We've been having a little discussion with Dan the Debunker over atheism being a religion. After a post which had a paragraph on a court deciding that atheism is a religion (which it didn't) he makes another post with a comment from an atheist that we have:
- no holy books.
- no worship or belief in a higher being
- no rituals
- no [hierarchy] of priests
- nothing in common that religion has
- at most, technically, a viewpoint about religion
After a flurry of comments, I think Dan conceded the point that atheism is not a religion. Quasar posts a follow-up message which says, in part:
In short, Dan, you're targeting E,L and X but claiming to be debunking the entire alphabet.Dan responds with:
As I said earlier, the only way to debunk atheism is to prove a deity exists, and the only way to debunk theism is to prove one doesn't.
"the only way to debunk atheism is to prove a deity exists,"Quasar's final, humorous response:
If that is what I was attempting then I would have named my blog that.
Look at my tag line "Debunking Atheists
This Blog has been created for the purpose of debunking atheists."
Not atheism. Get it? The individual not the belief system.
Besides there is plenty of evidence that God exists, just look outside your window. Insert Romans 1:20 here.
You're debunked again. next. (I lovingly tease you)
Oh, I see now. You're debunking us, not our belief system. I mistakenly equated them.
Thanks for the clarification.
- I'm not a secular humanist, and have never read the manifesto or even skimmed over. That kills three of your links.
- I don't worship anyone or anything. That's another two dead.
- I don't attend skeptic meetings. And thats the last one down.
That was quick.
"Besides there is plenty of evidence that God exists, just look outside your window."
Looking...
...
Still looking...
...
Still... oh hey, there goes the Flying Spaghetti Monster!
"Insert Romans 1:20 here"
Apart from the F.S.M just now, I've yet to clearly see any invisible things. Sorry.
Want some bolonaise?
Posts
I can't believe that he was able to ignore my reply like that.
ReplyDeleteI had responded because the links he gave in his initial reply to me were basically bullshit that didn't help his case at all.
Now he's made a blog post about it that still doesn't refute my reply, but just repeats the same accusation?
Yeah, he ignored my replies to it as well regarding the court decision and atheism under the First Amendment. It was my first time commenting there, though, so I don't know if it's the norm.
ReplyDeleteYou do realize the SUpreme Court has ruled blacks aren't people and nicely enough that poor people and immigrants aren't people either.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part4/4h2933.html
http://www.eugenicsarchive.org/html/eugenics/essay8text.html
I take their decisions with a grain of salt.
Also, it is an appeal to authority. Newton believed in Alchemy. Does that make it true? No. Authorities deserve our respect... if they can back it up. I'm sure you could take the reasons the court gives an present them... but they would be torn apart like the BS they are.
On Romans 1:20
ReplyDeletebetter translations render the Greek word καθορᾶται (kathoratai) as "to perceive or understand"; not to visually see invisible things.
I am not ignoring you, sometime you make a point and I leave it alone. I try to move on in a good flow not bicker back and forth. Yes I full understood that Reynold would comment again but I felt it was funny enough as a post (dig)
ReplyDeleteIF you know a little bit about me by now I do pick my battles and leave the others alone.
Now disable that word verification it's annoying (just a pet peeve)
I like when you comment and engage I will try to also, as much as my newborn will allow.