"Kelsey Bjarnason" <kbjarnason@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:i9ta05-6vq.ln1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [snips]
>
> On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 23:28:48 -0500, rockymt wrote:
>
>> I can understand that many of you who frequent these newsgroups expect
>> scientific proof/evidence and no less.
>
> "Scientific evidence" is a pointless phrase. There is _evidence_, and
> there is that which is not evidence. Science simply offers a way of
> evaluating evidence, in particular, a way to weed out errors.
>
>> A lot of
>> what I'm hearing, at a much deeper level is that it is just too
>> painful... impossible for me to listen to you let alone believe in a
god
>> with the state this world is in.
>
> Then you're hearing the wrong thing. The issue is not and never has
been
> "it's too painful" or "how can God let X happen" - although the latter
may
> well be a legitimate question.
>
> No, the issue is much simpler: if someone comes along and makes a claim,
> we say "Show me."
>
> We do this when someone claims they have a deed to the Brooklyn Bridge,
> which they're willing to sell, cheap: really? Show me. Show me it is
> legit, that you are the legal owner.
>
> We do this when someone claims they have discovered cold fusion. We say
> show me. Show us the details of the experiment, that we can duplicate
and
> validate it.
>
> We do this when someone claims they've created a perpetual motion
machine.
> We say show me. Show us the details of the machine, the designs. Let
us
> examine it to verify there's no magnets or midgets involved. Or other
> sources of input energy.
>
> We do this when someone claims to have a miracle cure for cancer, or
AIDS,
> or some other disease. We say show me. Show us the medicine, the
> clinical trials. Let us test it independently, to ensure it actually
> works as claimed.
>
> And we do this when someone claims gods. We say show me. Show us the
> evidence these gods exist. And we never, ever, EVER get it.
>
>> topics, such as hobbies, literature, s****ts travel etc. Maybe even come
>> to enjoy each others company( outside of this newsgroup or in person),
>> and even like one another. Who knows. What bothers me is that most are
>> not just disagreeing, they're offending, insulting, making those that
>> disagree, feel unwelcome
>
> Guess what? Many of us read and post exclusively through alt.atheism.
> Guess what? Theistic crap isn't topical here. Guess what? You and
your
> ilk are in *our* house spewing your crap. Not to mention all the other
> details, like messing with the laws we live under, the education system
> our kids go through - and which we, in part, pay for. And on and on.
>
> Don't want to be made to feel unwelcome? Don't foist your crap on
people
> who don't want it.
>
>> yet we don't stoop to degrading, offensive language. This is most
likely
>> because we've come to accept and respect one another.
>
> And you and your ilk have done what, exactly, to *earn* our respect?
Hey,
> you're coming into *our* house with your crap; it's up to *you* to make
> the effort. Do you?
>
> I make very little effort to be respected by the theists... but then, I
> don't invade their houses. I have not, as far as I'm aware, *ever*
> initiated a post to a theistic group. I have, certainly, posted
> follow-ups, such as this one, which get cross-posted... but then, the
> majority of the cross-posted threads I've seen are, in fact, created
*by*
> theists.
>
>> There is a foundation built of mutual respect.
>
> And you've done what, precisely, to earn our respect while in our house?
>
>> It's to bad it has to be like this so much- wish it'd tone down. I
know
>> this is not a friend****p newsgroup, but at a deeper level I feel for
>> each and everyone of you, good bad or indifferent. And I know we don't
>> really mean those hurtful things we say.
>
> Like what? Like when I say that theism in general, and Christianity in
> particular, is little more than the wor****p of unmitigated evil, and
such
> people should be treated in the same manner you'd treat a volatile
> explosive - that is, expect them to go off and kill everyone in sight at
> the drop of a hat? That sort of thing?
>
> Why would I *not* mean that? Read the Bible sometime. There's this
> psychotic, sadistic, evil monster described in it. Goes by the name of
> "God". Yet these people will try to tell you this evil, twisted
sickness
> is "love" and "good". How can one look at a person doing that and treat
> them as anything *but* a positive menace to society?
>
> Oh, but they're not happy with that. No, no. They go on to actually
> _pray_ for us. To ask their evil monster deity to intercede on our
> behalf, to forgive us. And assuming we are forgiven, what do we get?
We
> get eternal life - the single most vile torment which has ever been
> described by anyone in all recorded history. They *want* us to have
this
> torment. They *want* us to have it *forever*.
>
> They are sick, twisted, evil people, following a sick, evil, twisted
> belief system. Why the hell wouldn't I mean what I say, when facing
that
> level of an active, in-your-face threat?
<><><.<><>
..,<><><><><
Kelsey, guess what. You and many like you can go on and say, "go ****
yourself." I am telling
you -But I am not your enemy. I am a friend as hard as that is for you to
understand.
My comments here are, I am well aware are not welcomed . I want you to
know though, " I love you brother."
This will not change no matter how you may respond. Please do not be
angry.
What if you and I ( without our having prior knowledge of having had these
emotionally charged exchanges via these newsgroups.) would be acquainted
otherwise. this topic would never come up and maybe, just maybe we would
find some things to agree on... maybe even bond afterward. Are we not
speaking more or less impulsively out of our emotions?
Take care
rockymt
|
