TheAtheist888

@lykopis said:

@Raiiyn said:

@mrdecepticonleader: Aren't there certain limits to freedom of speech? As in things that are seen as hateful should not be said?

That's the beauty of free speech. Rational, intelligent people can determine easily who is racist and bigoted -- how else can we point at them and single them out for their hypocrisy and delusions if we muzzle them? So no -- free speech means free speech. Once we start inhibiting a person's right to their opinion, no matter how vile, then we take away self determination.

Yes, that would be the essence of free speech. Regarding religion or anything else, limit the freedom of speech, and we are talking about a tyranny.

This thread gets very interesting at various points of time with clever discussions and arguments from both sides. I for one wouldn't want this thread to be locked. So I would like to propose that we move on with the topic. Although I know that the issue of disrespect would crop up again at some point of time, but until then let's continue the discussions in a more civilized fashion as this time it seems overkill.

A normal Deadpool!!!!!!!!!!!????????????

No way... Not even for one issue! At least not in the main series.

Now this is a great example of how people have made religion completely impervious to criticism. You can criticize a restaurant if it makes bad food, you can criticize a political system if it is not doing any good for a country, you can criticize a theory of economics if it is not fruitful, but no! Not religion. This undeserved respect that religion gets has been a problem throughout human history. It is what led to the Inquisition in the past. We are lot more civilized now and don't find heresy hunts moral. But if and when someone points a finger at religion for its shortcomings, without being open minded towards criticism, the religious always give them the middle one.

@Shotgun said:

@TheAtheist888: @TheAtheist888 said:

May I ask for the contradicting evidences of evolution that you are talking about?

*Edit - And do also point out the alternative to the theory of evolution to explain the whole scenario of the development of biological organisms throughout millions of years.

I never said that I had any points or evidence against evolution, but I still don't buy that apes were the ancestors of homo sapiens.

Apes are not the ancestors of homo sapiens. No scientist including Darwin ever made that claim. Humans and apes like gorillas, chimpanzees, bonobos etc. are related because we share a common ape-like ancestor that lived millions of years ago and does not exist anymore. According to the theory of evolution, apes are related to us, it has never stated that they are our ancestors.

@ssejllenrad said:

@TheAtheist888 said:

All I am saying is, everyone should be open to suggestions and criticisms while discussing a sensitive subject like religion rather than getting offended at arguments.

This is very true. But we should also be mature about it. There is a difference between being critical and just being offensive for the sake of being offensive (even if there is some truth to it). Of course, satire is at times beyond these two and shouldn't be taken seriously.

Agreed.

@Enemybird said:

@TheAtheist888 said:

@Enemybird said:

@King Saturn said:

@Enemybird said:

I don't like how some atheist are on this site in particular. They tend to be a bit disrespectful and rude. It doesn't bother me at all that you don't believe in a higher power... just don't try to poke fun at me or others.

well according to Matthew 5 : 11 - 12, it is a blessed thing to be insulted and made fun of because of your faith cause your reward in heaven is great... so why are you bent out of shape because some users on a site are making fun of you because of what you believe... is this not to be expected anyways ?

Nobody has really made fun of me directly. However, It's indirectly insulting to compare someones faith to the tooth fairy among other things. I appreciate the excerpt but not everyone here is christian.

Don't know about the tooth fairies, but any religion must be criticized for its shortcomings if and when it leads to immoral acts committed against humanity. It should not be impervious to criticism.

Like I said it ok to have your own opinion just don't be disrespectful or rude.

That is commendable, but whenever faith is being criticized for its flaws, the religious tend to find it as an insult. I do agree that some of the discussions do turn out to be disturbingly offensive, but it is unwise to pin it on the atheist only. Well, it should be taken into account that anyone can be wrong whether it's a militant atheist or a moderate theist. All I am saying is, everyone should be open to suggestions and criticisms while discussing a sensitive subject like religion rather than getting offended at arguments.

@Enemybird said:

@King Saturn said:

@Enemybird said:

I don't like how some atheist are on this site in particular. They tend to be a bit disrespectful and rude. It doesn't bother me at all that you don't believe in a higher power... just don't try to poke fun at me or others.

well according to Matthew 5 : 11 - 12, it is a blessed thing to be insulted and made fun of because of your faith cause your reward in heaven is great... so why are you bent out of shape because some users on a site are making fun of you because of what you believe... is this not to be expected anyways ?

Nobody has really made fun of me directly. However, It's indirectly insulting to compare someones faith to the tooth fairy among other things. I appreciate the excerpt but not everyone here is christian.

Don't know about the tooth fairies, but any religion must be criticized for its shortcomings if and when it leads to immoral acts committed against humanity. It should not be impervious to criticism.

@Shotgun: First of all, the theory of evolution does not state that we descended from monkeys. The monkeys evolved too. Humans share a common ancestor with modern African apes, like gorillas and chimpanzees. A better understanding of the theory of evolution is in order before one points out "too many holes" in it. A scientific theory is not a simple guess or speculation. It is a convincing explanatory framework for a body of evidence meant to explain statements about the real world. A good theory will make sense of wide ranging data that was previously unexplained. It makes testable predictions and is vulnerable to falsification. One can conceivably prove any scientific theory wrong with the help contradicting evidences. May I ask for the contradicting evidences of evolution that you are talking about?

*Edit - And do also point out the alternative to the theory of evolution to explain the whole scenario of the development of biological organisms throughout millions of years.

@Rogan2112: I agree with you when you put it as the best working idea about how the biological organisms on earth came to be what they are today. There are many unknown facts - true. But all the evidences gathered till now strengthens the theory of evolution. The best part about science is that while forming an idea and pursuing it through the scientific method, it is criticized, rechecked, reanalyzed over and over again to find any errors. Then there's peer review of each and every theory by the giants in their particular fields. If errors do arise, scientists are the lot who will accept without any hesitation that they were wrong regarding a hypothesis. As of now, there is no such alarming discourse against the theory of evolution. Although one can always look forward to form other hypothesis if there's any contradicting evidence, but for now, it cannot be disproved with any such significant evidence.

Moving on, as I come to think of the existence of God, my position is somewhat similar to you. With what little knowledge of the cosmos we have at our disposal today because of science, it is still not enough to prove or disprove the existence of God. But here's when I differ from the theists, I don't think there's any reason to believe that one exists. And the fact that at this point of time we can't prove that an intervening God does not exist does not mean we would never be able to do that in the future. Many old religions and their gods became myths and fables because of the advancement of science. As I have said in the last post, in future, abiogenesis might be able to prove that through many complex processes, living organisms can be produced from inanimate objects. We are not in a position to say that science won't be able to make the God that intervenes obsolete in the future. As for logic, the God is still a matter of debate and the idea of an all-powerful and all-knowing God has not yet successfully passed through the arguments of Epicurus. For me, the best position to be in is being a skeptic and look for answers where the age old books can never take you.

And as for the killing part, I'd like to term it as direct and sometimes indirect outcome of organised religion which is not necessary to live in a peaceful world.

As always, looking forward to your skillful rebuttals.

@mrdecepticonleader To discover the origin of God, at first one has to prove that God exists. I'm afraid you would have to sit back and relax until one proves that God exists to get your answer.

*Grrrr! Had to edit the post so many times for the typos... Pardon me if I overlooked any.