Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Charlotte Allen: Why I can't stand atheists
St. Paul Pioneer Press ^ | 05/18/2009 | Charlotte Allen

Posted on 05/23/2009 12:15:01 PM PDT by rhema

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-105 next last
To: dfwgator
More specifically, angry at Jesus and his followers, they're usually neutral when it comes to Allah or Buddha, or Xenu, or whatever else.

Good point. And it's not only atheists who get spooked by the name of Jesus. There's a lot of generic "God" and "Christian" talk in the liberal denominational churches. About the only time they refer to Jesus, however, is to quote the one Bible verse they know for sure: "Do not judge lest you be judged."

51 posted on 05/23/2009 2:53:16 PM PDT by rhema ("Break the conventions; keep the commandments." -- G. K. Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003
Sorry, but the very creation itself screams of a creator. To ignore God does not make Him not exist, nor does it make Justice cease. We have life, to not be greatful is a crime against all creation.

Look at it this way, in creation we have free will. To choose to be not subject to the body of creation, and the Creator Himself is to be a cancer cell in that body.

52 posted on 05/23/2009 2:54:34 PM PDT by American in Israel (A wise man's heart directs him to the right, but the foolish mans heart directs him toward the left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: autumnraine

HOW can He be evil if he doesn’t exist?

**************

From what I imagine is Dawkins’s point of view, a fictitious character in any story can be portrayed as good or evil, hero or villain. In his mind, the fictitious character “God” is “a ‘petty, unjust, unforgiving control freak’ as well as a ‘misogynistic, homophobic, racist ... bully.’”


53 posted on 05/23/2009 2:57:06 PM PDT by Hepsabeth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: American in Israel

>>Look at it this way, in creation we have free will. To choose to be not subject to the body of creation, and the Creator Himself is to be a cancer cell in that body.<<

I suspect that God doesn’t need that level of support and that those who don’t see Him are not “cancerous.”


54 posted on 05/23/2009 3:01:21 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (Communism comes to America: 1/20/2009. Keep your powder dry, folks. Sic semper tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: rhema
I can’t stand atheists — but it’s not because they don’t believe in God. It’s because they’re crashing bores.

I prefer to say there seem to be an inordinately high number who, if they did believe in a deity, would be exactly the type of miserable, intolerant creatures they profess to hate most among believers.

55 posted on 05/23/2009 3:33:40 PM PDT by RichInOC (No! BAD Rich! (What'd I say?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bluegirl
Assume there are two groups of atheists. Group one is angry and rude in asserting their atheism while group two is tolerant and considerate of the feelings of others. You would likely notice only members of group one.
56 posted on 05/23/2009 3:51:58 PM PDT by conejo99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Bryanw92

I see what you mean. Maybe we should just hate ‘em right from the start? Nah, I can’t be bothered. Better to just enjoy mocking them I think.


57 posted on 05/23/2009 3:58:34 PM PDT by Emmett McCarthy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: rhema

I don’t believe in athiests.


58 posted on 05/23/2009 3:59:51 PM PDT by spodefly (This is my tag line. There are many like it, but this one is mine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: autumnraine

Dawkins is an idiot. Albert Einstein, Newton, Descartes and many of the greatest minds that have ever existed believed in GOD. Dawkins use of faulty logic is laughable. Mathematics, logic, and reasoning can not prove or disprove the existence of GOD. Either Dawkins knows this and wrote the book just to make money off the atheists, or he is delusional.


59 posted on 05/23/2009 4:08:41 PM PDT by Do the math (Doug)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Emmett McCarthy

Ignore them. Let them file their lawsuits. Then pray at graduation ceremonies anyway. Let the cops come in and arrest everyone for public prayer. Let the school administration withhold diplomas earned from 4 years of work because the students decided to pray. Put up your crosses on the side of the road so they can make the cops take them down again. Have the 10 Commandments mysteriously “appear” in the courthouse every night, so that they can be removed again the next day.

Force them to persecute the religious people. Because although there is no “separation of church and state” in the Constitution, there sure is a something about “or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

But we can’t fight on that ground until we stop giving in at the threat of a lawsuit.


60 posted on 05/23/2009 4:16:11 PM PDT by Bryanw92
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Westbrook
Sorry but the Constitution disagrees with you. Read article 6 section 3; luckily the Founders thought differently.

No one is beholden your religious tests.

61 posted on 05/23/2009 4:17:32 PM PDT by GunRunner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Do the math

Look at it from the opposite direction: just because you’re a good atheist doesn’t mean that you’ll be good at science or math. When was the last time that Christopher Hitchens published research in a refereed scientific journal, or handled any math more difficult than that involved in figuring out his annual taxes?

A person’s ability in science or math is not determined by their status as a believer in God. Of course, this does not exclude the fact that in certain societies, like the old Soviet Union, publicly expressing faith in God may adversely affect one’s CAREER as a mathematician or scientist. Let’s pray that our country does not follow in the path of the USSR.


62 posted on 05/23/2009 4:24:35 PM PDT by Poe White Trash
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Birch T. Barlow

What is the moral absolutes ping list? I’ve seen it on the thread list from time to time, but never read one.


63 posted on 05/23/2009 4:27:45 PM PDT by GunRunner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Westbrook
Sorry, but atheists must be banned from public office.

Upon what can they base their oath of office? To what external, objective, transcendent standard can they appeal in ordert to uphold the Laws of the Republic?

For the same reason, an atheist’s testimony should be inadmissible in a court room.

Your opinions on this would seem to be right at home in an Islamic fundamentalist state, but they are not what this country is supposed to be about.

Our civil rights have no dependence upon our religious opinions more than our opinions in physics or geometry. -- Thomas Jefferson, Statute for Religious Freedom, 1779. Papers, 2:545

64 posted on 05/23/2009 4:30:38 PM PDT by cerberus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Bryanw92

Congress has it set up so that these ACLU lawyers get paid even when they lose, so these clowns can file lawsuit after lawsuit forever. Local officials lack the balls to say, “Hell, no, we’re not going to pay a judgement” because they want to advance in their respective party’s political machine so that maybe they can be in Congress someday, serve a few terms and retire extremely rich and set for life.


65 posted on 05/23/2009 4:31:43 PM PDT by Emmett McCarthy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: rhema
I love telling atheists the true story about Madalyn Murray O'Hair. It leaves them speechless. She was more angry and anti-religion than anything; angry that the man she was having an affair with wouldn't divorce his wife because of the Catholic church. It exposes their flaws that this woman was their mouthpiece.

Atheists demand proof that God exists and argue that He doesn't because theism hasn't proven it with science. Despite the fact that God is probably the most about written subject in human history with more evidence, esp personal, than anyone can amass, they claim that the evidence is "anecdotal" and not the result of a "double blind" test. However, when you note that science can't cure the common cold or that science proves and disproves long held theories and uncovers new ones, they concede that science hasn't proven God's existence yet, and therefore it is a possibility. When asked what the necessary evidence would be or look like, they draw a blank. Atheism has become a de facto religion that worships science.

Gods' existence is not dependent on our belief.

66 posted on 05/23/2009 5:56:13 PM PDT by FTJM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Do the math
Albert Einstein, Newton, Descartes and many of the greatest minds that have ever existed believed in GOD

Not the GOD that the Born Again Bible Absolutist Triumphant cult insists must be followed.

67 posted on 05/23/2009 6:40:42 PM PDT by Oztrich Boy (a competent small government conservative is good enough for government work)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: cerberus

> Your opinions on this would seem to be right at home in
> an Islamic fundamentalist state, but they are not what
> this country is supposed to be about.

Argumentum ad absurdum.

Only Islam is permitted in the Islamic fundamentalist state.

The US Constitution allows for all faiths, faiths that involve a belief in a source for external, objective, transcendent, eternal Truth. Atheism is not such a faith.

John Adams, one of the principal framers of the Constitution, wrote “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

As for your Jefferson quote, “Our civil rights have no dependence upon our religious opinions more than our opinions in physics or geometry,” I submit that Jefferson was referring to sectarianism, as he was in his famous “wall of separation” letter to the Danbury Baptists that was also tortured out of context by the Warren Court to give us the ridiculous anti-faith situation we see today.

Here are some Jefferson quotes you may have missed.

“Of all the systems of morality, ancient or modern which have come under my observation, none appears to me so pure as that of Jesus.”[Letter to Benjamin Rush April 21, 1803]

“God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are a gift from God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, and that His justice cannot sleep forever.” [Notes on the State of Virginia, 1781]

It [the Bible] is a document in proof that I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus.” [Jan 9, 1816 Letter to Charles Thomson]

As president, Jefferson:

* Put “God” in the national motto

* Exempted churches from taxes

* Asked Congress for money to fund Christian missionaries to the Indians.


68 posted on 05/23/2009 7:45:24 PM PDT by Westbrook (Having more children does not divide your love, it multiplies it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Westbrook
If you think for a minute that the founding fathers would have denied civil rights to a person for being an atheist, you are sadly and absurdly mistaken.

That being said, I do not consider myself an atheist and would prefer they not try to impose their views on others. I expect the same from any and all religions including Christians, Islamists, Buddhists, Hindus, Zoroastrians and assorted pagans.

69 posted on 05/23/2009 8:49:04 PM PDT by cerberus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Westbrook
Sorry, but atheists must be banned from public office.

Upon what can they base their oath of office?

And believing that a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree, is an acceptable basis for an oath of office?

70 posted on 05/23/2009 11:00:01 PM PDT by mc6809e
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: mc6809e

Atheists exclude themselves by refusing to place their hands on a Bible, or raise their right hand (Heavenward) and take an oath (or affirmation) of office.

Here are some things the ACLU and the Warren Court did not tell you about Thomas Jefferson.

“Of all the systems of morality, ancient or modern which have come under my observation, none appears to me so pure as that of Jesus.”[Letter to Benjamin Rush April 21, 1803]

“God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are a gift from God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, and that His justice cannot sleep forever.” [Notes on the State of Virginia, 1781]

It [the Bible] is a document in proof that I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus.” [Jan 9, 1816 Letter to Charles Thomson]

As president, Jefferson:

* Put “God” in the national motto

* Exempted churches from taxes

* Asked Congress for money to fund Christian missionaries to the Indians.

While you may think your sarcasm is funny, Christians are not the only “moral and religious people”. And according to John Adams, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

You are free to believe or disbelieve whatever you want. But if you do not have a Source for external, objective, transcendent, eternal Truth to which you can appeal when making promises before your fellow citizens, you are disqualifying yourself from leading them or from giving believable testimony in courts of law.

True enough that many who profess a Faith will lie, but the widely held belief is that the Truth will find them out, and their consciences will bother them. Unless, of course, they don’t really believe and thier oath or affirmation was a lie in the first place.

There is a saying among military chaplains, “There are no atheists in a foxhole.” While that may not be entirely true, I know a few military men whose belief in God started when they were under fire and continues in their civilian lives.


71 posted on 05/24/2009 5:25:39 AM PDT by Westbrook (Having more children does not divide your love, it multiplies it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: autumnraine
At the American Atheists Web site, a writer complains that God "set up" Adam and Eve, knowing in advance that they would eat the forbidden fruit.

If the writer doesn't believe in God, then where does he/she come up with that theory?

I also tell people who believe in evolution, just when did God put the soul into man? At what stage? It can't be answered.

72 posted on 05/24/2009 5:48:46 AM PDT by Northern Yankee (Freedom Needs A Soldier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Northern Yankee

That’s because most atheists don’t believe in ‘souls’. They believe what makes us tick is chemicals swirling around in our brains and that we are no different than any other animal on this planet.

I can’t get them to explain to me why no other animal on this planet is using a computer to tell me this, much less invented it.


73 posted on 05/24/2009 6:02:32 AM PDT by autumnraine (Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose- Kris Kristoferrson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: autumnraine

I reckon you could remind them that animals are unable to come to moral conclusions.


74 posted on 05/24/2009 6:07:25 AM PDT by Northern Yankee (Freedom Needs A Soldier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Westbrook
Thomas Jefferson respected the teachings of Jesus, but did not believe him to be divine. For further evidence of this, I would refer you to the Jefferson Bible wherein Jefferson edited and created his own version of the Christian scriptures. You can find more information and/or obtain your own copy at the Amazon link below:

http://www.amazon.com/Jefferson-Bible-Morals-Jesus-Nazareth/dp/1557091846/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1243193751&sr=1-1

That all being said, most of the founding fathers did attend churches of one Christian denomination or another at some points in their lives. Others, like Jefferson, also revered the moral teachings of Jesus, but most would not have been considered orthodox Christians. Jefferson, in fact, considered what has been done to the teachings of Jesus by orthodox Christianity to be rather vile as illustrated through some of the following quotes:

"It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are 20 gods, or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg."

"History I believe furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, of which their political as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purpose. " — Thomas Jefferson to Baron von Humboldt, 1813

"Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned. What has been the effect of this coercion? To make one half the world fools and the other half hypocrites" –Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1782.

"Rogueries, absurdities and untruths were perpetrated upon the teachings of Jesus by a large band of dupes and importers led by Paul, the first great corrupter of the teaching of Jesus."

"The clergy converted the simple teachings of Jesus into an engine for enslaving mankind and adulterated by artificial constructions into a contrivance to filch wealth and power to themselves...these clergy, in fact, constitute the real Anti-Christ."

"And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter. But may we hope that the dawn of reason and freedom of thought in these United States will do away with this artificial scaffolding, and restore to us the primitive and genuine doctrines of this most venerated reformer of human errors." –Thomas Jefferson, Letter to John Adams, April 11, 1823

"Religions are all alike – founded upon fables and mythologies."

"I do not find in orthodox Christianity one redeeming feature."

75 posted on 05/24/2009 12:52:59 PM PDT by cerberus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: cerberus

> “Religions are all alike – founded upon fables and
> mythologies.”

I agree with this, because true Christianity is based on a Relationship, not on Religion or priests or rites or hierarchies.

It is not difficult to reconcile Jefferson saying in his own handwriting, “I am a Christian,” with his disdain for orthodoxy and hierarchy.

Jefferson never says he is anti-Christ.

Neither do I see in any of the writings of Jefferson, who, after all, was ambassador to France and living in Paris when the Constitution was compiled, or any of the Constitutional framers any acceptance, let alone endorsement, of atheism.

As an aside, Jefferson was able to see with his own eyes what the rule of Godless, anti-Christian people would look like, as he oberved the French Revolution and wondered each morning if he would awaken with his head still attached. Perhaps that is why, as president, he promoted even the Catholic faith, asking Congress for money to fund Catholic missionaries to the Indians.

Where does he give voice to allowing atheists, who cannot take public oaths or affirmations before a power higher than man, to rule over us? Atheists are their own gods, determining for themselves what is good and what is evil.

The point remains, without an external, objective, transcendent, eternal Truth, good and evil are determined by either each person individually, or by some consensus. The former is anarchy, and the latter democracy.

A government that uses external, objective, transcendent eternal Truth, Natural Law, (”nature’s God”) as a foundation for its Laws, is a Republic.

See Blackstone, upon whom the Constitutional Framers relied for much of their understanding of Republican government.


76 posted on 05/24/2009 2:04:51 PM PDT by Westbrook (Having more children does not divide your love, it multiplies it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: GunRunner

wagglebee runs the list. It is a list of moral absolutes, most pings have to do with abortion and the radical homosexual movement, as well as euthanasia/assisted suicide, although a wide variety of issues also fit within this framework and are occasionally pinged.


77 posted on 05/24/2009 2:19:37 PM PDT by Mom MD (Jesus is the Light of the world!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Birch T. Barlow; rhema; 185JHP; 230FMJ; 50mm; 69ConvertibleFirebird; Aleighanne; Alexander Rubin; ..
Moral Absolutes Ping!

Freepmail wagglebee or DirtyHarryY2K to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.

FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]

Hmmm. . .

rhema (a fine conservative) wrote:
...their fixation with the fine points of Christianity.

To which Birch T. Barlow (a newbie who despises social conservatives) responded:
Atheists hardly have a corner on this. On FR there are people who are guilty of the same, but from the other direction. They fancy themselves the "Moral Absolutes" crowd and have their own Ping list. This list is immediately pinged the second one of them engages in a thread. Cowards the whole lot of them.

Please explain how we are "guilty" of trying to defend six thousand years of Judeo-Christian teaching against the onslaught of leftist atheism.

What PRECISELY is wrong with having a ping list? There are hundreds of ping lists around here.

What do you mean by "this list is immediately pinged the second one of them engages in a thread"? A grand total of FOUR FReepers have this list, there are several hundred FReepers on this list, so your statement makes no sense.

Please define "coward", is it the humility which comes in having faith and dependence upon God? Is that "cowardice" to you?

78 posted on 05/24/2009 3:10:17 PM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: ansel12; Birch T. Barlow
Just curious, how many names have you posted under at FR and especially what name were you using from August of 2007 until this latest sign up of February 2009?

That is a great question that Birch has been asked several times and REFUSES to answer. This is quite suspicious in view of his utter disdain for conservatives.

79 posted on 05/24/2009 3:14:07 PM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Birch T. Barlow; rhema; wagglebee
. On FR there are people who are guilty of the same, but from the other direction. They fancy themselves the "Moral Absolutes" crowd and have their own Ping list. This list is immediately pinged the second one of them engages in a thread. Cowards the whole lot of them.

Thank you for so readily providing an example of exactly what the author was talking about.

80 posted on 05/24/2009 3:45:36 PM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: autumnraine
“Dawkins, writing in “The God Delusion,” accuses the deity of being a “petty, unjust, unforgiving control freak” as well as a “misogynistic, homophobic, racist ... bully.”

Based on what I've heard and read on Dawkins, he's merely projecting. He simply thinks that God is like him.

81 posted on 05/24/2009 3:57:23 PM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

Repentance from sins is required to be pardoned. How does one ask forgiveness if one doesn’t recognize or acknowledge the God from whom forgiveness must come?

Ps 14:1 1 The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.” They are corrupt, their deeds are vile; there is no one who does good.

Nowhere in Scripture does it indicate that God approves of sincerity of convictions even though those are wrong and excuses wrong behavior just because the person is *honest* in his convictions.

Unless one accepts Christ, there is no forgiveness. Jesus is the only way to God.

John 14:6 Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

No one can see God unless they come to Him through Christ. Christianity is very exclusive on one hand, because it’s only through Christ that one can come to God, and very inclusive in that ANYONE has access through Christ to God regardless of position, power, finances, intellectual ability, or whatever.

God made it easy enough for a child to do. Man is without excuse because it’s not too hard for anyone.


82 posted on 05/24/2009 4:12:09 PM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: PressurePoint

How true. Everyone has faith.

It’s simply a matter of who or what one puts his faith in.


83 posted on 05/24/2009 4:15:17 PM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Oztrich Boy
John 14:6 Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

John 3:1-7 1Now there was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a member of the Jewish ruling council. 2He came to Jesus at night and said, "Rabbi, we know you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the miraculous signs you are doing if God were not with him."

3In reply Jesus declared, "I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again. "

4"How can a man be born when he is old?" Nicodemus asked. "Surely he cannot enter a second time into his mother's womb to be born!"

5Jesus answered, "I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit. 6Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit. 7You should not be surprised at my saying, 'You must be born again.'

One can't pick and choose the god they believe in and expect that one to do anything for him. Jesus Himself was the one who said that man must be born again. You can criticize all you want the God of the Bible, but He's the only real one who IS a god and can do anything for mankind. Anything else is merely a construct of the human mind or some demon masquerading as a god or spirit.

84 posted on 05/24/2009 4:30:46 PM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Birch T. Barlow; wagglebee

Yeah, we ping each other whenever one of us sees a troll.

Thanks for the ping, Wagglebee.


85 posted on 05/24/2009 5:22:11 PM PDT by BykrBayb (Fight the bastards or perish! ~ Jim Robinson ~ Þ)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: rhema
Militant anti-atheism is as irrational as anti-Christianity. I'm not judging the sincerity here, only the ignorance of what intelligent atheism is. It is not anti-anything, only "pro" reason.

Here are a couple of links you might be interested in:

An Atheist's defense of Christianity

My Christian Friends' Bad Mistake

Another Christian Mistake

If you must be the enemy of something, why not the enemy of the anti-reason leftists that are currently running this country, and why not be the ally of those who would die to defend your right to believe and worship as your best reason leads you to.

The freedom you enjoy (what's left of it) was very much made possible by the Atheist Thomas Paine, whose pamphlet "Common Sense" swayed many to become patriotic defender of America's independence.

Why do you take a couple of noisome idiots claiming to be atheists as the spokesmen for atheism. What would you think of me, if I chose the most despicable of self-proclaimed Christians as your example and spokesman? Hank

86 posted on 05/24/2009 5:36:49 PM PDT by Hank Kerchief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BykrBayb; Birch T. Barlow; wagglebee
Yeah, we ping each other whenever one of us sees a troll. Thanks for the ping, Wagglebee.

Thanks for the ping Wag. I smell ozone in somebody's future. IBTZ

87 posted on 05/24/2009 6:10:32 PM PDT by DirtyHarryY2K (The Tree of Liberty is long overdue for its natural manure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Thanks for the ping!


88 posted on 05/24/2009 8:27:39 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief
The freedom you enjoy (what's left of it) was very much made possible by the Atheist Thomas Paine, whose pamphlet "Common Sense" swayed many to become patriotic defender of America's independence.

Some have characterized Paine as having Deistic sensibilities. Cf. this 1707 address:

Thomas Paine on "The Study of God" Delivered in Paris on January 16, 1797, in a Discourse to the Society of Theophilanthropists

It has been the error of the schools to teach astronomy, and all the other sciences and subjects of natural philosophy, as accomplishments only; whereas they should be taught theologically, or with reference to the Being who is the author of them: for all the principles of science are of Divine origin. Man cannot make, or invent, or contrive principles. He can only discover them; and he ought to look through the discovery to the Author.

When we examine an extraordinary piece of machinery, an astonishing pile of architecture, a well executed statue or a highly finished painting where life and action are imitated, and habit only prevents our mistaking a surface of light and shade for cubical solidity, our ideas are naturally led to think of the extensive genius and talents of the artist. When we study the elements of geometry, we think of Euclid. When we speak of gravitation, we think of Newton. How then is it, that when we study the works of God in the creation, we stop short, and do not think of God? It is from the error of the schools in having taught those subjects as accomplishments only, and thereby separated the study of them form the Being who is the author of them. . . .

The evil that has resulted from the error of the schools in teaching natural philosophy as an accomplishment only has been that of generating in the pupils a species of atheism. Instead of looking through the works of the creation to the Creator himself, they stop short, and employ the knowledge they acquire to create doubts of His existence. They labor with studied ingenuity to ascribe everything they behold to innate properties of matter; and jump over all the rest, by saying that matter is eternal.

Why do you take a couple of noisome idiots claiming to be atheists as the spokesmen for atheism. What would you think of me, if I chose the most despicable of self-proclaimed Christians as your example and spokesman? Hank

Dawkins, Hitchens, Myers: not exactly illiterate, inarticulate Fred Phelpses, are they? With their educational bona fides, they're considered a who's who of the intelligentsia, Hank, and they're lionized in the media. That same media, by the way, are perennially taking unlettered hatemongers like Phelps and setting them up as oracles of the [Christian, pro-life, pro-family, you name it] community.

89 posted on 05/25/2009 4:27:42 AM PDT by rhema ("Break the conventions; keep the commandments." -- G. K. Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: rhema

Typo: Paine’s address was delivered in 1797, as the next paragraph’s heading indicates.


90 posted on 05/25/2009 4:31:06 AM PDT by rhema ("Break the conventions; keep the commandments." -- G. K. Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: Northern Yankee
I reckon you could remind them that animals are unable to come to moral conclusions.

Humans are animals...species homo sapiens, order primates, class mammalia, phylum chordata, kingdom animalia.

91 posted on 05/25/2009 11:08:44 AM PDT by GL of Sector 2814 (One man's "magic" is another man's engineering. "Supernatural" is a null word. -- R A Heinlein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Northern Yankee
I also tell people who believe in evolution, just when did God put the soul into man? At what stage? It can't be answered.

Sure it can.

What God? What soul?

92 posted on 05/25/2009 11:09:48 AM PDT by GL of Sector 2814 (One man's "magic" is another man's engineering. "Supernatural" is a null word. -- R A Heinlein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: autumnraine
I can’t get them to explain to me why no other animal on this planet is using a computer to tell me this, much less invented it.

Because no other animal than homo sapiens has (as of yet) evolved a brain of sufficient intelligence to use and/or invent a computer.

Happy to be of service!

93 posted on 05/25/2009 11:12:42 AM PDT by GL of Sector 2814 (One man's "magic" is another man's engineering. "Supernatural" is a null word. -- R A Heinlein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: rhema
“With their educational bona fides, they're considered a who's who of the intelligentsia, ...”

Only by mental pygmies, who are easily fooled by so-celled “educational bona fides,” i.e. pieces of paper handed out to good little academics who can spit out their leftist professors’ pet theories, darlings of the leftist media, that is, all the media.

Good grief. “Intelligentsia.” Not one of them has ever produced a single thing of value in their lives. (That does not mean they have never produced anything that some people like—pigs like slop.)

Hank

94 posted on 05/25/2009 12:42:16 PM PDT by Hank Kerchief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

I suspect those who do not see him have their hands over their eyes and are a danger to other drivers on the road.


95 posted on 05/25/2009 1:11:35 PM PDT by American in Israel (A wise man's heart directs him to the right, but the foolish mans heart directs him toward the left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief
Why do you take a couple of noisome idiots claiming to be atheists as the spokesmen for atheism.

There are genuine atheists and agnostics, and then there are the much larger groups of anti-christians/anti-creationists. The difference between the two usually becomes quickly apparent, with the anti-christians/anti-creationists trying to hide their agenda in 'science' and using every tool they can come up with (evolutionism, etc) to attack those who do not adopt their ideology.

96 posted on 05/25/2009 1:32:43 PM PDT by valkyry1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief

Cambridge (Hitchens) and Oxford (Dawkins) aren’t exactly educational thin gruel. Hitchens and Dawkins may be tendentious acolytes of atheism, but they’re not unlettered.


97 posted on 05/25/2009 1:37:41 PM PDT by rhema ("Break the conventions; keep the commandments." -- G. K. Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: valkyry1

>>The difference between the two usually becomes quickly apparent, with the anti-christians/anti-creationists trying to hide their agenda in ‘science’ and using every tool they can come up with (evolutionism, etc) to attack those who do not adopt their ideology.<<

And then there are who understand and practice science and have no political agenda at all.


98 posted on 05/25/2009 2:03:01 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (Communism comes to America: 1/20/2009. Keep your powder dry, folks. Sic semper tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: rhema

There might be some good minds yet in some of the schools of Cambridge and Oxford, but for the most part they have become as postmodernist, cultural-Marxist, and anti-intellectual as any other modern-day universities. What do you think they are teaching and studying—they, like all big universities get government money—guess what dictates the curricula.

All that has happened to Western culture and society began with the corruption of academia, and it began a long time ago.

Try typing the following into a Google search:

postmodernism in Oxford Cambridge

deconstruction in Oxford Cambridge

environmentalism in Oxford Cambridge

...to get a hint of how much of this nonsense is spewed from the academic elite at these prestigious universities.

I’m not at all impressed by the names of the universities someone as attended. Obama attended Harvard.

Hank


99 posted on 05/25/2009 2:28:04 PM PDT by Hank Kerchief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief
I’m not at all impressed by the names of the universities someone as attended. Obama attended Harvard.

How he got there is one of the age's mysteries. Graduating without honors from Columbia, he's never revealed his LSAT scores that ostensibly qualified him for Harvard Law.

100 posted on 05/25/2009 2:32:18 PM PDT by rhema ("Break the conventions; keep the commandments." -- G. K. Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-105 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson