Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 2/5/08 06:40 AM, The-evil-bucket wrote:

At 2/1/08 01:48 PM, Tjalve wrote: No, we aren't a cult or religionen. But all atheists refuse to connect themselves to a religionen.

Are you crazy? I have an atheist friend who goes to church every Sunday, a Unitarian church.

Woah I never heard of that. Sounds impossibly stupid! Time for wikipedia. Weee

oooooh "As Biblical Unitarians we believe in one God, the Father, and one Lord, Jesus Christ"

BUT WAIT the other kind:

"The modern day Unitarian Universalist Church does not hold to the Bible as the Word of God and the source of absolute truth. As per their web site (http://www.uua.org/), they believe that "personal experience, conscience, and reason should be the final authorities in religion. In the end, religious authority lies not in a book, person, or institution, but in ourselves."

You know what happens when a bunch of people with a similar set of spiritual beliefs starts organizing themselves every X days into a building called a "church"?
You get a RELIGION. Or a CULT.

Might just be a lot of semantic crap here, but still, did you ever see that South Park episode where Cartman travels to the future and "atheism" is divided into 3 separate churches? This is exactly what stuff like the Unitarian Church will inevitably lead to down the road, assuming the other religions die out eventually.

BLARGGLE CARRY ON.

At 2/5/08 07:41 AM, poxpower wrote: Might just be a lot of semantic crap here, but still, did you ever see that South Park episode where Cartman travels to the future and "atheism" is divided into 3 separate churches?

Hold your horses here, one of those groups was hamsters.

Oh Fadious Fadious... Your lack of intelligence, its sad.
I wonder why your "People" (You know who), almost all of you, are so dumb?

I don't get the point of the Universalist Unitarians. There are plenty of intelligent people who still have some kind of spirituality and still pay heed to whatever religion or philosophy interests them, and they reckon it would be totally dumb for them to join a religious organisation that is specifically disinterested in organising religion.

I believe the main reason people are in the UU is because they like praying and going to church, because it seems to me like a totally unnecessary organisation. Existing largely to bridge a gap between the more analytical spiritual person and every other organised religion. I don't know why you wouldn't try to get out of the whole 'religion' thing once you'd given up your specific belief system, and why you would purposefully seek to join a religion that isn't actually a religion just so you can call yourself something.

I'm going to make this post short, only because I want to save energy incase my game plan is wrong;

Drakim do you think that believe this is how Atheists 'DO' behave [or think]?
Or that they 'HAVE' to think that way?

Because that isn't the case, I am interested in a logic that is based on the idea that

1) We want to advance mankind
2) We want to look at things in a way that goes beyond human emotion, and looks at human emotion as, rather than as a template for viewing the world, as a cause for the way that things have occurred. Emotion is related to instinct
3) We have seen through historical evidence that Atrocities are correlated to advancements made by mankind. [I can name a few] These Atrocities can be done by ourselves or by outside forces. [Nature and the like]

Do you notice how I go around not caring about the plight of individuals? This isn't a straw man argument.

It is my belief that this is a more logical way of looking at things than saying 'This is wrong' [And yes, there are reasons why we see it as wrong; and the reasons are directly correlated to what my next statement is going to be] Look at something and say 'This suffering was caused naturally, it is natural, and it is the general goal of mankind to fix the problem'

I just dislike the one sidedness of individuals who claim altruism is necessary for 'The good of mankind'.

If you thought that is what I thought [About the straw man] I can't really argue back, only say that me saying 'Atheists should support evil lulz' is not the point of the argument.

Since a judgement on a particular topic should [idealistically] be made based on deductive reasoning [looking at the causes of a problem] And understanding human nature, I feel human atrocities need to be viewed as natural obstacles rather than 'Evils which must be stopped for this untangible force we call our own emotion'

Rather than stating why you feel it is wrong for me to go around saying that;

"If you look at the evidence, it seems that this is the way that things are; if you look at the world from an observant point of view rather than one that judges things as good and evil"

Why not prove the logic behind the evidence gathered as wrong?

Hey I just realized something, have you guys heard that Atheists are trying to remove "One nation under God" from the allegiance because it wasn't there originally? (it got added in the 50's) Only 12% - 14% of Americans Don't believe in God.

Yet a whopping 44% of the UK does not believe in God. So why the hell do we have to endure this:
God save our gracious Queen!
Long live our noble Queen!
God save the Queen!
Send her victorious,
Happy and glorious,
Long to reign over us,
God save the Queen.

Thy choicest gifts in store
On her be pleased to pour,
Long may she reign.
May she defend our laws,
And give us ever cause,
To sing with heart and voice,
God save the Queen.

I demand a rewrite!

At 2/6/08 12:08 AM, Brick-top wrote: Hey I just realized something, have you guys heard that Atheists are trying to remove "One nation under God" from the allegiance because it wasn't there originally? (it got added in the 50's) Only 12% - 14% of Americans Don't believe in God.

Yet a whopping 44% of the UK does not believe in God. So why the hell do we have to endure this:

Because we really don't give a shit about the national anthem, whereas Americans have it everywhere.

Uhhhh, ok then

At 2/6/08 07:35 AM, Slizor wrote: Because we really don't give a shit about the national anthem, whereas Americans have it everywhere.

That's true. I haven't even said it or ever read it till now.

At 2/5/08 11:55 AM, Earfetish wrote: I believe the main reason people are in the UU is because they like praying and going to church, because it seems to me like a totally unnecessary organisation.

It's more of a community thing. Not about saving yourself from hell, but from saving other people from hell on Earth. It's about helping people. A community of people who want to help not only each other, but people outside their religion as well. A tolerant people.

Oh god haha
http://youtube.com/watch?v=r5J0cSnYnFg&f eature=related

I didn't know Colbert had such a reason to laugh at that big fat idiothead O'Reily.
But judging from this brief segment, it's clear that he's at least ignorant about science. Who gives morons like this tv shows?

oh my DEAR GOD
http://youtube.com/watch?v=2FARDDcdFaQ&f eature=related

What a STUNNING asshole haha. Oh my God I had no idea Colbert had him so fucking pegged even right down to the interviews.

Oh dear hahaha
God that man is a moron. Now I see where all those fucking idiot religious arguments come from. You kids need to stop that piece of shit show ( O'Reily's show.. )

Bump.

But seriously, I have decided to write up something referring to intelligent design and how it's just creationism with a new name. Because It's going to be really funny.

At 2/10/08 12:42 PM, poxpower wrote: Oh god haha
http://youtube.com/watch?v=r5J0cSnYnFg&f eature=related

"someone must have made this camera lens..." i can't stand these people.

unfortunatley the audio about the evolution of the eye is wrong as well; bats do infact have eyes.

a crocaduck? i think i can safely call him an idiot.

At 2/11/08 02:23 PM, SolInvictus wrote: a crocaduck? i think i can safely call him an idiot.

And besides, centaurs clearly prove evolution. Man-horse? Win.
You know, I think it would be arrogant to say I'm just smarter than him, so I'll just call him willfully ignorant.

Is it wrong that I actually want some scientists to somehow evolve a crocaduck just to get Cameron to shut his mouth?

I don't know what was more amusing, the crocaduck or the video I saw sometime last year where someone argued that the fact life didn't appear spontaneously in peanut better was proof evolution was false.

That and the idea of a crocaduck sounds quite awesome to me. would certainly make walks down my local park more interesting. Heh the geese down my local park are violent enough and do try and bite you. Imagine the fun if they actually had teeth and the jaw strength of a croc = )

Also, Cameron's entire argument is exactly the same as Descartes Watchmaker Analogy, which in all honest, doesn't exactly do a lot to prove the existence of god.

Too bad there are too many morons and ass holes on both sides of the debate.
Im getting less and less interested in this debate.

But one thing nobody has answered was that if there is no God, than why would the universe exsist at all?

At 2/11/08 03:20 PM, Zoraxe7 wrote: Too bad there are too many morons and ass holes on both sides of the debate.
Im getting less and less interested in this debate.

The only interesting thing in the debate IS the idiots on both sides.

The debate itself serves no purpose as we'll never know the answer, and even if somehow we did learn the answer what would it change exactly? Nothing. Those with faith would continue to believe despite evidence to the contrary, and Atheists would continue to deny God's existence if they were proven wrong.

At 2/11/08 03:20 PM, Zoraxe7 wrote: But one thing nobody has answered was that if there is no God, than why would the universe exsist at all?

so are you one of those "life must have meaning" people? why does everything need a purpose for it to exist?

At 2/11/08 03:28 PM, SolInvictus wrote:

At 2/11/08 03:20 PM, Zoraxe7 wrote: But one thing nobody has answered was that if there is no God, than why would the universe exsist at all?

so are you one of those "life must have meaning" people? why does everything need a purpose for it to exist?

Yes, every thing has a purpose, every action has an equil and opposite reaction, the universe exsists, therefore it has a purpose.

If I combused right in front of you, youd think something caused that, instead of it just happening.

At 2/11/08 03:20 PM, Zoraxe7 wrote:

But one thing nobody has answered was that if there is no God, than why would the universe exsist at all?

Ok I have a great one for you.

If god is good, and the creator of all things, then explain this strange conundrum:

Some foods taste good and are good for you ( fruits, for instance ) and yet some foods are good for you and taste terrible ( codliver oil, grubs )

The reverse is true. Food that is very bad for you ( margarine, KFC fried breading, liquor ) is appreciated by 99.99% of humans and of course other things that are bad for you ( shit, raw intestines ) are generally not liked by people.

How do you make any sense of this?

At 2/11/08 03:28 PM, SolInvictus wrote: why does everything need a purpose for it to exist?

Because humans, in general, tend to look at things and put them into categories, including, but limited to, uses. If something doesn't have a use, or a purpose, then it's quite difficult for us to fathom why such thing would exist. Hence why we look at the universe and think ' ZOMG WHY IS IT HERE!!!!!!' or words to that affect.

Is there actually any reason that something *should* exist without a purpose?

At 2/11/08 03:38 PM, Tri-Nitro-Toluene wrote: Is there actually any reason that something *should* exist without a purpose?

Absolutly, like, just the other day I was kicked in the ass by absolutly nothing.

At 2/11/08 03:39 PM, Zoraxe7 wrote:

Absolutly, like, just the other day I was kicked in the ass by absolutly nothing.

Ok so apparently you don't know the difference between the word "purpose" and "cause".

At 2/11/08 03:36 PM, poxpower wrote: Some foods taste good and are good for you ( fruits, for instance ) and yet some foods are good for you and taste terrible ( codliver oil, grubs )

Some people like grubs and/or codliver oil, its because we are individuels and not puppets.

The reverse is true. Food that is very bad for you ( margarine, KFC fried breading, liquor ) is appreciated by 99.99% of humans and of course other things that are bad for you ( shit, raw intestines ) are generally not liked by people.

Well, if there was no alchohol than civilization wouldnt have developed in many places, it was either drink alcohol or drink contaminated germ infested water and die.

How do you make any sense of this?

God lets us make our own choices, and there are bad things in the world, but we must make the good choices non-the-less. Otherwise all inocent people would pass the 'floating witch water test'.

At 2/11/08 03:36 PM, Zoraxe7 wrote: If I combused right in front of you, youd think something caused that, instead of it just happening.

you seem to be confusing cause with purpose.

At 2/11/08 03:44 PM, Zoraxe7 wrote:

Some people like grubs and/or codliver oil, its because we are individuels and not puppets.

Then wouldn't it make more sense that the vast majority of people like these instead of the vast, VAST minority?
I knew you'd run straight for that argument.

Well, if there was no alchohol than civilization wouldnt have developed in many places, it was either drink alcohol or drink contaminated germ infested water and die.

Don't you think it would have evolved in many more places if God made it so all the water was clean?

God lets us make our own choices

I can't choose that chocolate tastes good and I can't choose that it is bad for me. I can choose to not eat it, but why would he make it so delicious?

Ah, I see you coming already:

"because he wants to tempt you and test you!"

So then why also make good food that tastes great? Wouldn't that be "too easy" for us? Oranges are delicious, all humans like oranges. There is no particular challenge in getting them and eating them and they taste good.

I honestly think there should be polls on NG. Statistical polls, not thread polls. Then we find the minority, and crush it. Like the Nazis.

Did god create Nazis and if not, why not?

At 2/11/08 03:20 PM, Zoraxe7 wrote: But one thing nobody has answered was that if there is no God, than why would the universe exsist at all?

I see you're searching for "moral comfort" for your existience. Rather than you should be searching for a how, rather than the why. The why is irrelevent. Nothing needs a purpose to exist. Why am I here? What purpose do I serve? What points in my life am I going to make a difference? I don't care and I never will. It's irrelevent to my life. I'm here, it's fantastic, nuff said.

What you're doing is using that god awful "something from nothing" arguement which has been refuited so many fucking times it's starting to lose it's humor.

And what's even more funny is, you're creator came from nothing, yet you argue with that arguement I mentioned. Ironic.