharias] video.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Richard Dawkins confronts a Muslim who says Islam is peaceful
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0Ks4pCO5O8
7 min 14 sec
(the deadly penalty of apostasy in a Muslim country)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4:02
... I should say, the act of collective worship, I don't approve of it, but nevertheless:
The Christian religion ... is benign by comparison ...
The penalty for apostasy in the Christian religion is not death.
There is no penalty for apostasy at all in the Christian religion.
The Christian religion is comparatively benign, and we should respect it as such. -- Richard Dawkins
4:33
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So without watching a dozen Youtube videos, because again I've told you before I don't take time to watch every five or ten minute video that you cherry picked, etc. etc.
Bottom line, faiths are equal in their faith-based foundations. It's right in the description and bordering on axiomatic. The dogma of the easter bunny doesn't kill anyone either; should I arbitrarily decide that it is too polite and nice to have the burden of proof on its shoulders?
This is of course ignoring the righteous violence sanctioned in the old testament, the crusades, the raping of the New World often justified in bringing god to the heathens, and the scriptures justifying racism in the curse of Ham (erroneously, but still again in vogue) and all the other kewl Christian things that we should remove so as to think of Christians as bastions of love and understanding and morality.
If someone has faith that the easter bunny exists but can't satisfy the burden of proof, how is this different from Christianity? Can you prove God to me?