It's May 22nd

[who_cares973]

Re: It's May 22nd

guy two:no my grass is greener

[who_cares973]

Re: It's May 22nd

guy one:how you tell that your grass is greener when there is a wall that you cant see past

[who_cares973]

Re: It's May 22nd

guy two:i could ask you the same question

[who_cares973]

Re: It's May 22nd

guy one:yeah well w/e my grass is greener

[who_cares973]

Re: It's May 22nd

guy two:you're an idiot who doesnt know any better. my grass is greener

[who_cares973]

Re: It's May 22nd

guy one:look at this guy calling me an idiot when he cant prove that his grass is greener than my grass LOL

[Sephiroth28]

Re: It's May 22nd

^ This is right on the money.

[sakura080789]

Re: It's May 22nd

epic WC

[DotKritic]

Re: It's May 22nd

nice WC.

[Reach]

Re: It's May 22nd

Just because there is a lack of evidence regarding a certain religion doesn't necessarily mean it is false, but that the evidence just hasn't been discovered yet.

You can think that all you want, but it holds no weight in an intellectual argument.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophic_burden_of_proof

When you make claims, you are burdened with having to be able to back them up. The other party does not need to debunk your claim, it's not their burden because they're not the ones making a claim. If this was not the case, I could simply claim any nonsense I want without ever having to support it, instead telling you to go disprove it.

Can you provide evidence that atheism is accurate and correct.

Atheism in and of itself isn't really a claim, so it doesn't need to be proven. Rather, it's a rejection of a claim (the religious claim), which must be subjected to the burden of proof by any serious intellectual.

The foundation of (a)-(theism) is essentially that (theism) does not pass the burden of proof, thus rejecting the existence of theistic deities until proven otherwise by theistic parties.

Now if you're talking about stuff like making claims about how life on earth started or how the universe started, you would need to provide evidence, but that isn't atheism.



With respect to the current topic;

http://i.imgur.com/0tpku.png

8)

[-zeroSKILL-]

Re: It's May 22nd

I lol'd hard at

Can you provide evidence that atheism is accurate and correct.

The rest of the thread kinda went to shit after that post... but still, that was funny.

Asking someone to prove that atheism is "accurate and correct" is like asking someone to prove that my opinion that chocolate tastes good is "accurate and correct". Atheism is an opinion, religion is a belief.

Opinions:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnosticism

Religion:
Everything else that can't be proven.

[Andrew Mitchell]

Re: It's May 22nd

no proof as proof

[Patricoo]

Re: It's May 22nd

Atheism in and of itself isn't really a claim, so it doesn't need to be proven. Rather, it's a rejection of a claim (the religious claim)

If you really wanna nit-pick and argue semantics it can be a claim. Religion is not a singular thing. We have words for people exploring the middle ground. Religion is actually this broad, wide-scoping subject that involves so many possibilities and to say all beliefs that have been and will be thought of are wrong in a ballsy claim.

But since we're just working with broad, offensive generalities why I don't take some shots at atheists as well?

Most of you kids aren't really atheists. You're just lazy people with a poor understanding of general Protestant ideas forming straw arguments in order to make yourselves feel intelligent. If you want to have an intelligent discussion, start off with Buddhism and Atheism. Go ahead. Look into it. I don't give a damn what you decide on, but hopefully the two of you who google it will come away realizing that all religion isn't some guy on the radio convincing ninety stupid people some stupid thing.

Anyways, I'm being mean on purpose. I don't give a damn as I've accepted Jesus as my true lord and savvv...pphhhffttthahahaha.

[kommisar]

Re: It's May 22nd

don't argue with reach man....

[Reach]

Re: It's May 22nd

If you really wanna nit-pick and argue semantics it can be a claim. Religion is not a singular thing. We have words for people exploring the middle ground. Religion is actually this broad, wide-scoping subject that involves so many possibilities and to say all beliefs that have been and will be thought of are wrong in a ballsy claim.

I'm not nit-picking; Christianity has several key components to it that are undeniably claims, as do all other religions. If this wasn't the case, they ...wouldn't be religions.

You haven't addressed my argument at all, so there's really nothing else to say. (A)-theism is simply the rejection of theistic claims on the basis of lacking evidence. That is, an atheistic stance is that there is no evidence that deities actually exist (This applies generally to every deity, since many people presumably reject every deity other than one).

But since we're just working with broad, offensive generalities why I don't take some shots at atheists as well?

I don't know what I would have said to offend someone. I purposely structured my post such that it is fact-driven with as little opinion in it as possible. If you are offended by fact, well, that isn't exactly my problem.



With respect to doomsday; it doesn't surprise me that this guy supposedly changed the date. It's pretty funny, to be honest, but I could really care less about people this moronic.