| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The reason religious types like to portray Atheism as a 'belief in a lack', rather than a lack of a particular belief is so that they can deflect criticism of Theism by claiming that Atheism is just one form of Theism.As a not-religious-type, I call your statement here hogwash.
Part of the reason I consider Atheism (capitalized by you, not me) a religion is the zealotry displayed by those who defend their beliefs - illustrated quite nicely by your posts.
It's not really zealotry when you're correcting people who are defining things incorrectly and they just won't get it.
You have an established belief system - one that may not be consistent with other denominations or sects of Atheism, but ultimately, a generally consistent belief system.
But the point that he's been trying to get across is that atheism is not a belief system. It is a lack of belief. Period.
You cannot have a "generally consistent belief system" based on a lack of belief. Everybody who does not believe something will have the same opinion on the subject ("I don't believe it"). Any consistency, uniformity, or organization is purely based on the fact that belief or disbelief is a pretty binary thing. Either you believe in something or you do not. You cannot "half-believe" something.
You CAN be NOT SURE if you believe in something or not, but that's not atheism.
Religions are scattered because they can believe in a multitude of different things. Judaism, Islam, Christianity, Hinduism, Taoism, Wicca, whatever you wish to believe in you can. However, atheism is a complete lack of belief in all of those as a collective, hence the "uniformity of belief" which is really just "We're all atheists".
The only "sects and denominations" that exist spring from HOW OBNOXIOUS ARE WE GONNA BE about our atheism?
Saying it doesn't make it so.
Really, it's amusing that you go to such an extent to disprove that your religion is a religion in it's own right, because it's not as if the label harms your belief structure or your argument.
It kinda does, yes. Calling a Capitalist a Socialist is an insult. The two labels are incompatible with each other, and are directly harmful to the "belief system" and insulting to the "believer". Essentially, by labeling atheism as a religion, you are implying that atheism does not exist and that all atheists are "Closet theists" or something.
Which is untrue, and it is an insulting thing to imply, much as if I were to call a Jew a "Closet Christian".
|
No, it's the reverse. Im guessing you don't believe in the Toothfairy because you lack empirical (sp?) evidence.well, don't take my understanding of your point to mean I agree that even atheists don't have a chosen belief about the divine. They still have made a choice whether or not the idea of the improvable divine does or does not exist.I don't believe in the Tooth Fairy either, but that doesn't mean that this disbelief is some kind of religion or worldview!
That's not the reason. I don't start by considering the Tooth Fairy, then find it wanting. What happens is that I live my life, then someone tries to tell me the Tooth Fairy exists, and at that point I require proof of such an absurd assertion. It's not that my disbelief in Fairies is my worldview.
So, I'm happily living my life, then someone asserts a Creator, a concept which is inherently absurd. At that point I start to demand evidence. My starting point is not 'there is no God', my starting point is 'living my life'.
The world view is that of a skeptic... I'll believe when it's proven true. Either way, its a choice to believe that way as opposed to being undisputedly right.
...I'm not sure how to respond to this...
It's not like I demand evidence of every single thing before I believe in it, it's more like some things are credible so I don't feel the need to challenge them, while some are incredible so I do. I don't know if that counts as a worldview or not.
You seem like a very reasonable guy, genuinely trying to get your head around the other point of view, and this speaks very well of you. However, there are those in this debate that would twist 'skeptical worldview' into 'Atheism is a religion!'
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The only "sects and denominations" that exist spring from HOW OBNOXIOUS ARE WE GONNA BE about our atheism?
Hee.
I think this is maybe where some of the contention stems from in the discussion here.
Most of the people I know who don't believe in God don't really care whether I do or not. I'm a Christian, they're atheists; we all like cookies.
But I do have a friend whose father's atheism is pretty much the center of his universe. He preaches to me all the time, hoping to convert my way of thinking to his. His atheism informs the way he votes, what he reads, who his friends are, and his view of people who don't share ideas on the non-existance of a divine being. It's a constant source of discussion above all other topics when I'm around.
His atheism carries with it all the zeal and desire to proselytize you get with some organized religions. This certainly doesn't make atheism a religion, but I don't think it would be too terrible a metaphor to say he approaches atheism with a religious fervor. Oxymoronic? Perhaps, but not unfitting, if you were to ask me. He's the athiest of atheists!
Most of my discussions with atheists have gone like this:
Me: Can I tell where the sound is coming from?
Atheist: Roll a Perception check.
Me: Darn, I rolled a 3.
Atheist: Not really, but you don't like what you're hearing.
Most of my discussions about God have been more involved, but wind up amounting to:
Me: You don't believe in God?
Atheist: Which God?
Me: The Judeo-Christian God?
Atheist: Nope.
Me: Any God?
Atheist: Nope.
Me: Oh.
Atheist: You?
Me: Yeah. Judeo-Christian.
Atheist: Ah. Is there a particular reason?
Me: Lots. Mostly a deep-seated self-loathing and fear of sex.
Atheist: Really?
Me: Nah. It just makes sense to me.
Atheist: You're weird. Now, make a Perception check.
So...
How about that Pat Robertson? Is he silly, or what?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't believe communism is an equally sensible form of government to democracy. I do, however, believe that people have a right to be communists.
Vive le Galt!
Atheism is not a belief system.
Anti-theism is a belief system.
Taking all options into consideration and abstaining from the action of religion is atheism.
Taking all the options into consideration and concluding that they are wrong and cancerous to society is anti-theism and is by definition a set of beliefs about religion.
An anti-theist will tell you that all beliefs about religion except their own are wrong. Now the degree of evangelism differs between anti-theist as much as it differs between Christians and other religious people.
Now some of most extreme anti-theist would like laws in place to abolish the practice of religion. They advocate against the freedom of religion.
More mild anti-theist simply feel all religion is wrong and that people shouldn't practice it, but feel that everyone has the right to choose their faith.
Atheist on the other hand have no strong beliefs about religion. They choose not to believe.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Taking all the options into consideration and concluding that they are wrong and cancerous to society...
What about those of us who just conclude that SOME of those beliefs are harmful, and others aren't?
Now some of most extreme anti-theist would like laws in place to abolish the practice of religion. They advocate against the freedom of religion.
Or pieces of it, anyway. Like "honor killings." Or refusal to use vaccines. Or female genital mutilation. Or forcing others to pray against their convictions. Or teaching of demonstrable falsehoods as "equal to any other theory" in science classes.
You know, that kind of stuff.
Atheist on the other hand have no strong beliefs about religion.
That's true in general, but not in all specifics. It's a Venn diagram thing. Anti-theists tend to be atheists, but not all atheists are anti-theists.
They choose not to believe.
I've explained about three times now why this statement isn't accurate, yet you insist on repeating it? Talk about "choosing not to believe."
Now some of most extreme anti-theist would like laws in place to abolish the practice of religion. They advocate against the freedom of religion.Or pieces of it, anyway. Like "honor killings." Or refusal to use vaccines. Or female genital mutilation. Or forcing others to pray against their convictions. Or teaching of demonstrable falsehoods as "equal to any other theory" in science classes.
You know, that kind of stuff.
My bad. I did not clarify that we are talking about "law-abiding faiths" where such laws make no mention of religion.
My bad. I did not clarify that we are talking about "law-abiding faiths" where such laws make no mention of religion.
In many countries, it is totally legal to stone rape victims to death. I still maintain that's a harmful practice, though. Maybe my moral compass isn't tied to legality?
A lot of things done in the name of religion are morally virtuous. Charities are an obvious example (they're not in any way unique to religions, but a lot of people wouldn't participate unless their church told them to, so it's still a net plus on the side of religion). Some of the things done in the name of religion are morally repugnant, or at least demonstrably deleterious to society. Most religious people talk up the former and deny the latter. Many, but not all, non-religious people gloss over the former and decry the latter.
They choose not to believe.I've explained about three times now why this statement isn't accurate, yet you insist on repeating it? Talk about "choosing not to believe."
Are you ok? You're criticizing me repeating myself in the same commit you committed on and then complain how I'm not listening to you... Like I can somehow respond to your response in the same commit your committing on.
Atheist on the other hand have no strong beliefs about religion.That's true in general, but not in all specifics. It's a Venn diagram thing. Anti-theists tend to be atheists, but not all atheists are anti-theists.
Huh.
You know, up until about a minute ago I think I really was conflating the two, on some sort of level. Or at least, I hadn't really taken the time to consider that there might be such a thing as antitheism, separate and distinct from atheism. I mean, I certainly didn't think all atheists were antitheists, but still...
Well, now I just feel silly.
Thank you for the clarification!
Taking all the options into consideration and concluding that they are wrong and cancerous to society...What about those of us who just conclude that SOME of those beliefs are harmful, and others aren't?
If you don't believe that the principle of faith itself is the problem, then you would be someone with an ethical or moral qualm about certain actions intrinsic of whether or not they are spiritual in nature.
If you don't believe that faith is the root cause of the problem then you would be an atheist with morals (which having morals tends to be a common thing among atheist and all other kinds of people)
Are you ok? You're criticizing me repeating myself in the same commit you committed on and then complain how I'm not listening to you... Like I can somehow respond to your response in the same commit your committing on.They choose not to believe.I've explained about three times now why this statement isn't accurate, yet you insist on repeating it? Talk about "choosing not to believe."
It's the fact that other people have repeatedly made the same comment not too far upthread, and it's been repeatedly objected to and explained why, and you ignored all those posts.
If you don't believe that the principle of faith itself is the problem, then you would be someone with an ethical or moral qualm about certain actions intrinsic of whether or not they are spiritual in nature.
I do not believe that the principle of faith itself is the problem, although, that said, I do believe that the principle of faith can in many cases serve to exacerbate the existing problem.
If you don't believe that faith is the root cause of the problem then you would be an atheist with morals (which having morals tends to be a common thing among atheist and all other kinds of people)
Thank you -- I would certainly like to believe that all of this is true.
It's the fact that other people have repeatedly made the same comment not too far upthread, and it's been repeatedly objected to and explained why, and you decided that you can't be bothered to read anyone else's posts.Are you ok? You're criticizing me repeating myself in the same commit you committed on and then complain how I'm not listening to you... Like I can somehow respond to your response in the same commit your committing on.They choose not to believe.I've explained about three times now why this statement isn't accurate, yet you insist on repeating it? Talk about "choosing not to believe."
a·the·ist [ey-thee-ist] Show IPA
nouna person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.
Can be confused: 1. agnostic, atheist (see synonym study at the current entry) ; 2. atheist, theist, deist.
Synonyms
Atheist, agnostic, infidel, skeptic refer to persons not inclined toward religious belief or a particular form of religious belief. An atheist is one who denies the existence of a deity or of divine beings. An agnostic is one who believes it impossible to know anything about God or about the creation of the universe and refrains from commitment to any religious doctrine. Infidel means an unbeliever, especially a nonbeliever in Islam or Christianity. A skeptic doubts and is critical of all accepted doctrines and creeds.
Since most atheist commonly deny having beliefs about religion. I augmented the definition keeping that in mind. But if you want to rule out the possibility of atheist not having a belief structure then by all means do.
Choosing not to believe in something and denying its existence is the difference between not having a belief and having a belief. Believing something does not exist is a form of belief. Choosing not to believe in something is not a belief.
Choosing not to believe in something and denying its existence is the difference between not having a belief and having a belief.
And again, you're still ignoring all of the previous discussion (although googling dictionary entries isn't too much effort, apparently scrolling up an inch or two is?). HINT: The problem with your previous assertion isn't with the word "deny." It's with the "choose to" part.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Atheism is not a belief system.
Anti-theism is a belief system.
Taking all options into consideration and abstaining from the action of religion is atheism.
Taking all the options into consideration and concluding that they are wrong and cancerous to society is anti-theism and is by definition a set of beliefs about religion.
This is simply wrong. Both atheism and antitheism are belief systems. Atheism is belief that there is no God; anti-theism is the belief that religion is harmful. They're not even necessarily linked; one might think that God is real, but that people should be discouraged from practicing religion for other reasons.
But more importantly, a set of beliefs about religion is not a religion, any more than a set of beliefs about food is a food. I may believe that chocolate is yummy, but I can't eat that belief.
An anti-theist will tell you that all beliefs about religion except their own are wrong.
Some of them will, yes. But that has nothing to do with whether or not their belief is religious. I can tell you that all beliefs about chocolate except my own are wrong,.... but I still can't eat that belief.
Atheist on the other hand have no strong beliefs about religion.
Some atheists have no strong beliefs about religion. Others have. The strength of a belief is rarely related to its contents.
What if I believe religion is problematic because it's such a wonderful tool for getting people to do what you want them to?
There are other such tools, of course, but religion is very good at it.It can be used for good purposes, but humans being what we are, it's very often perverted to destructive and hateful ends.
You could be christian with that belief...
Choosing not to believe in something and denying its existence is the difference between not having a belief and having a belief.And again, you're still ignoring all of the previous discussion (although googling dictionary entries isn't too much effort, apparently scrolling up an inch or two is?). HINT: The problem with your previous assertion isn't with the word "deny." It's with the "choose to" part.
If you are trying to argue that atheism is a belief system, I suggest not pursuing that. You get into a lot of corner cases about the tooth fairy.
Instead I try to lump them all in the anti-theist crowd and reserve the term atheist and agnostic for people who are not A-holes about religion.
What if I believe religion is problematic because it's such a wonderful tool for getting people to do what you want them to?
There are other such tools, of course, but religion is very good at it.It can be used for good purposes, but humans being what we are, it's very often perverted to destructive and hateful ends.
Yeah, I'm a Christian and I beleive this. Also, it makes me sad.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Instead I try to lump them all in the anti-theist crowd and reserve the term atheist and agnostic for people who are not A-holes about religion.
Well, no one can force you to use words with any regard to their actual meanings. If you want to use "glory" to mean "a nice knock-down argument," you and Humpty-Dumpty can get together and fail to communicate with everyone else on the planet -- together.
Atheist is a word with a well-established meaning; it means a person who does not believe in the existence of God. Nothing about it implies that they need to be diplomatic about it.
If you are trying to argue that atheism is a belief system, I suggest not pursuing that.
No, I am not. Nor am I making any progress in getting you to catch up on the thread.
Instead I try to lump them all in the anti-theist crowd and reserve the term atheist and agnostic for people who are not A-holes about religion.
Atheist is a word with a well-established meaning; it means a person who does not believe in the existence of God. Nothing about it implies that they need to be diplomatic about it.
Anti-theist are for the most part atheist(not that I know an exception), but I don't call squares quadrilaterals.
Once you cross the line into anti-theism you can no longer claim a lack of a belief system concerning religion. Atheist like to claim that they don't have a belief system. So respecting their definition of the term, I don't call anti-theist atheist. Because one does have a belief system.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Once you cross the line into anti-theism you can no longer claim a lack of a belief system concerning religion. Atheist like to claim that they don't have a belief system. So respecting their definition of the term, I don't call anti-theist atheist. Because one does have a belief system.
Well, atheists who know the meaning of the word will accept that they have a belief system. There are a number of things that they systematically hold to be false, to with:
1) There is a God.
2) There is a God and the Patriots will win the Superbowl.
3) There is a God and the Patriots will not win the Superbowl,
*) There is a God and P, for any value of P.
There are similarly a number of beliefs that they will hold to be true, including variants on "There is no God."
If that's a system, so be it. But that's not a religion. It's also not a religious belief system, simply a system of beliefs about religion (the use-mention distinction again). Atheists claim (correctly) that they don't have a religion or religious beliefs. Theists seem to like to twist this claim because they can then try to put the lack of a religious belief on an equal epistemological footing with religious beliefs. Which is rather like trying to claim "not playing guitar" is a hobby....
Claiming that a religion is anything more than a belief system about religion.
Your distinction about hobbies is why I used the term "choosing". You can choose not to play a guitar. You don't believe that guitars do not exist. You don't believe that they do exist either.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Taking all the options into consideration and concluding that they are wrong and cancerous to society...What about those of us who just conclude that SOME of those beliefs are harmful, and others aren't?
If you don't believe that the principle of faith itself is the problem, then you would be someone with an ethical or moral qualm about certain actions intrinsic of whether or not they are spiritual in nature.
If you don't believe that faith is the root cause of the problem then you would be an atheist with morals (which having morals tends to be a common thing among atheist and all other kinds of people)
You can have morals and believe that a religious faith is the root cause of problems.
You can have morals and believe that a religious faith is the root cause of problems.Taking all the options into consideration and concluding that they are wrong and cancerous to society...What about those of us who just conclude that SOME of those beliefs are harmful, and others aren't?
If you don't believe that the principle of faith itself is the problem, then you would be someone with an ethical or moral qualm about certain actions intrinsic of whether or not they are spiritual in nature.
If you don't believe that faith is the root cause of the problem then you would be an atheist with morals (which having morals tends to be a common thing among atheist and all other kinds of people)
I would call that an anti-theist with morals (which having morals tends to be a common thing among anti-theist and all other kinds of people).
Claiming that a religion is anything more than a belief system about religion.
Lots of beliefs ABOUT religions are not themselves religions. If I believed that Catholics are polytheists, which religion would I be part of? If I believed that St. Christopher was a a reselling of the Jason legend, which religion would I be practicing?
Your distinction about hobbies is why I used the term "choosing". You can choose not to play a guitar. You don't believe that guitars do not exist. You don't believe that they do exist either.
???
On the contrary, I strongly believe that guitars exist. If you don't, I'd be happy to show one to you and permit you to satisfy yourself.
|
|
Yeah some people are obnoxious. There's a time and a place, guys. : )
On the occasions when I visit my father (he lives in the states now) I 'attend' church on Sunday, because it is a social occasion as well as worship. I'm not precious about the 'worship' part and I go to meet his friends.
On one occasion my father introduced me as 'my son, the Atheist'. One guy looked like he wanted to fight about it, but bit his tongue enough to just ask (through gritted teeth), 'So, you think we arrived by pure chance, do you?' I didn't think is was an appropriate time to put him right on the whole 'random mutations but not random results after natural selection' point of evolution, and limited my reply to, '...something like that...!'
@Eben, to give some insight into how our minds work re: choosing not to believe:-
We can agree (I hope!) that 2 + 2 = 4
'So, you're choosing not to believe that 2 + 2 = 5?'
'...What?'
'Youre choosing not to believe that it's 5!'
It doesn't make sense as a statement. I'm not choosing to believe that's it's not 5, it's 4!
And I'm not choosing not to believe in a god....it's 4!
Well if you go down the labels, most modern atheists would be: areligious, agnostic, atheists (3 separate terms each describing 3 different parts that are just common to the group but not mutually exclusive)
Modern atheist would argue that there is no such things as agnostic.
They would say that agnostic means uncertainty. Therefore there are agnostic atheist, agnostic theist, strong atheist, and strong theist. Strong denies the possibility of the other person being right and generally is accompanied by what that person considers to be proof.
Which this really pisses off people who identify as agnostic.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Religion when it becomes an organized and money collecting entity, with blanket rules for how everyone should and should not behave is where I have problems. My "religion" says I should be a good person and treat others like they are good people. Nobody in my religion says you are only good if you give me a $1 or only if you do "x". Sure i donate to charity and help people less fortunate than me but because it falls in the treat others like they are good people category not because some leader or official says I have to in order to be a good person. I like to think I am a reasonably intelligent individual that can set my own moral compass pretty well without the outside help of organized religion telling me what I should or should not do. I believe in a higher power a god if you will but I believe he has enough faith in me that I don't need to have my faith in him dictated by anyone else.
Your distinction about hobbies is why I used the term "choosing". You can choose not to play a guitar. You don't believe that guitars do not exist. You don't believe that they do exist either.???
On the contrary, I strongly believe that guitars exist. If you don't, I'd be happy to show one to you and permit you to satisfy yourself.
I would say that you "know" guitars exist. This under the assumption of there being given assumptions that separate belief and knowledge.
Of course I'm just regurgitating the other side of a debate I've had with atheist who deny having a belief structure.
Your the first person I've met to have "evolved" to deciding there is a fundamental difference between belief and faith.
re·li·gion
/riˈlijən/
Noun
1) The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, esp. a personal God or gods.
2) Details of belief as taught or discussed.
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
re·li·gion (r-ljn)
n.
1.
a. Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
b. A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.
2. The life or condition of a person in a religious order.
3. A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
4. A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.
Idiom:
get religion Informal
1. To become religious or devout.
2. To resolve to end one's immoral behavior.
[Middle English religioun, from Old French religion, from Latin religi, religin-, perhaps from religre, to tie fast; see rely.]
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Second source for the definition aligns more towards what you think religion is. Of course the logical defference between having a belief structure against faith and actively pursuing it's downfall and a religious activity is sparse.
I would go so far as to call anti-theism an unorganized religion (except for the organisation devoted to anti-theism, that's just a religion).
|
|
Well if you go down the labels, most modern atheists would be: areligious, agnostic, atheists (3 separate terms each describing 3 different parts that are just common to the group but not mutually exclusive)Modern atheist would argue that there is no such things as agnostic.
They would say that agnostic means uncertainty. Therefore there are agnostic atheist, agnostic theist, strong atheist, and strong theist. Strong denies the possibility of the other person being right and generally is accompanied by what that person considers to be proof.
Which this really pisses off people who identify as agnostic.
Well most atheists aren't 100% certain there is no god (just look at Dawkins)
As to the pissing off of those who call them selves agnostics, a few things come to mind
1) is it because they believe that agnostic is a better term for their disbelief?
2) is it because of prejudice associated with the term atheist?
3) or is it now used as a term for "I haven't decided yet"?
Well if you go down the labels, most modern atheists would be: areligious, agnostic, atheists (3 separate terms each describing 3 different parts that are just common to the group but not mutually exclusive)Modern atheist would argue that there is no such things as agnostic.
They would say that agnostic means uncertainty. Therefore there are agnostic atheist, agnostic theist, strong atheist, and strong theist. Strong denies the possibility of the other person being right and generally is accompanied by what that person considers to be proof.
Which this really pisses off people who identify as agnostic.
Well most atheists aren't 100% certain there is no god (just look at Dawkins)
As to the pissing off of those who call them selves agnostics, a few things come to mind
1) is it because they believe that agnostic is a better term for their disbelief?
2) is it because of prejudice associated with the term atheist?
3) or is it now used as a term for "I haven't decided yet"?
Identifiers are important to some people. They preferred to be called one thing over the other.
1) They believe agnostic is a better term for their uncertainty. Since they have no belief either way on the matter.
2) That and they don't feel it defines them correctly.
3) or it is the term for "I've seen no proof either way and am not taking a position. Both atheist and theist bare the burden of proof when it comes to my opinion. Until then I opt out of the whole religion thing, but would appreciate it if people would stop calling me an atheist. As in I'm equally open to the existence and not existence of a God."
NOTE: Since someone bothered asking. My beliefs are hard-core christian. The bible is the written truth. Anyone who stands against homosexual marriage is of the Devil!
I have no non-scriptural "proof" for my beliefs. There is always a seed of doubt with faith. Without doubt, faith is certainty and certainty begets fanaticism.
I firmly believe other faiths are wrong. I'm not sure if they go to hell for being wrong though. But I don't particularly care either way.
I believe the notion of doing good because it is good is the root of all non-mental-illness(or reckless greed) related evil in the world. Every good act must have a logical reason behind it, less we use good as an excuse to commit horrible acts.
NOTE: Since someone bothered asking. My beliefs are hard-core christian. The bible is the written truth. Anyone who stands against homosexual marriage is of the Devil!
I assume you mean "anyone who stands for" and please do not start a debate on gay marriage here.
I assume you mean "anyone who stands for" and please do not start a debate on gay marriage here.
NOTE: Since someone bothered asking. My beliefs are hard-core christian. The bible is the written truth. Anyone who stands against homosexual marriage is of the Devil!
You know what they say about when you assume. "It makes an <a word that starts with 'A'>-hole out of you and me." -- Coach V
I meant against.
Demographically surprising, but nevertheless, please leave gay marriage out of it, as it tends to derail threads that weren't about it in the first place.
Demographically surprising, but nevertheless, please leave gay marriage out of it, as it tends to derail threads that weren't about it in the first place.
Fair enough.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I assume you mean "anyone who stands for" and please do not start a debate on gay marriage here.
NOTE: Since someone bothered asking. My beliefs are hard-core christian. The bible is the written truth. Anyone who stands against homosexual marriage is of the Devil!
But feel free to continue the off-topic religious debate that should be in the off-topic section, because, hey, selective enforcement kicks ass!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But feel free to continue the off-topic religious debate that should be in the off-topic section, because, hey, selective enforcement kicks ass!I assume you mean "anyone who stands for" and please do not start a debate on gay marriage here.
NOTE: Since someone bothered asking. My beliefs are hard-core christian. The bible is the written truth. Anyone who stands against homosexual marriage is of the Devil!
Your avatar really makes the post.
Reminds me of this guys face http://lolsnaps.com/upload_pic/WhereDoesItEndWithYouPeople-71817.jpg
But feel free to continue the off-topic religious debate that should be in the off-topic section, because, hey, selective enforcement kicks ass!I assume you mean "anyone who stands for" and please do not start a debate on gay marriage here.
NOTE: Since someone bothered asking. My beliefs are hard-core christian. The bible is the written truth. Anyone who stands against homosexual marriage is of the Devil!
That's a fair point (although unnecessarily antagonistically phrased) -- I'd forgotten that it wasn't the original topic. Locked. If you want to debate what constitutes atheism, take it to the Off-Topic forum with the rest of the non-gaming threads.