Atheist Sees Image of Big Bang in Piece of Toast | Page 6 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Atheist Sees Image of Big Bang in Piece of Toast

Pat Condell on aggressive atheism... I couldn't say it nearly as well as Pat does, so here he is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjO4duhMRZk

People will say anything for a buck these days!

Seriously, he a comedian! That's like taking environmental advice from a politician! Or political cues from an actor! Or even believing anything said from a fat and disgusting ultra capitalist disguised as a revolutionary documentary film maker in a dirty cap! Who does that?:p

Can't we just drop this issue, and talk about things we all agree on, like the virtues of Stephen Harper, or the tastiness of seal meat?
 
People will say anything for a buck these days!

Seriously, he a comedian! That's like taking environmental advice from a politician! Or political cues from an actor! Or even believing anything said from a fat and disgusting ultra capitalist disguised as a revolutionary documentary film maker in a dirty cap! Who does that?:p

Can't we just drop this issue, and talk about things we all agree on, like the virtues of Stephen Harper, or the tastiness of seal meat?

Nope, sorry Edders, can't drop it... not until all the religidiots drop it and I no longer hear a thing about their imaginary friend or religious institutions and schools are any longer funded by public dollars.

What sort of expertise does one need to comment on religion? Does one need a theology degree in order to make a valid comment to you?

I happen to agree with what Condell is saying in that video, so I posted it.
 
Was that Vlad?
 
Nope, sorry Edders, can't drop it... not until all the religidiots drop it and I no longer hear a thing about their imaginary friend or religious institutions and schools are any longer funded by public dollars.

What sort of expertise does one need to comment on religion? Does one need a theology degree in order to make a valid comment to you?

I happen to agree with what Condell is saying in that video, so I posted it.
Oh, but you offended the sensibilities of the religiotards. Dear me, I think I've got a case of the vapors, I must sit down. :p

I suppose as soon as the muslims stop killing women for daring to drive, burning girls in school because, well, their in school, the catholics actually start turning their kiddie fiddlers over to the police, stop lieing about condoms, taking peoples' money, preaching about living a life of destitution while hypocritically living in opulaence, the religiots stop knocking on my ****ing door at 8am on saturdays, then I'll stop bitching about religion.

In other words, I'll treat them like they treat me. :D I think that's in most of those so called holy books somewhere....
 
Worldtraveller, my favorite "man" with a cross-shaped chip on his shoulder! I know others on this site agree with you, but you don't just disagree; you live and breathe atheism, well you and your buddy Vlad. If you weren't such a strong atheist, you wouldn't have an identity at all! Try to define yourself as something other than an anti-religious bigot, like maybe someone who's even a bit likeable:p

if you want to discuss religion, come on over to talkrational.org. Take the pressure off Paul.

Hey Athiortard, why don't you follow your own advice?

Oh, but you offended the sensibilities of the religiotards.

That's the difference between me and you. You try to offend everyone who disagrees with you in the hopes of validating your own sorry existence. Me, I just try to offend you! (Sorry, maybe your phat IQ and science credentials help with your validation!)

You just can't disagree, you must also attempt to put people down. That shows the kind of (small) man you really are, despite your off-the charts IQ (which you claim doesn't matter anyway) and membership into a more exclusive club - the Scientists of the Mid-West or something like that. (a club for Kansas intellectuals? What's next, a club for American Communists?)

Tell us again, what was your stratospheric IQ again? What fancy science club are you a part of again? :laughing3:

Feel like putting me on your ignore list yet?

Nope, sorry Edders, can't drop it... not until all the religidiots drop it and I no longer hear a thing about their imaginary friend or religious institutions and schools are any longer funded by public dollars.

I'm assuming you're not calling me a religidiot since I don't push my beliefs on you, or spend your tax money on my religious dealings:)

BTW, our public money also funds the English monarchy. Where's the name-calling for that? How about something along the lines of "damn the morononarchists!"
At least you have a choice of either paying taxes for Catholic school or public school. You have no choice in supporting your queen!
 
Wow, is this still going on? I give both sides credit for being dedicated to their beliefs... Ding, ding... Round 6,048...

If there is a God, do you think these posts will be submissible at the Pearly Gates Courthouse?

"Sorry, I don't have time to deal with this mess... to Hell with all of you..."
Yours Truly,
God
 
Wow, is this still going on? I give both sides credit for being dedicated to their beliefs... Ding, ding... Round 6,048...

If there is a God, do you think these posts will be submissible at the Pearly Gates Courthouse?

"Sorry, I don't have time to deal with this mess... to Hell with all of you..."
Yours Truly,
God

No, because the "pearly gates courthouse" probably doesn't exist :D
 
No, because the "pearly gates courthouse" probably doesn't exist :D

lol, hence the "If there is a God..."

If there is... "Dude, c'mon, how was I supposed to know you were real???"
 
One thing I particularly dislike about the religious is how they try to subvert freedom of speech.

Take, for example, all of the opposition to the atheist ads on buses this past summer. In Toronto it didn't get too out-of-hand because Toronto is fairly liberal and secular, but some other cities they brought those messages to got a bit out of hand.

Then there is the recent push (particularly by Muslim countries) for the UN to outlaw blasphemy.

I like Condell's take on blasphemy in the video I posted above:

The very concept of blasphemy is a perfect illustration of the cowardly immaturity of the religious mind and the emptiness of religion itself. If religion contained any truth, it could be ridiculed, insulted, even defiled without being diminished in any way. Its truth would shine through undimmed, unblemished, shaming those who abused it into silence. But that's not how things are. Religion is prickly, it's intolerant, it's ultra-defensive precisely because it's brittle and fragile.
 
One thing I particularly dislike about the religious is how they try to subvert freedom of speech.

Then there is the recent push (particularly by Muslim countries) for the UN to outlaw blasphemy. QUOTE]

I totally agree with you on Freedom of Speech. I also dislike how other religions try to force their beliefs; I'm not cool with that.

No one ever forced my beliefs on me, and I don't force mine on others. And I certainly do not think any less of people who believe different than me. I respect that you don't like the zealots, because I don't either. Just don't think that everyone who believes in the unknowable are zealots or idiots or otherwise intellectually challanged.

Dictionary.com defines a zealot as "an excessively zealous person; fanatic" a definition that has nothing to do with religion, and everything to do with people like Vlad and Worldtraveller, who persecute those who believe (or otherwise have differing opinions) with such zeal.

That's right Worldtraveller, I defined you in a dictionary! Don't make me break out the definition of "Atheist" and make you whine about that again!:p
 
I like Condell's take on blasphemy in the video I posted above:
The very concept of blasphemy is a perfect illustration of the cowardly immaturity of the religious mind and the emptiness of religion itself. If religion contained any truth, it could be ridiculed, insulted, even defiled without being diminished in any way. Its truth would shine through undimmed, unblemished, shaming those who abused it into silence. But that's not how things are. Religion is prickly, it's intolerant, it's ultra-defensive precisely because it's brittle and fragile.

This is somewhat of a side comment, more on the nature of blasphemy, not anything specific.

Blasphemy is more of an insult, not something that diminishes the value of faith or the object of the faith. It's like having someone cursing your mother doesn't make her any less great, but still hurts you to hear it.
 
Edders said:
I know others on this site agree with you, but you don't just disagree; you live and breathe atheism, well you and your buddy Vlad. If you weren't such a strong atheist, you wouldn't have an identity at all! Try to define yourself as something other than an anti-religious bigot, like maybe someone who's even a bit likeable.
Look, Edders, don't try to pretend like you know the least bit about me. Because the bits you think you know are either wrong, or you intentionally distort them to try to score cheap points.
me said:
if you want to discuss religion, come on over to talkrational.org. Take the pressure off Paul.
Edders said:
Hey Athiortard, why don't you follow your own advice?
1) I do post over there plenty. It's not my fault you're too much of a coward to also do so.
2) You are being a supreme hypocrit here. I did not call you a name, although, based on your responses, I think it applies to you. If you're going to whine about Paul supposedly not enforcing rules, then turn around and violate them even worse, you don't have any room for complaining.

So, you going to come over to TR and post, or are you chicken?
Edders said:
That's the difference between me and you. You try to offend everyone who disagrees with you in the hopes of validating your own sorry existence. Me, I just try to offend you! (Sorry, maybe your phat IQ and science credentials help with your validation!)
There are many differences between you and me. One of them is that I don't assume that any reference to an athiest necessarily refers to me. You, Edders, are the one who keeps making this personal. This post of yours is nothing but a personal attack, on me specifically. So I will assume that means you don't have any real points. Feel free to provide evidence to the contrary.
You just can't disagree, you must also attempt to put people down. That shows the kind of (small) man you really are, despite your off-the charts IQ (which you claim doesn't matter anyway) and membership into a more exclusive club - the Scientists of the Mid-West or something like that. (a club for Kansas intellectuals? What's next, a club for American Communists?)
Thank you for continuing to proove my point. Would you like to quote the rules again here so the mods know which ones you've violated? (I only point this out because you are such a hypocrit, I have no problems with your childish attacks.)
Feel like putting me on your ignore list yet?
You flatter yourself (I suppose no one else will?). I like reading your posts for comedic value.
No one ever forced my beliefs on me, and I don't force mine on others.
Really? So you arrived at your beliefs logically, after examing at least the majority of the evidence for and against your, and other, religions? I'll take that bet.
Dictionary.com defines a zealot as "an excessively zealous person; fanatic" a definition that has nothing to do with religion, and everything to do with people like Vlad and Worldtraveller, who persecute those who believe (or otherwise have differing opinions) with such zeal.
Now you're just lying. Show me an example of you or any other religious person being persecuted here by myself or any of the other atheists posting here? Go ahead, I'll wait. I have no problem with many believers. But this is a discussion board, if you are going to whine about us discussing your beliefs, maybe you should try a different pastime, like knitting.
 
2) You are being a supreme hypocrit here. I did not call you a name, although, based on your responses, I think it applies to you

...you're too much of a coward ...

I did not call you an idiot, although, based on your responses, I think it applies to you.

Oh, ye of such short memory.

The very first post I ever read from you was a personal attack on me. The very first! El Zilcho had to edit it. Others here have disagreed with me. Most have been much more witty and entertaining than you. But you, without knowing a thing about me except I was a Catholic (and someone who answered a thread with honesty and without a hint of malice or disrespect), attacked me as your very first contact with me. So yeah, I do know you, and your ways. Well, you and your buddy Vlad did the same thing. But I got to give you credit, at least you didn't run and cry like Vlad.

To me, it's not about religion. Yeah, I got a long memory. God gave it to me:D

Well, back in that thread, I was the only one calling you out. Now, thanks to your one-man crusade against anything that doesn't fit your narrow-minded view, more people are calling you out.

Next time you're sitting at home alone, seething with anger over the injustices of religion, just remember: if you were only nicer, people might actually like you, and I'm not talking about the other country-bumpkin scientists in your exclusive "intellectual" club

You said people don't like you because of your Ateist shirt. Could it be they don't like you for other reasons? Or are you sooooo sure of that too?

PS - One billion happy Christians rule the world. Your stupid shirt ain't gonna change that. How does that make you feel?;)
 
Keep it comin' Edders, you're a better spokesman for atheism than I am.

By their fruits, you will know them. I know I read that somewhere.
 
This is going nowhere. It's going to be trashed, just to be started all over again in another thread. I strongly suggest that everyone put their money where their (dirty) mouth is, become site supporters and continue the discussion where it originally started, for better or for worse.
 

Back
Top Bottom