43
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 22:
Line 22: + + + + + + + +
→Seriously?!
::I too reject the idea of deities since there is one and only one God. Secondly, you didn't show why this system of morality is valid: "I take a libertarian position in that any act is admissible that is consensual between all parties involved and does not harm another human, or cause unnecessary suffering to non-humans." Where is the basis of the ought? Lastly, atheism does not have a good historical track record when it comes to morality and the issue of violence: [[Atheism and mass murder]] and [[Atheism and sadism]] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 09:38, 11 July 2012 (EDT)
::I too reject the idea of deities since there is one and only one God. Secondly, you didn't show why this system of morality is valid: "I take a libertarian position in that any act is admissible that is consensual between all parties involved and does not harm another human, or cause unnecessary suffering to non-humans." Where is the basis of the ought? Lastly, atheism does not have a good historical track record when it comes to morality and the issue of violence: [[Atheism and mass murder]] and [[Atheism and sadism]] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 09:38, 11 July 2012 (EDT)
:::I wanted to add that I do thank you for your input and I added a Rebecca Watson quote as a result to the article (claim of hundreds of cases of harassment). Also, it is true that atheists claims concerning the Bible involving poor Bible exegesis are largely ignored and not taken seriously. See this article: [http://www.tektonics.org/af/calcon.html Why critics of the Bible do not deserve the benefit of the doubt]. Again, thanks for your input. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 10:22, 11 July 2012 (EDT)
:::I wanted to add that I do thank you for your input and I added a Rebecca Watson quote as a result to the article (claim of hundreds of cases of harassment). Also, it is true that atheists claims concerning the Bible involving poor Bible exegesis are largely ignored and not taken seriously. See this article: [http://www.tektonics.org/af/calcon.html Why critics of the Bible do not deserve the benefit of the doubt]. Again, thanks for your input. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 10:22, 11 July 2012 (EDT)
:::: I have read that article, it relates to those claiming contradictions. I am not claiming there is a contradiction in the Bible, I don't want to have that tired old debate. I read the bible as a believer, many times. It was the content of the old testament that led me to conclude that it was fallacious, as I could not find any reasonable interpretation of so many things. I believe you have to interpret it from a literalist perspective, and that appears to be the consensus on Conservapedia. On that basis, there is very little room for interpretation. I wasn't making any interpretation of the text, simply stating the content of the story. So, my question to you is this - how could I be misinterpreting this story if we are to believe it is the literal truth?
:::: The harassment Rebecca Watson received is unfortunate, but is it any different from the harassment of just about everyone by the Westboro Baptist Church? (As an example)
:::: Moreover, atheism is the absence of a belief, and not a belief system in and of itself. On this basis, the opening sentences make no sense from a purely semantic view point. How can an absence of believe ever provide condemnation of anything? It would be better to put 'some non-christian belief systems offer no condemnation of rape' if you were going to replace that drivel with anything! This is a particularly pertinent point, because it is quite easy to derive senseless criticism of atheism if you treat it as a religion. Atheists believe in one less god than Christians.
:::: Finally, I have made some constructive edits. Now, I find the edit button has mysteriously disappeared. This really isn't the interest of honest discourse, is it? Reverting changes you dislike is one thing, but to prevent any future edits is fairly censorial. I haven't said anything unreasonable. [[User:LucoDaw|LucoDaw]] 14:36, 11 July 2012 (EDT)