Bizarro News

redrumloa said:
I'm a perfect example. I simply identify as Agnostic, and these days that works Atheists up until they are frothing at the mouth. Even here on Whyzzat I've been accused of "copping out" by Atheists for being Agnostic.
Click to expand...

What does the 'a' mean in those words. Atypical means not typical. Atheist means not theist. Agnostic means not gnostic. Someone who is agnositic simply takes a position that something cannot be known. You can be theist and agnostic or atheist and agnostic. You can claim to believe in a deity but maintain the position that the existence or truth of the deity can never be proven or disproven or you can believe that there is no deity (or that insufficient evidence exists to posit a deity) and also hold that the truth of the matter can never be absolutely known.

So, if you remain convinced that there is a god but we can never ultimately know that for sure then you are agnostic theist. If you are not convinced that there is a god then you don't really fulfill the theist position which leaves you in the atheist position. You can still be agnostic about the truth of that position.
 
metalman said:
There are atheist sects,
Click to expand...

Unsupported by the link which is concerned with nomenclature rather than doctrine. The only really "secty" atheists I can think of are the Atheism + clowns (and the slow circling of the drain that movement is doing) who felt that being an atheist should also imply a moral doctrine which has turned them into a noisy but largely ignored backwater.
you have the “New Atheists” who argue over which guru is most enlightened: Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris or Christopher Hitchens
Click to expand...
Hah. Each of those guys have fans and so does the late great Carl Sagan, but I have only seen arguments over their positions and ideas rather than whether any of them gained wisdom by divine revelation. Perhaps you just see things in religious terms because you can't imagine any other way of seeing them.

now you have the new "Atheist Plus" sect which combines "Social Justice" and atheism
Click to expand...
As mentioned before, an obnoxious bunch of losers who like telling other people what to do and who now are reduced to back biting each other. They may have arisen naturally (there was a bit of a feeling (or fear) in the air around that time that the people who were becoming atheist at that time might feel a bit uneasy without a clear moral framework so the crew that wrecked occupy stepped in to "supply the need" and generally take all the steam out of the growth of atheism. I personally (sometimes not so jokingly) think that the SJWs were unleashed as a psi-op to bust up groups that were organising because any organisation of people not under the control of the elites is an implicit threat to their power. Then again, it could be that SJW groups are simply self powered by their own obnoxious self righteousness - but how the heck do they seem to get all the funding they apparently get? Maybe by hectoring and threatening to show up to rich kids parties and bum out the scene unless they pay up.

Anyway, atheism still lacks a major attribute of religion - that is a belief in a god or gods (or the supernatural).
 

FluffyMcDeath said:
Each of those guys have fans and so does the late great Carl Sagan, but I have only seen arguments over their positions and ideas rather than whether any of them gained wisdom by divine revelation. Perhaps you just see things in religious terms because you can't imagine any other way of seeing them.
Click to expand...

The great double null has no divine revelation, but gospels of thoughts on non-deity written by self proclaimed guru's of great intellect
Atheist Wisdom is spread by tutors, teachers, sages, masters, swami, maharishi who enlighten you with the knowledge of your intellectual superiority in belief of the non-deity

FluffyMcDeath said:
groups are simply self powered by their own obnoxious self righteousness - but how the heck do they seem to get all the funding they apparently get?
Click to expand...

George Soros funds anything "Frankfort School"

FluffyMcDeath said:
Anyway, atheism still lacks a major attribute of religion - that is a belief in a god or gods (or the supernatural).
Click to expand...

you are a truly a believer in the great double null!!

when I see a bird that quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, has feathers and webbed feet ... it's a duck
 
FluffyMcDeath said:
So ... having meetings makes you a religion? Cool. Really thought it might take a bit more than that but seems I'm wrong, huh? Don't have to believe in any greater power outside of yourself, don't need to believe in things that can't be proven (especially if they can't be proven). Seems a bit of a low bar, perhaps even insultingly low to those serious about their religions but I guess the joke's on them.
Click to expand...

Having a church, sermons, and missionaries certainly does. Do you really want me to go the extra step to find out if they are registered as a tax exempt religious organization?
 
metalman said:
The great double null has no divine revelation, but gospels of thoughts on non-deity written by self proclaimed guru's of great intellect
Atheist Wisdom is spread by tutors, teachers, sages, masters, swami, maharishi who enlighten you with the knowledge of your intellectual superiority in belief of the non-deity
Click to expand...

That was gibberish. People write books about what they think (as opposed to what a supernatural being whispers into their ears so that no-one else can hear because supernatural beings, especially omnipotent ones can't) but that doesn't make them swami or such. They aren't claiming any special revelation.

when I see a bird that quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, has feathers and webbed feet ... it's a duck
Click to expand...
Even if it isn't there!
 
redrumloa said:
Having a church, sermons, and missionaries certainly does.
Click to expand...
It doesn't occur to you that they are having a bit of a laugh - that they are ironically adopting church terminology to wind-up the religionists? Is that idea just unimaginable to you?
Do you really want me to go the extra step to find out if they are registered as a tax exempt religious organization?
Click to expand...
Yes, please.
 
redrumloa said:
Atheists Take On The IRS
Click to expand...
What does that article say? (I read it, did you?)
[quote]
Feds say OK to atheists on religion tax break
"We are not a church," atheists say. Government lawyers disagree, saying atheist leaders can be considered ministers.

Atheists want their cake and eat it too.[/QUOTE]
How does atheists saying they want the same treatment as churches in terms of taxes but saying they are not a church support what you are claiming. The atheists just want to be treated the same as churches are regarding taxes. That is what the government should do. If the government instead tries to recognise them as a religion while they refute that, does that make the government right? Do you believe in general that the IRS exercises wisdom in all its judgements?

Both these articles point to the fact that the atheists are just asking for their rights under the constitution to be treated the same way as religions are but they are also quite clearly saying that they are not religious. They just want the same rules to apply to those who have no religion the same as they apply to those who do. Again, I'm curious if you read more than the headlines.
 
FluffyMcDeath said:
How does atheists saying they want the same treatment as churches in terms of taxes but saying they are not a church support what you are claiming. The atheists just want to be treated the same as churches are regarding taxes. That is what the government should do. If the government instead tries to recognise them as a religion while they refute that, does that make the government right? Do you believe in general that the IRS exercises wisdom in all its judgements?

Both these articles point to the fact that the atheists are just asking for their rights under the constitution to be treated the same way as religions are but they are also quite clearly saying that they are not religious. They just want the same rules to apply to those who have no religion the same as they apply to those who do. Again, I'm curious if you read more than the headlines.
Click to expand...

What part of the IRS classifying them as a religion don't you understand? So you only like big government when it suits your needs?

I also think you have reading comprehension issues when it suits your needs. I quote them saying "we are not a church" and you claim I didn't read the article because they claim they are not a church.

Come on Fluffy, I expect better out of you.
 
The co-host of YouTube channel "Skeptic Feminist" "Russian Deadpool" has been arrested in the fatal shooting of his female YouTube co-host known as “Dominatrix Ivy”

C_5nMO7WAAEC3FP.jpg


He is the president of Western Colorado Atheists and Freethinkers

Apparently, Aleksandr Kolpakov had some kind of polyandrous relationship going on with the two females. One goes by the name of Homicidal Harley and the other goes by Dominatrix Ivy. Apparently, he shot and killed the Ivy portion of the female duo, at least according to police. She’s named as Heather Anable in The Denver Post



https://twitter.com/x/status/864202175412658180
 
redrumloa said:
What part of the IRS classifying them as a religion don't you understand?
Click to expand...
I understand that the IRS has classified them as a religion for tax purposes in this case. What about that makes the IRS RIGHT about whether atheism is a religion? Is a corporation really a person for example?
I also think you have reading comprehension issues when it suits your needs. I quote them saying "we are not a church" and you claim I didn't read the article because they claim they are not a church.
Click to expand...
I saw you quoting that but assumed that you had not read the quote you quoted because they say they are not a church - but it turns out that it is not the case that you failed to read that, it's just that you have chosen to ignore it because you disagree.

Come on Fluffy, I expect better out of you.
Click to expand...
You got better than that but you just refuse to see it. You've got an idea in your head and nothing supports it except your own opinion - which you then try to impose on news stories that don't actually support that opinion. The IRS classifies someone as something for the purposes of taxation does not make the thing they classified the thing they classified it as.
 
Public Outraged as Vietnam War Veteran's Body Displayed at Wake Without Coffin

Taylor's family said the funeral home refused to put George Taylor in a casket because of problems with his life insurance payment.

Taylor's son, James, said the family was given little notice of the problem prior to the visitation.

"They came to me and told me that unless $9,000 was paid, they couldn't put him into the ground," he told ABC 7 New York.

"Mr. Taylor was a two-term Vietnam Vet," wrote Ella Moss on Facebook. "We live in the Greatest Country in the world, and this is the best we can do for our soldiers. Not even a pillow for his head."

18342559_1853207191610572_1142142261718531006_n.jpg
 
Man headed to jail for murder over Hot Pockets: ‘I just snapped’

Prosecutors said Nathaniel Mathis had asked his sister and her boyfriend, Rodney Benton, 34, to get pepperoni Hot Pockets last July using his card. When the couple got to the store, the Hot Pockets were sold out so his sister called Mathis to let him know. They tried to buy other food, but Mathis’ card was rejected. Prosecutors said that Mathis went up to the passenger side and yelled “you know what’s going on” and shot Benton eight times.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top