I don't want this to be a chance for you to tell me what is wrong with the theocratic abscess burrowed; the thorn in your side or the vacant imperfection imposed upon the resident scapegoat. I care not to afford you the opportunity to lick your wounds in my sight or to appease the cultural norms subscribed.

Without the fear on the other side of the fence nor the ruckus in the alley way I want you to tell me what the benefit of an atheist lifestyle is had the social and political majority not absolved you and the necessary protestation of that artificial insemination had manifested itself in hindsight.

In other words, had there been no myth where would you see yourself rather than where would you see yourself in light of it.

Views: 3622

Replies are closed for this discussion.

Replies to This Discussion

I care not to afford you the opportunity to lick your wounds in my sight or to appease the cultural norms subscribed.

Well gee, that might make some sense if I had ever yet seen you win so much as one argument.  You haven't, not even close, and you can't cover that lack up by being such a pompous ass.

Steve. . . .

I specifically asked you not to do that.

If winning an argument here were dependent upon your concession then you would only be half as ignorant as I would suppose and twice as honest. I don't expect either so answer the fucking question.

Why. Think. Athiest?

See your whole goddamn post is a left handed insult aimed at us and you demand we not respond in kind?


No, Steve. My goddamn post is not a left handed insult. It is an appeal to your baser instinct without my or the theistic influence.

If that is an insult to you then fuck you. You haven't a mind beyond what the theocratic would have imposed in the first place.

You are a shadow of what that theocratic bullshit dictates if for nothing more than to object to it. Which is, in my opinion, fucking retarded. What I ask and what you fail to deliverer, is a sensible alternative to thousands of years of fucking ignorance.

Stand in line for the next illusion. And fuck you. Cause you are an idiot.

You take a political or social bristling position without any substance besides that is boring. Let them eat cake of kill each other over a debt based economy. 

That was a cheap and vulgar display.

David. What a finely crafted and eloquent post you compsed to represent your position.

Thousands of years of fucking ignorance and the next illusion indeed.

I had an interesting read of your blog the other day. The one about your lord crying over recent events. It was unintentionally humorous. One would expect the almighty capable of more effective intervention into the problems that he knows are inevitable in the this world he created. Perhaps this is indeed Universe v1.0, the trial model, and after we blow each other up over religion, he'll get it better in his 2nd go.

I guess I can feel better when I think of all the joy those dead kids are now experiencing in the presence of the lord. Kinda makes you wonder why the theistic suicide rate isn't higher to accelerate the process.

Thanks for exemplifying the stereotype!


It would seem there is no argument here. You ask where we would be ourselves, if there were no myth? Its simple: I would not be an atheist. To beat a dead horse: I don't believe there's a tea-pot orbiting the sun, but neither does any one else. So I don't need to claim any resentment or disclaim toward that belief(especially since the belief would in no way effect my life whether it be through social, government policy etc). But to answer your question without a myth I don't think my life would change much. I'd have the same morals, and I'd continue to strive for answers in regard to science, philosophy, and anywhere else my inquisitive nature takes me. 

Owen . . .

No argument. No teapot orbiting the sun. You don't know that there is no teapot orbiting the sun so to deny it is retarded. Sort of a Richard Dawkins anomoly.


Science, Philosophy, Morals. This is shit.

Your life would be the same had it not been dubiously influenced by bullshit.

Well there is the first step.

You don't know that there is no teapot orbiting the sun so to deny it is retarded.

Why is it retarded to deny a retarded belief? Especially if the teachings of that belief are what holds us back as a species.

Science, Philosophy, Morals. This is shit.

And shit is god, right?

Your life would be the same had it not been dubiously influenced by bullshit.

Really? You honestly believe that people's lives would be the same whether they were influenced by religion or not? So, all those kids getting raped by priests would have been raped by a different celibate authority figure? Those girls being killed for shaming their family in the eyes of Allah would be killed for some other reason by their parents? Owen's, as well as most of our lives would be the same in the regard that we would still behave the same way we do now. We would rely on the same methods for coming to conclusions, just more advanced, since we would have most likely avoided the Dark Ages. But our lives would also differ than now, because there would have been no religion to label us as baby eating monsters, or to dictate how people should live their lives, based on bronze age myths.

In that regard I have to disagree with Owen. Our lives would be quite different if there was no religion to begin with. We would be much closer to a utopian society.

You ateapotists are all the same.

Without a Teapotist, what would you be....


Not to mix topics but is there a regulation that we could all agree to to keep David and people like him from buying a gun?

Haha...isn't that a separate thread.

But I am going to a gun show this weekend maybe I'll see him there. :)


This is no way to debate on a forum.  We all believed you when you said you had been debating on forums for years and years, but it appears evidence points us, or more specifically me, towards revising that belief.  Your OP here spends two paragraphs in offensive dictatorship using expressions like the one Steve quoted above.  The only line that actually invites a response is the last line.  And if I replace the 'myth' with 'soup' for example, and then asked soup-despisers how they would behave in the light of the soup-absence, what kind of answer would that evoke?

The title of your thread, Well, Then, Why Think Atheist, held a promise of potential debate which evaporated rapidly when you resorted to antagonistic remarks.

It's a shame, because most people here truly enjoy objective debate.  The problem with your post threads, is that whereas their titles are interesting, the body of them do not carry a tone conducive to such debate.  Do you like to debate?

The principle behind debating is to exchange thought processes, not to enable expressions of offensive or combative nature.  Your comment "so answer the fucking question" is in the latter category.

David, I really enjoy debating.  However, I still have no idea what philosophy you are promulgating here.  So far, I have read that you think there are multiple gods in the bible, that you love the bible, that you have a non-standard definition of the god of the Christians, that you think Jesus was the greatest of men, and that there is historical accuracy in the bible, although you yourself are not a Christian.  We have heard lots of "no, you're wrong" but very little about what you believe is right.

Do you think you can post a simple and clear statement of what you feel is the truth, so that we can involve ourselves in a realistic and practical discussion, or is that not something that might appeal to you?

I realise that you feel a little persecuted, but in those moments where you feel incensed to compose offensive responses, why not think for a minute as to how your post might be received.  If you simply want to type a lot, and argue for the sake of argument, you are doing a fine job, but I feel it is only fair to warn you that the interest you initially generated will fade rapidly, and in the end you will be posting into a vacuum.

One last thing.  If you have the urge to post in response to what I have just written, may I suggest that you actually consider the content of these paragraphs first?.  I, for one, would be quite interested to discuss a philosophy with you.  I just do not have the same interest in discussing random negatives that seem to need to be expressed in an offensive and/or dictatorial fashion.

Come on, David, put some real views down, as you have been repeatedly invited to do, settle down and we can have a nice mutually rewarding discussion.


© 2022   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service