Well, I had decided that my previous post in this thread would be my last, as Bigboy and I were just going in circles. I'm sure he feels the same; we said all we could say, and were getting nowhere.
But, Jesus Christ ... It's not that I'm not glad that it isn't back-and-forth posts of the same two arguments anymore, but it has now really derailed into something far worse.
I weep for the future.
I can't restrain from responding to a couple of things:
Omniscientx said:
I have no problem with atheists, but Im willing to bet that 50% of atheists can't give you a valid reason as to why they are atheists, most of them just dont care if God exists or doesn't.
Your thinking on this is so bloody Back-asswards, it makes me woozy. I understand that "God exists" is a given to your state of mind, but to someone with a little doubt on the subject, it would make a lot more sense to say that most religious people can't really give a "valid" reason for
believing in God. That is to say, other than that they were told so all their life that he/she/it is there. You've literally stated things in the exact opposite way than they really are: you've shifted the burden of proof from the religious to prove that God exists, onto those that doubt to prove that he
doesn't exist.
Any good debater can tell you that the burden of proof always lies with the person making the claim. It is
never with those who doubt your claim to prove that it is NOT true.
The ones who don't really "care" one way or the other are more accurately described as agnostic. Atheism, by definition, is a firm disbelief in any supreme being.
Omniscientx said:
Haha, I don't hate gay guys because the book says its wrong, I hate them because its my opinion and my opinion is that men should not buttsecks men. Its nasty, and its wrong. Lesbians are always hot, but it doesnt make them more right.
Well, if the basis of your "hate" (your word, not mine) isn't religious, I really don't understand it. I've never heard a non-religious explanation for why homosexuality is 'wrong,' at least not one that holds up under any sort of scrutiny. Is it even possible to explain why something that doesn't hurt anyone else is morally wrong without some sort of religious dictation?
I mean, universal morality is understandable by all, on a basis of logical reasoning, because it is easy to find victims in immoral acts that everyone agrees on. Theft, murder, rape, deception, fraud ... these can all be said to be "immoral" without needing the "because God said so" explanation.
Things like "don't masturbate" or "don't be gay," on the other hand, have only ever been pointed to as immoral based on religious views. You can't explain those to someone who doesn't believe in your religion; thus, I've never really seen the conviction that they're wrong exist separately from it.
"Nasty" and "wrong"? Are you saying it's wrong because it's NASTY? I mean, I can't really claim a great love for onions, either, but I don't literally HATE people who eat them. I don't have to project my sickening dislike of doing something myself on to the people that do it. Why do you?