danot Posted January 21, 2012 Author Share Posted January 21, 2012 I agree with you, but some people do this just out of politeness to honour their partner's wishes, or for the style of the wedding, or even tradition. It annoys me a little but there's worse things to be annoyed about. I'm not getting annoyed, I'm just identifying where the hypocrisy lies in the arguments and attitudes of some self proclaimed atheists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 I'm not getting annoyed, I'm just identifying where the hypocrisy lies in the arguments and attitudes of some self proclaimed atheists. I would think that most theists say that god created the universe and most atheists say they don’t know what of if it was created but don’t believe it was a God. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 I'm not getting annoyed, I'm just identifying where the hypocrisy lies in the arguments and attitudes of some self proclaimed atheists. I think the only way somebody can be a hyprocrite purely as an atheist is if they have a belief in a God. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted January 21, 2012 Author Share Posted January 21, 2012 What would have a greater moral impact for you, harmless lies to a vicar you don't know, or ensuring the happiness of the woman you love on her wedding day? I must have missed the bit about kids, can't see what that has to do with it. The relevance of the kids is that I doubt that Jimmy would pretend to believe in God, lie to a vicar, and prove himself to be an hypocrite in order to avoid upsetting or offending his wife who does believe in God, (assuming she does) only to then disrespect her beliefs by telling their kids that he's atheist and that sky pixies don't exist. However, If both of them are atheist and just want a church wedding it wouldn't matter what he told the kids about sky pixies because both of them would be being hypocrites. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 It seems to me that an atheist is someone that never questions their existence. They feel they simply exist and there is no reason to question why they exist. This a wrong assumption on your part. It's this questioning that led to me being an atheist. I strongly believe that this is the only life we have, there is no second chance or no afterlife and for me that make life it's self so valuable, fragile and beautiful because it's the only one I'll ever have. Also it's worth considering that any altruistic acts carried out by an atheist are carried because they believe those acts to be the right thing to do, not for any reward, or an eternal resting place in paradise. For example, a solider who is an atheist who sacrifices their life is giving up everything for no personal reward, whereas a 100% committed Christian who sacrifices their life is only really going to look forward to spending eternity in paradise. Who is making the bigger sacrifice? Does this mean that mean that atheists are better people? I don't actually believe this myself, as everyone is an individual, but it is an interesting debating point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted January 21, 2012 Author Share Posted January 21, 2012 I think you should take a break. Agreed. He's really tying himself in knots in his posts. why is that? Would you care to point out the contradictions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted January 21, 2012 Author Share Posted January 21, 2012 I don't have to define God to not have a belief in it. But you would need to define God in order to discredit creationism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 But you would need to define God in order to discredit creationism. No you wouldn't, don't be so wilfully perverse. The fossil record clearly duscredists creationism and no definition of God is required. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 But you would need to define God in order to discredit creationism. I haven't tried to discredit creationism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 I'm confused about everything relating to the unknown phenomena, aka- God. I'm in no position to tell anyone what it is or isn't, or whether it did or didn't create the universe and everything within it. All I know is that I don't know anything about it, I don't proclaim to know what it isn't, like you do. When have I claimed to know what the universe is or isn't ? Have I been sleep- claiming again? You appear to be quite confused about who has said what. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.