Atheists Do It On A Bus

[GeminiBrian]

[QUOTE]

Quote by: Yarn Granted, what atheists do in the privacy of their own homes is their business and no one elses. But they shouldn't do It on the bus. Thats just publically indecent.

What exactly shouldn't we do on buses? You've lost me...

And you have to chop off your right hand the moment you notice it raised threateningly. Better a bloody stump than your entire being discarded for good in the dump.

The problem is I can't type very well with my left hand, so I'll keep my right hand attached for the time being, providing you have no objection...

[isaone]

So guess what, even the innocuous message "There's probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life" on the sides of buses has irritated the the religious fools. They are attempting to kill the campaign because (read the full article here if you wish)

This is my favorite quote from the opponents.

"the ad breaks the Advertising Code anyway, unless the advertisers hold evidence that God probably does not exist."

The thing that ticks me off is not that the group protesting is made of idiots and insane people but that solely because they are a religious group they get a platform and a tremendous amount of respect.

[isaone]

So there is a new suggested message for buses and the like

Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings


What do y'all think ?

[Dan_77]

Quote by: isaone So there is a new suggested message for buses and the like Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings What do y'all think ?

Well, it's shortsighted and ignores the fact that both of them do both good and bad.

[loser]

Quote: Quote by: loser Of course, if you are equating Christianity with Catholicism then I agree with the superstitious part...but they are NOT the same and, in fact, are worlds apart. Quote: It's true, the RCC has attempted to single-handedly destroy Christianity with myth and superstition. The RCC does NOT represent Christianity, no matter what they do or say. Quote: They're not Christians except by name only. You might call yourself good but that doesn't make it so. shawmutt's reply: "No true Scotsman" fallacies.

First, your adhoc fallacy was advanced by Antony Flew. Here's a preacher's son who became an atheist who then became a sort of deist who remains unsure as to what exactly he believes. He admits to being "misled" by Richard Dawkins, claiming Dawkins "has never been reported as referring to any promising work on the production of a theory of the development of living matter" Antony Flew - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ironically, he proves his own adhoc fallacy is a fallacy in itself. Are there indeed 'any true atheists'?

Nevertheless, even if the fallacy position was not a fallacy itself, it would not apply to my remarks:

"Errors in usage

In situations where the subject's status is previously determined by specific behaviors, the fallacy does not apply. For example, it is perfectly justified to say, "No true vegetarian eats meat," because not eating meat is what defines a person as a vegetarian."

No true Scotsman - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nice try, though.

Next, you link to an evolution site. By the second page, I was rolling on the floor laughing my a** off (ROFLMAO). LOL, good grief, what has happened to critical thinking. The site shows the nostril placement of a crocodile (which it claims to be an early ancestor of the modern whale) and that of a gray whale and posits this as evidence of transitional forms.

Why do people want to so desperately cling to such foolishness?

Rom 1:21 They know God, but they do not give him the honor that belongs to him, nor do they thank him. Instead, their thoughts have become complete nonsense, and their empty minds are filled with darkness.
Rom 1:22 They say they are wise, but they are fools;
Rom 1:23 instead of worshiping the immortal God, they worship images made to look like mortals or birds or animals or reptiles.
Rom 1:24 And so God has given those people over to do the filthy things their hearts desire, and they do shameful things with each other.
Rom 1:25 They exchange the truth about God for a lie; they worship and serve what God has created instead of the Creator himself, who is to be praised forever! Amen.

[loser]

So instead of just making an unfounded contention, how about providing some scientific research that supports this. Otherwise I can easily dismiss one person's opinion when it attempts to counter hundreds of experiments and mountains of evidence. In short, I don't believe you until you can back up what you think. But do it in the appropriate thread. Attempts to further distract this thread from its topic are not appreciated.

Thanks, Jack. It is so easy for me to get off track. My brain is like an electron, it's flying off in all directions. I'll try to remember to address your concern in the appropriate thread. I definitely don't want to give you the impression that any of my contentions are unfounded.

[Chancellor]

Quote by: isaone Sorry but incorrect(IMO) on both counts. A person who is without ("A") a belief in God is an Atheist. Someone who had never ever heard of God(s) and lacks the belief for that reason is just as much an Atheist as someone who has heard all about it and chosen to not believe. The act of believing is that action that makes a person a Theist. Anyone who does not 'Believe' for whatever reason becomes an Atheist. "Not believing" is the results of lacking belief . It is not a believe in and of itself.

Nonsense. Just listen to the way most atheists talk and you will see that they very clearly believe that there are no deities. If you're (I don't mean you specifically) going to be an atheist, if you really and truly believe that there are no deities, then say so. Stop trying to dance around it.

OK by that perfectually correct use of the term Gnostic you are correct. My usage is meant to mean 'knowing' in the general definition not the specific religion. IN other words it is possible for someone to 'know' there is a God and yet choose to believe there is not. As I said such a person deserves a award for self contradiction but they would have a lot of humans to share it with since we are all very talented in that area .

But since your usage is wrong, it is dismissed out of hand. When the first letter of the word is capitalized (except at the beginning of a sentence), it specifically refers to the theistic religion called Gnosticism. Besides, I'm not convinced that it's possible to know something and, at the same time, not believe it.

[Chancellor]

Quote by: CruellaDeChaCha I didn't say it was, and that wasn't what I asked. Sheesh. Atheism is a belief system, and religion/theism is a belief system. One believes in god, one believes there isn't. Therefore they are both belief systems, albeit one religious, one anti-religious (so to speak). Agnosticism is the absence of belief - or merely, just waiting to be convinced one way or the other - therefore not a belief system, and so is different to atheism and theism/religion. I can't believe I had to clarify the question on this board of all places.

Of course, you could have simply read my statement as affirming what you had posted.

[Jack]

Nonsense. Just listen to the way most atheists talk and you will see that they very clearly believe that there are no deities.

I could use the same reasoning to conclude that theists, because of the way they talk, allow for the existence of any kind of god. Imprecision in speech is unfortunate but isn't an excuse to be unaware of the actual positions of theists and atheists.

[isaone]

Chancellor, yes I do not believe there are any Gods (or faires or ghosts or bigfoots(feet?) or ... {well you get the idea}

I do not make any pretense to say that there is 0% chance that any of the above do not exist. I cannot prove they do not (at least in part because the definitions of those 'things' are undefined/multidefined).

Even Mr. Dawkins admits that the probability that there is God is greater than 0%.

I simply lack the belief in anything for which there is insufficient evidence. This of course is exactly the same way that everyone feels about all of the supernatural deities and such in which they do not believe (any Zeusists out there ? ) .

The key is that I do not believe because there is insufficient evidence. No evidence whatsoever is simply a subset of that . Do you believe in Gremdel ? I am certain you do not since I invented the term and it has no meaning whatsoever. Therefore you clearly lacked the belief on Gremdell even before you ever heard of it. You have been an Agremdellist for your entire life. The same is true of any person who lacks any belief in anything for any reason.

[Trojan_Ripper]

I really like isaone’s answer and it pretty much sums it up IMO.

So isn’t it a moot point? Why carry on the thread when neither party can answer or provide sufficient evidence to counter the other in just about anything brought up here?

I do like the "probably" in the bus message though.

[Cruella]

So isn’t it a moot point? Why carry on the thread when neither party can answer or provide sufficient evidence to counter the other in just about anything brought up here?

Um, like, hello? This is a debate forum, if there was ultimate proof of everything, there'd never be anything to talk about...

[Trojan_Ripper]

Hello CruellaDeChaCha-

Didn’t mean to get anything in a bunch but C’mon, we are supposed to debate an add on the side of a bus?

Like I stated “I really like isaone’s answer and it pretty much sums it up IMO”. Period

Peace

[Cruella]

I rather think it was the assumptions behind the ad that could have been debated, but never mind.

[Laurahill]

I just thought some members might appreciate an example of this campaign continued:



In my honest opinion this particular add walks across a fine line. More than just critical thinking jogging this add seems to evoke digs against those who appear Islamic.

[Cruella]

I think that's a parody of the original ad, actually. There's a random bus slogan generator on the internet, that one certainly wouldn't get past the ASA.