mitchellmckain wrote:Incorrect. Yuri's statement is just wrong and your defense of it is just wrong wrong. Belief in God is NOT a method of soothing the fear of death or a method of abdicating moral values to authority, any more than unbelief in God is a method of soothing the fear of hell or a method of abdicating any moral values at all. Both of these are just wrong. Sure people can find a way to escape realities and abdicate responsibility from both a theist or atheist framework but it just does not follow that this is the motivation for why people decide as they do on this undecidable issue.
How is it "wrong"? How is my defense of it "wrong"? You are the one making universal and indefensible statements now while mine have always been delivered with specificity. I have explained how regional and cultural differences play into the spectrum of Beliefs of Christians, but you merely whine. Can you please explain why you reject my personal experience with Christians who believe this way? Why is it that you deny this?
I am saddened because you aren't behaving in a rational way, Mitch. I like these discussion boards, but I don't like getting into these childish arguments which you apparently relish. All I ask is that you please behave like an adult.
I do indeed understand the dishonesty of cherry-picking and I even know what this logical fallacy actually refers to no matter how much you try to pretend otherwise.
Wonderful, if you understand it and agree that it is dishonest, then why do you defend your right to engage in it? Do you consider it a valid tactic in debate or discussion even thought it is dishonest?
gary_s wrote:And as for your last statement, I repeat that your statement is nothing but an exaggeration conjured in your own mind. I'm not lying when I say that I believe these things to be true about Christians because I know them first hand from Christians. You simply do not have the capacity to accept this information and so you merely cover your ears and say, La, la, la as loudly as you can.
More examples of how you just don't seem to be able to accept that people disagree with you.
No, Mitch, you are remembering your own behavior. If you can think back you will remember that this all began because I commented that Yuri's statement was largely true. I also charged Rian with cherry picking and mocking. You disagreed from the start and even justify mocking and derision on the basis that Yuri is A) wrong and B) lying. I have provided sound arguments that he is both A) partially right and B) not lying but rather offering his opinion, which could only be lying if he doesn't believe it. Your logic here is completely vacant and you have resorted to insulting and responding like a child. I can take disagreement, Mitch, but childish behavior is something different. You have not engaged in a discussion here. You have offered no argument, no theories, no facts, just sort of whining and complaining about atheists being intolerant and now you whine that I can't accept disagreement when you began this with disagreement long ago. So it is clearly YOU who cannot tolerate disagreement. I'm open to discussion, but you can't label mockery and derision as discussion and just saying "You're wrong!" isn't a discussion either. Grow up and act like an adult for a change and I'll stop treating you like a child. I know you are capable of it because you do it on threads when you feel like it.
Yes and Dawkins boasted that any religious people who reads his book "The God Delusion" will be an atheist by the end of it. LOL People say extremely silly things. It does NOT prove anything at all. Again I repeat that these kind of generalizations are the very essence of bigotry and prejudice.
So what? What does this mean? You haven't proven a thing except that Dawkins thinks that if people read his book they will become an atheist. It could be right or wrong, I have no way of knowing. At least he's making an argument that he can convince you by intelligent argument and not threatening to send you to an atheist version of hell. You obviously can't address my point, so you dodge it and make up an irrelevant point of your own. And yes, you are absolutely correct, when Christians make such generalizations about atheists in foxholes, they are the very essence of bigotry and prejudice, and a whopping helping of ignorance as well. Not to mention lying. Heck, there's a whole lot of dishonest and deplorable things going on in such a generalization, so the only question remains is why Christians keep saying such bigoted things?
gary_s wrote: Why wouldn't the argument be more akin to: "There are no atheists with college degrees" because when one learns more about the world, they always gravitate toward god. Or perhaps, "There are no atheist philosophers" or "There are no atheist cosmologists" for similar reasoning.
Yeah and I have heard atheist make claims like "religious people cannot be scientists" and "atheists never become theists". People can be so immersed in "my-side bias" that they become rather blatantly out of touch with reality.
Well, I never suggested that bias doesn't work both ways; I know it does. But the only salient point here is that I've never engaged in any one-side bias here, nor invalid rhetoric. If you will remember, I said I'm open to the idea that atheists are just sin-avoiders, but I've never met any who fit that definition. You just said you do know some like that and offered nothing else. OK, fine. You know some atheists that are very different from the one's I know. At least I never called you a liar!
(and since you want to look for reasons for feeling sorry for other people) I do not turn these into pictures of atheism in general and I am sorry that you feel the need to indulge in that invalid rhetoric.
With you, Mitch, I don't have to look for reasons; you provide them too easily. And please feel sorry for me all you want, but don't put words in my mouth. My argument are sound.
You again simply ignored my comment and ranted about things that are not important. Why don't
Christians argue that learning more about the world leads one to Christianity? This would seem to be a sensible plan, but rather they focus on the fear-inducing death and hell as driving points for accepting Christianity.