h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

blub-blub, when you say "but please don't dismiss these legitimate arguments as mere abuse, just because you don't want to tackle them."
you are projecting, or rather, you are accusing me of doing what others have done.

Freud is otherwise known as 'fraud' for good reason, IMO. Your arguments re God being *our* creation are interesting, but obviously I don't accept them, but that's an argument which, however interesting, I don't have time for right now. Maybe later?

<< centre left trade union member>>

and another dose of !!! (To judge by your stated views on womens' rights, workers' rights and developing countries that is..

Jodie: "your stated views on womens' rights, workers' rights and developing countries"

Baffled. In what way to do my opinions on those subjects conflict with my characterisation of myself as "centre left"? (I am assuming at this point that you don't know what my opinions on those subjects are, and you are simply making things up as usual.)

SoRB

"*IF* you don't believe in God *THEN* what are you doing on a thread whose premise includes "if god turns out to be real" in the first place?"

Because atheists are the subject matter and was a question posed by an athiest (or at least thinks themself as one)?

Della,

"you are accusing me of doing what others have done."

Others may (or may not, I'm not picking sides yet) have abused your beliefs, but the examples I gave where definatley valid arguments.

When you do have time to 'argue' the ideas of god as our creation then you want to check out my [first] entry on the subject - A8364684. I respect the fact you probably don't agree with the arguments there, but all have been at some time 'endorsed' by theists.

Blub-blub

As for the bit about Crusaders piloting stealth bombers ... I am just going to stop right now, and refrain from engaging in the same type of instults that have been directed at me on the internet, partially because every time I try to stoop to that level, my opponents always manage to stoop lower so that I can't keep up (meaning I am too polite to win in a flamewar so I won't even try) but mostly because it would not be polite in the first place. (meaning I want to set a good example) I will just say I believe that simplistic view of history to be invalid.

Ok, I'm prepared to admit I was wrong, it was a heat-of-the-moment thing.

But I stand by my point that me expressing an opinion is not forcing anyone to do anything.
The catholic church making a law that ALL catholic priests everywhere HAVE to oppose the use of contraception, or persuading a gay christian that his worst fears will be realised if he dosn't agree with them: that's forcing a belief.

blub-blub

<>

Forcing a belief - on willing participants, else it would have no validity for them, and they could, and would ignore it.

Della,

The catholic church telling a gay non-catholic christian that his god will punish him amounts to a threat, and a threat is an attempt to force someone to do what you want, regardless of what they want.

blub-blub

I disagree, blub-blub. A non-Catholic would not feel himself bound by Catholic teaching, might in fact, just laugh it off - no harm done!(Well, to his amour propre anyway.)

I find it hard to accept the concept of 'gay Christian', but surely such a person puts the gay part first, and is therefore not really at all worried?

Della

I am sure you do but they exist. Have a read and at least understand even if you do not accept.

http://www.gaychristian.net/

http://www.gaychristians.org/

http://www.lgcm.org.uk/

Della,

If I was to assume a god existed, and assume that he had views one way or the other on homosexuals, a homosexual is bound to feel threatend and worried by those telling him god would punish homosexuals.

"puts the gay part first, and is therefore not really at all worried?"

If you are a hetrosexual, do you place this as being more important than your belief in god?

blub-blub

Hello,

Back after a bit of a hiatus. Thread's gone to sh*t then. Nice.


Nerd,

Here's the point that I'm making in a nutshell (I no longer am willing to patiently sit here and make a sincere effort to explain things to you - if you are not willing to learn about evolution then there is no hope. Congratulations, you are a Child Left Behind):

Your complaints about evolution are not based in science. They are based in your religion, specifically your unshakeable belief that the Bible should be read literally (*why* do you believe that anyway?).

Given this starting point you are not *allowed* to think evolution is true by your brain. You say it is absurd, yet you cannot give reasons why, and you are then unwilling to learn. You seem to think there is some conspiracy going on out there by a shifty cabal of scientists to keep evolution is the mainstream (talk about absurd!). This conspiracy also seems to extend to Bush-appointed, right-wing judges.


So, to summarise: Evolution has been established as a scientific fact for over a century and a half. The theory of evolution is an ongoing, vibrant field of scientific research that aims to explain how evolution happens. ID is (was) a last-ditch religious attept to squeeze the ever-shrinking God-of-the-Gaps into school curricula. It failed because it isn't science (admittedly cool idea though). Debate over. Goodnight.


Ste

<>

Personally, no, but I have met people who do put their sexuality first, mostly homosexuals, but some few heterosexuals.

You don't like gay people, do you Della?

I haven't met all gay people, but of the ones I've met, there is one I could say I liked, haven't seen him for a while but.

As for the rest, to a man (and woman) they were not nice people, oh no!

But as I have never met *all* gay people and never will, no, I won't say I don't like gay people.

(I don't like what many of them do..)

If you didn't say such unpleasant things, Della, I'd be sorry to see you banned from the site.

["How many is a brazillion?" - nice tag!]

You talk as if my banning is imminent, Rudest Elf. Is it up to you then? (Well, if it happens, I'll know, won't I?)


What do you mean by unpleasant things anyway? I answered Ste by saying, essentially no, I don't dislike all gay people, merely that all the ones I've met, with one exception, have been unpleasant self-centred people, who put their sexuality before all else.

The tagline is a Bushism, of course (or a reported one.)

Wow, so acting polite does get you somewhere!

"But I stand by my point that me expressing an opinion is not forcing anyone to do anything."
For some reason, the Israeli-Palistinian conflict springs into my mind when you say that. That's very odd...

But anyway, how is your saying something is wrong different from my saying something is evil?

"The catholic church making a law that ALL catholic priests everywhere HAVE to oppose the use of contraception, or persuading a gay christian that his worst fears will be realised if he dosn't agree with them: that's forcing a belief."

I am not in the habit of defending the corrupt Catholic church. (or the many corrupt Protestant churches for that matter) However, I think you are mistaken. That is not forcing any beliefs on anyone. Those people are perfectly free to leave the Catholic church at any time.
Nerd42

Ste: I did explain why. FISHES CAN'T HAVE MONKEY EGGS! LOL!!

I also think "gay Christian" is an inherrant contradiction, as the teachings of Christ/Christianity state clearly that homosexuality is evil. Thus, it is kind of like saying one is an "intelligent Democrat." (I'm a Republican - that was a political joke, OK - replace "Democrat" with any political party you disagree with and it will suddenly become funny to you )

But seriously, on the one hand a so-called "gay Christian" is a practicioner of a belief system (homosexuality isn't just a practice, as it incorporates a belief system to morally justify the practice) that contradicts the other belief system. (Christianity - which is an abolutist belief system and thus incompatible with contradictory belief systems)

It is like saying one is both an insect and a mammal at the same time.
Nerd42