Thanking 'god' but not the medical staff

marty1985

Dave! wrote: »

Well then most posters on Boards are quite 'tolerant' of religion... I have no problem accepting the existence and practice of religion. I just think it's a silly belief and practice, and have no problem with pointing out why.

People can believe what they want, though.

By numbers alone, I would agree with your first point that most Boardsies are quite tolerant, but there are a number of militant atheists and the vitriol and group think (and downright anti-Catholicism, e.g. a mod referring to them as sick flesh-eaters) can be quite alarming at times.

I definitely agree that people can believe what they want.

xsiborg

Owen_S wrote: »

Thank God for atheism.

and thank god for some people that can still have a sense of humor about the whole thing...

Agricola

battle_hardend wrote: »

im not popular enough to be different , i discuss the weather and football results in my local

You should dip your toe in the water some time, see what happens.

"Dya see United there yesterday? Some goal from Scholes werent it? Cos of the early kickoff I skipped Mass. Tbh, Im thinking of doing it more often. Awful aul nonsense aint it?"

Overheal

Agricola wrote: »

Why not?

:rolleyes: mmmm..... They dragged an angry 80 year old man out of the bar years ago on me, because I let him know I was an atheist when he started on me with all this Love Jesus stuff that made me uncomfortable. It sent him into a rage.

xsiborg

battle_hardend wrote: »

i disagree , the internet is a very open and liberal place to discuss issues , the shackles are off and people tend to be much more forthcoming , i would never even raise the issue of religon ( let alone athiesm ) in the real world , in a pub or some social setting

actually imho the internet is the LEAST open of places to discuss issues, because there are plenty of ass-hats that can drag down a good discussion. at least in the pub you can tell these people to F right off. cant do that here, no such thing as free speech and all that...

My name is URL

krudler wrote: »

It bugs me how people who have a belief in something think it affords them some sort of special rights that puts them beyond criticism, sorry, it doesnt. Its an opinion, nothing more. You can believe anything you want, but if other see those beliefs as ridiculous then thats their right to poke holes in them.

So it would be okay for people to ridicule and mock you for being a fan of wrestling?

xsiborg

My name is URL wrote: »

So it would be okay for people to ridicule and mock you for being a fan of wrestling?

oh no you di'int.... :eek:

:pac:

krudler

My name is URL wrote: »

So it would be okay for people to ridicule and mock you for being a fan of wrestling?

of course, that goes with the territory :pac:

Duggys Housemate

Ghost Buster wrote: »

padd b1975 wrote: »

Read any of the threads about religion in after hours and note what is allowed to slide and what is not.

I have done and there are dicks on both sides who get warned as much Mod' attention as each other.
However I can say that talking snakes, dead folk getting up and having a stroll, wafers becoming human flesh but magically / invisably so, ladies getting pregnant from magic cuddles from angels are all retarded notions .
But i have not insulted any individual.

But you have insulted deep beliefs ( also you have the typical new atheists non- understanding of transubstantiation) and you have used deliberately joking language. You do that here because, given the demographic profile, you hope for thanks from fellow travellers.

I urge internet atheists to get out of the basement, and wipe their arses with the Koran outside the Finsbury mosque, since it is only a book and nobody could be reasonably offended.

marty1985

Agricola wrote: »

You should dip your toe in the water some time, see what happens.

"Dya see United there yesterday? Some goal from Scholes werent it? Cos of the early kickoff I skipped Mass. Tbh, Im thinking of doing it more often. Awful aul nonsense aint it?"

Did you see that game this afternoon? 4-4. Premier league may be in Man City's hands after all, thank God. That Catholic Mancini will probably get some divine intervention.

He was an altar boy and played for the local Aurora Calcio football team in his youth. On one occasion, a fixture clashed with his first Holy Communion. Halfway through the ceremony, the eight-year-old Mancini was nowhere to be seen. His local priest who was administering his first communion frequently coached football, he heard they were losing 2–0 at half-time and so he asked a young Mancini quietly after receiving his communion if he had his football kit and boots with him. Roberto said they were in the changing rooms and so he told him to sneak out of the side door and put them on because his team needed him, unbeknownst to his father.[12]

In the pub you can tell them all how Mancini loves to go to Medjugorje. He went there last month, and the results so far have been extraordinary.

xsiborg

Overheal wrote: »

:rolleyes: mmmm..... They dragged an angry 80 year old man out of the bar years ago on me, because I let him know I was an atheist when he started on me with all this Love Jesus stuff that made me uncomfortable. It sent him into a rage.

i had to laugh at this 'cause it reminded me of the other day when i posted about the fact that i went to a christian brothers school and there was a kid beside me that was a jehovahs witness, he used always be trying to get me to come to one of their prayer meetings, i was like "no!", drove me up the walls for the whole term...

Agricola

Overheal wrote: »

:rolleyes: mmmm..... They dragged an angry 80 year old man out of the bar years ago on me, because I let him know I was an atheist when he started on me with all this Love Jesus stuff that made me uncomfortable. It sent him into a rage.

Well maybe when he went home and calmed down for awhile, your words may have made him think on his violent and unnecessary actions. He may have converted!

battle_hardend

marty1985 wrote: »

If you want a theological debate go to a religion forum or approach a religious person and ask them in a sincere way. If you really want an answer, you are in the wrong place. Otherwise you could be just throwing that out there to add heat but no light.

My guess is that Christians view God as being inherently good, the very definition of good, so the concept of "blaming" God might take some explaining. They might believe that God has a destiny for them, that they can grow spiritually through suffering and emerge stronger, that God can give them strength to endure suffering, that they exist in an imperfect world where suffering and decay is a part of life, or something like that.

What Christians don't do, AFAIK, is have this weird idea that they are so supreme in the eyes of God that he will not allow them to suffer.

In any case, this thread probably should have not been dignified by several pages of posts.

it appears to me that believers dont measure god by human standards , if a fireman ran into a burning building and rescued a small child , he would be rightly praised and lauded , if a fireman sat on his ass and refused to even turn on the hose and a small child died in a burning house fire , the fireman would be villified , those are pretty standard considerations and judgements

when it comes to god , believers heap praise on god when a person undergoes cancer treatment and emerges fully recovered , when another person undergoes cancer treatment but dies within a few short months , they still heap praise on god and claim that it was the persons time to die and join god

im not saying thier is anything wrong with this way of thinking but its obvious that when discussing the issue of god with believers , you can more or less dispense with all other common forms of consideration and common understanding

padd b1975

Ghost Buster wrote: »

I have done and there are dicks on both sides who get warned as much Mod' attention as each other.
However I can say that talking snakes, dead folk getting up and having a stroll, wafers becoming human flesh but magically / invisably so, ladies getting pregnant from magic cuddles from angels are all retarded notions .
But i have not insulted any individual.

Your use of the word retarded suggests otherwise.

You should try to tone back the passive aggression, you might fool others, not me.

krudler

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

But you have insulted deep beliefs ( also you have the typical new atheists non- understanding of transubstantiation) and you have used deliberately joking language. You do that here because, given the demographic profile, you hope for thanks from fellow travellers.

I urge internet atheists to get out of the basement, and wipe their arses with the Koran outside the Finsbury mosque, since it is only a book and nobody could be reasonably offended.

whats the non understanding of transubstantiation?

Dave!

marty1985 wrote: »

Did you see that game this afternoon? 4-4. Premier league may be in Man City's hands after all, thank God. That Catholic Mancini will probably get some divine intervention.



In the pub you can tell them all how Mancini loves to go to Medjugorje. He went there last month, and the results so far have been extraordinary.

And after Stephen Pienaar's goal, what does he do? Pull up his shirt to expose a "God is great" t-shirt!

mloc

battle_hardend wrote: »

im not saying thier is anything wrong with this way of thinking but its obvious that when discussing the issue of god with believers , you can more or less dispense with all other common forms of consideration and common understanding

Of course there's something wrong with it; it's totally lacking in logic and full of contradiction and hypocrisy.

battle_hardend

xsiborg wrote: »

actually imho the internet is the LEAST open of places to discuss issues, because there are plenty of ass-hats that can drag down a good discussion. at least in the pub you can tell these people to F right off. cant do that here, no such thing as free speech and all that...

well there we disagree , nothing offends me on the internet , its not remotely personal , i never remember a thing ive said or had said to be while online

Duggys Housemate

krudler wrote: »

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

But you have insulted deep beliefs ( also you have the typical new atheists non- understanding of transubstantiation) and you have used deliberately joking language. You do that here because, given the demographic profile, you hope for thanks from fellow travellers.

I urge internet atheists to get out of the basement, and wipe their arses with the Koran outside the Finsbury mosque, since it is only a book and nobody could be reasonably offended.

whats the non understanding of transubstantiation?

I am not here to teach Greek philosophy. Try the wiki entry on substance, to start.

padd b1975

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

But you have insulted deep beliefs ( also you have the typical new atheists non- understanding of transubstantiation) and you have used deliberately joking language. You do that here because, given the demographic profile, you hope for thanks from fellow travellers.

I urge internet atheists to get out of the basement, and wipe their arses with the Koran outside the Finsbury mosque, since it is only a book and nobody could be reasonably offended.

They would only do that if there was a wi fi. hot spot nearby, gotta keep their keyboards juiced up!

krudler

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

I am not here to teach Greek philosophy. Try the wiki entry on substance, to start.

jesus's flesh literally turning into wafers, thats the basics of it yes?

vard

lividduck wrote: »

Father Damo wrote: »

Are you honestly stating that you think Scientology are people who are mentally sound?

As an athiest I believe I am not only mentally sound but I do not consider myself to be either easily led or of low intellect.

Yet you can't spell the word? I kid, I kid.


I'm beyond bored of "militant atheist" accusations. Seriously, what a load of tripe. What makes someone a militant atheist? Is it a person who openly admits to being an atheist? Is it someone who isn't afraid to challenge or discuss discerning religious issues?

marty1985

Dave! wrote: »

And after Stephen Pienaar's goal, what does he do? Pull up his shirt to expose a "God is great" t-shirt!

Well Holy God!

marty1985

vard wrote: »

Yet you can't spell the word? I kid, I kid.


I'm beyond bored of "militant atheist" accusations. Seriously, what a load of tripe. What makes someone a militant atheist? Is it a person who openly admits to being an atheist? Is it someone who isn't afraid to challenge or discuss discerning religious issues?

Well, a few pages back the consensus among some here was that it is people who maintain religious beliefs must not be tolerated and must be ridiculed.

battle_hardend

mloc wrote: »

Of course there's something wrong with it; it's totally lacking in logic and full of contradiction and hypocrisy.

so are discussions about many issues , im presently a member of an american internet forum called city data , the republicans on that forum are convinced that the super rich should pay lower rates of income tax than someone who pumps gas for a living by virtue of the fact that donald trump creates more jobs , hypocrosy is not the sole preserve of the religous

im ok with the peculiar rationale of believers providing it doesnt interfere with how the state opperates

xsiborg

vard wrote: »

Yet you can't spell the word? I kid, I kid.


I'm beyond bored of "militant atheist" accusations. Seriously, what a load of tripe. What makes someone a militant atheist? Is it a person who openly admits to being an atheist? Is it someone who isn't afraid to challenge or discuss discerning religious issues?

nope, it's a person with a persecution complex who tries to be "contravershall" when all others see them as an attention seeking ass-hat who is afraid of having a sensible discussion on the issue and instead chooses to dismiss others as idiots for their faith.

they mostly hang out in After Hours where they'll get more attention than if they used the correct forum to air their views, because they're afraid of being torn apart by actual atheists or those of a religious persuasion. they do more of a dis-service to atheism than actually helping others to understand what it is to be an atheist.

it's the pseudo-intellectual "anti-anything-establishment" hipster kids that seek attention in this way though, not any actual atheist who has respect for other people's religious beliefs. its easy to spot the difference!

Dave!

marty1985 wrote: »

Well, a few pages back the consensus among some here was that it is people who maintain religious beliefs must not be tolerated and must be ridiculed.

I don't think there's a consensus on that. The consensus might be "religious belief must be permitted to be ridiculed and criticised, just like any other belief", which I think is fair, don't you?

Jimoslimos

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

Someone who is militant about his atheism. Like getting upset at a fairly benign use of language ( thank God)

In that case, I'll take that 'militancy' over suicide bombs and attacks on abortion clinics.

I think the issue isn't what Muamba said or didn't say, more to do with what the media concentrates on - miracles, God, etc.

padd b1975

battle_hardend wrote: »

so are discussions about many issues , im presently a member of an american internet forum called city data , the republicans on that forum are convinced that the super rich should pay lower rates of income tax than someone who pumps gas for a living by virtue of the fact that donald trump creates more jobs , hypocrosy is not the sole preserve of the religous

im ok with the peculiar rationale of believers providing it doesnt interfere with how the state opperates

It will if the republicans win in November.
Its called party policy.

Min

So do atheists believe God doesn't exist.

If they do, is that not a belief?

xsiborg

Dave! wrote: »

I don't think there's a consensus on that. The consensus might be "religious belief must be permitted to be ridiculed and criticised, just like any other belief", which I think is fair, don't you?

i wouldn't think it fair on any belief Dave to ridicule it. certainly provide critical thought on the issue by all means, but ridicule and disrespect should never be tolerated or perpetrated by anyone as it only serves to make people dig their heels in and become even more ingrained in their ideas and nobody learns anything.

padd b1975

Min wrote: »

So do atheists believe God doesn't exist.

If they do, is that not a belief?

Now thats a noodle scratcher.

Ellis Dee

biko wrote: »

So he thank the god that struck him down in the first place?

That's just what I was going to ask, but I was afraid people might think I was bashing religion.:D:D:D:D

marty1985

Dave! wrote: »

I don't think there's a consensus on that. The consensus might be "religious belief must be permitted to be ridiculed and criticised, just like any other belief", which I think is fair, don't you?

That's not a definition of anything. The militant atheist is characterised by what he does and says. I could agree to the above, tolerate militant atheists and still dislike militant atheists. The difference it seems is between "must be permitted to be ridiculed" and "must be ridiculed". Consider Dawkins and his "reason rally" and the instruction to ridicule believers with contempt.

take everything

Kiera wrote: »

Now this thread has got potential

battle_hardend

Min wrote: »

So do atheists believe God doesn't exist.

If they do, is that not a belief?

do you believe that santa claus doesnt exist

if not , is that not a belief ?

padd b1975

Ellis Dee wrote: »

That's just what I was going to ask, but I was afraid people might think I was bashing religion.:D:D:D:D

No one would ever think that petal.













No one at all.

krudler

Min wrote: »

So do atheists believe God doesn't exist.

If they do, is that not a belief?

no atheists just lack a belief in a god(s), its really simple and people keep having problems with it, I dont get it.

marty1985

krudler wrote: »

no atheists just lack a belief in a god(s), its really simple and people keep having problems with it, I dont get it.

Because it goes against the established common usage. But you just can't trust dictionaries these days.

Min

krudler wrote: »

no atheists just lack a belief in a god(s), its really simple and people keep having problems with it, I dont get it.

So when it comes to God that is what they believe regarding the existence of a God.

Min

battle_hardend wrote: »

do you believe that santa claus doesnt exist

if not , is that not a belief ?

Santa Claus existed as Saint Nicholas, and is said to be buried near Jerpoint in Kilkenny.

mloc

Atheism is a religion in the same way "off" is a television channel.

later12

krudler wrote: »

no atheists just lack a belief in a god(s), its really simple and people keep having problems with it, I dont get it.

Really?

I'm an atheist and nobody has ever had a problem with it. My parents might jeeringly pretend to lament it, but I think that to say someone has a problem with it would be a gross exaggeration.

Somehow I think a lot of the more militant types almost desire an adverse reaction.

Here's what I and many others do: be comfortable in your atheism and leave others to their beliefs as well. Accept that lots of perfectly intelligent human beings are people of faith, and move on. I find it works a treat.

marty1985

Min wrote: »

So when it comes to God that is what they believe regarding the existence of a God.

It varies between a belief that there is no god, a (positive) disbelief or rejection in the belief of God.

The passive lack of belief has traditionally been agnosticism.

The idea that agnosticism is also not to be tolerated is associated also with New Atheism and militant atheism.

Anthony Flew tried to redeploy the word atheist to mean a passive lack of belief. This was picked up by the New Atheism.

It probably will be redefined by dictionaries to be a passive lack of belief, if that becomes the established common usage.

It still doesn't appear to be - outside of the current atheist 'movement'. (I use the word movement for lack of a better word, not to irk anyone.) But that can change.

xsiborg

take everything wrote: »

Huberous. WTF.
This thread is fcuking gold.

"hubris" then... geez, did you miss the top sticky in AH about spelling nazi's? :rolleyes:

EuropeanSon

Min wrote: »

So do atheists believe God doesn't exist.

If they do, is that not a belief?

Wow, that's new. Did you come up with that argument yourself?

From the OED : "Atheism: disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods."
The former (disbelief) could be argued to be so. The latter (lack of belief) could not. I choose to identify with the latter, as do most other atheists I know, so to answer your question, no.

Jimoslimos

Min wrote: »

So do atheists believe God doesn't exist.

If they do, is that not a belief?

If you make an assertion that something exists, then the burden of proof lies with you. Not me, otherwise my supposed 'beliefs' would run to infinity.

Thread to be closed soon.

battle_hardend

Min wrote: »

Santa Claus existed as Saint Nicholas, and is said to be buried near Jerpoint in Kilkenny.

ok , rudolph then

xsiborg

later12 wrote: »

Really?

I'm an atheist and nobody has ever had a problem with it. My parents might jeeringly pretend to lament it, but I think that to say someone has a problem with it would be a gross exaggeration.

Somehow I think a lot of the more militant types almost desire an adverse reaction.

Here's what I and many others do: be comfortable in your atheism and leave others to their beliefs as well. Accept that lots of perfectly intelligent human beings are people of faith, and move on. I find it works a treat.

thank you later12 for this post, it exemplifies exactly what i was saying earlier about hipster kids desperate for attention that want everybody to know they're now "an atheist", as if it's the new "i dont conform to the norm" for this generation.

what they fail to realise is that people have far more on their minds than little johnny who never got enough attention growing up and now seeks out a way to be "different" just so he can get attention by getting up people's noses.

most people have no problem with atheists, they have a problem with ass-hats that feel the need to shove their new found pseudo-intellectualism in their faces.

holystungun9

lividduck wrote: »

I think its just a human thing, we instictivley say "Thank God", I wouldn't read too much into it.

After Hours fail

Please add more sexism, racism, blame the government-travellers-non nationals-religion-British-Roma-isms and take swipes at other posters comments.

Or at the very least, mention a fanny pad on your car door. :pac: