wardlelatic Posted January 18, 2008 Share Posted January 18, 2008 BREAKING NEWS ============ The RSPCA has today issued flood warnings after reports started pouring in from all over Britain that it's actually raining cats and dogs. Due to freak cloud formations known as Cumulus Canine and Feline Nimbus, pets are raining down on houses all over the country. The RSPCA has launched emergency lifeboats to retrieve stranded animals from rooftops. Mrs April Showers from Tewkesbury today commented,"It started with just a couple of kittens dropping from the skies and by lunchtime we had full grown rottweillers thudding onto the roof. The cats always land on their feet but the dogs are just slamming into everything. My conservatory was wrecked by a sudden flurry of Yorkshire Terriers." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted January 24, 2008 Share Posted January 24, 2008 You never hear in the news: "200 killed today when Atheist rebels took heavy shelling from the Agnostic stronghold in the North..." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OminousPoultry Posted January 25, 2008 Share Posted January 25, 2008 You never hear in the news: "200 killed today when Atheist rebels took heavy shelling from the Agnostic stronghold in the North..." I have been enjoying Brown Brothers Cienna - to the extent that other red varieties now taste flat. Does anyone know of any other producers of the Ciena variety as Tesco seems to be stopping stocking it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ackey Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 You never hear in the news: "200 killed today when Atheist rebels took heavy shelling from the Agnostic stronghold in the North..." I wish you'd let me know when you're turning the thread anti-religion so I can come and stick a proverbial boot in!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skiptonlatic Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 New Winner!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted February 6, 2008 Share Posted February 6, 2008 I wish you'd let me know when you're turning the thread anti-religion so I can come and stick a proverbial boot in!! Go on then - stick away... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted February 6, 2008 Share Posted February 6, 2008 Go on then - stick away... I'm not anti-relgious anyway, whatever that is. One can believe in whatever one wants, and it's almost impossible to sway people away from religion through debate anyway. I can discuss my point of view, and plant the seeds of scepticism - however, ultimately it's up to the individual to choose. I suppose that's the beauty of it - you have a choice - some don't... I just don't see it I'm afraid - that's me *shrug* I'm just a skeptic (US spelling) going about my day, minding my own business... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ackey Posted February 6, 2008 Share Posted February 6, 2008 I'm not anti-relgious anyway, whatever that is. One can believe in whatever one wants, and it's almost impossible to sway people away from religion through debate anyway. I can discuss my point of view, and plant the seeds of scepticism - however, ultimately it's up to the individual to choose. I suppose that's the beauty of it - you have a choice - some don't... I just don't see it I'm afraid - that's me *shrug* I'm just a skeptic (US spelling) going about my day, minding my own business... Perhaps anti-religious is the wrong term. Like you I'm more pro-athiest. Passionate athiest maybe? I wish I had chance to post more now... I shal think on it whilst I listen to this conference call and pop back later on Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 That's some conference call - or are you still thinking? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OminousPoultry Posted February 8, 2008 Share Posted February 8, 2008 That's some conference call - or are you still thinking? I would imagine Ackey's still talking..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ackey Posted February 13, 2008 Share Posted February 13, 2008 haha! I forgot all about this... but I think we pissed God off!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted February 13, 2008 Share Posted February 13, 2008 Check this out... God is God because God is God. This idea is known as ontology: a statement of fundamental being. I am, fundamentally, a human being. My identity as a Texan, as a North American, as a descendant of European ancestry, and even as a male, minister, and Christian, is all wonderful and true - but fundamentally, I am a human being. A glass of water may be cool, pleasing to the taste, refreshing as it is being drunk, but it is, fundamentally, a glass of water. And God is, fundamentally - or, as theologians like to say (again, using another big word), ontologically - God. God is and, by virtue of what it means to be God, cannot not be. Spot the logical fallacy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted February 13, 2008 Share Posted February 13, 2008 Check this out... Spot the logical fallacy. Ah, a garbled version of Descartes’ ontological argument for the existence of the big fella. It always amuses me (perhaps I should get out more )when people like this self-styled Minister rely on a half-understood argument, the original of which was kicked firmly into touch years (or in this case centuries) ago. Marxists are the best for this, many Ackey types still go around spouting lines of argument that Marx and Engels themselves shelved when they were shown to be crap back in the day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sheridans_world Posted February 13, 2008 Share Posted February 13, 2008 Bushisms Bush: God told me to invade Iraq President 'revealed reasons for war in private meeting' By Rupert Cornwell in Washington Friday, 7 October 2005 President George Bush has claimed he was told by God to invade Iraq and attack Osama bin Laden's stronghold of Afghanistan as part of a divine mission to bring peace to the Middle East, security for Israel, and a state for the Palestinians. The President made the assertion during his first meeting with Palestinian leaders in June 2003, according to a BBC series which will be broadcast this month. The revelation comes after Mr Bush launched an impassioned attack yesterday in Washington on Islamic militants, likening their ideology to that of Communism, and accusing them of seeking to "enslave whole nations" and set up a radical Islamic empire "that spans from Spain to Indonesia". In the programmeElusive Peace: Israel and the Arabs, which starts on Monday, the former Palestinian foreign minister Nabil Shaath says Mr Bush told him and Mahmoud Abbas, former prime minister and now Palestinian President: "I'm driven with a mission from God. God would tell me, 'George, go and fight those terrorists in Afghanistan.' And I did, and then God would tell me, 'George go and end the tyranny in Iraq,' and I did." And "now again", Mr Bush is quoted as telling the two, "I feel God's words coming to me: 'Go get the Palestinians their state and get the Israelis their security, and get peace in the Middle East.' And by God, I'm gonna do it." Mr Abbas remembers how the US President told him he had a "moral and religious obligation" to act. The White House has refused to comment on what it terms a private conversation. But the BBC account is anything but implausible, given how throughout his presidency Mr Bush, a born-again Christian, has never hidden the importance of his faith. From the outset he has couched the "global war on terror" in quasi-religious terms, as a struggle between good and evil. Al-Qa'ida terrorists are routinely described as evil-doers. For Mr Bush, the invasion of Iraq has always been part of the struggle against terrorism, and he appears to see himself as the executor of the divine will. He told Bob Woodward - whose 2004 book, Plan of Attack, is the definitive account of the administration's road to war in Iraq - that after giving the order to invade in March 2003, he walked in the White House garden, praying "that our troops be safe, be protected by the Almighty". As he went into this critical period, he told Mr Woodward, "I was praying for strength to do the Lord's will. "I'm surely not going to justify war based upon God. Understand that. Nevertheless, in my case, I pray that I will be as good a messenger of His will as possible. And then of course, I pray for forgiveness." Another telling sign of Mr Bush's religion was his answer to Mr Woodward's question on whether he had asked his father - the former president who refused to launch a full-scale invasion of Iraq after driving Saddam Hussein from Kuwait in 1991 - for advice on what to do. The current President replied that his earthly father was "the wrong father to appeal to for advice ... there is a higher father that I appeal to". The insurgents' aim was to "enslave whole nations and intimidate the world". He portrayed Islamic radicals as a single global movement, from the Middle East to Chechnya and Bali and the jungles of the Philippines. How does this make him any better than those who claim they have been told by Allah to attack the US? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ackey Posted February 13, 2008 Share Posted February 13, 2008 ... many Ackey types still go around spouting lines ... Oi! I spout my own Crap thank you! I don't quote it from anyone else! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted February 13, 2008 Share Posted February 13, 2008 Ah, a garbled version of Descartes ontological argument for the existence of the big fella. It always amuses me when people like this self-styled Minister rely on a half-understood argument, the original of which was kicked firmly into touch years (or in this case centuries) ago. Many think like this though, and I find it frustrating. I have similar frustrations with Intelligent Design and Creationism - blind faith - above all else. I am an Agnostic and a constructive skeptic. Therefore instead of thinking that it is just not possible to have absolute or certain knowledge of the existence of God or gods, I go with the train of thought that: I personally have no knowledge of the existence of God, and at the moment it cannot be proven to me. So I leave door open for anyone to try! I find that there is no such flexibility/opportunity with creationists or believers of intelligent design. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ackey Posted February 14, 2008 Share Posted February 14, 2008 Proof! A picture of God. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OminousPoultry Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 I am an Agnostic and a constructive skeptic. Therefore instead of thinking that it is just not possible to have absolute or certain knowledge of the existence of God or gods, I go with the train of thought that: I personally have no knowledge of the existence of God, and at the moment it cannot be proven to me. At what point does agnosticism become atheisism? When does an agnostic give up and decide that proof will never be forthcoming? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 At what point does agnosticism become atheisism? When does an agnostic give up and decide that proof will never be forthcoming? Why would they give up? In my case agnosticism and constructive scepticism allows for chance - however remote. Constuctive Scepticism encourages theists to come with some evidence - which puts all the onus on them. A good position to be in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ackey Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 Why would they give up? In my case agnosticism and constructive scepticism allows for chance - however remote. Constuctive Scepticism encourages theists to come with some evidence - which puts all the onus on them. A good position to be in. I may be using the wrong term I suppose, literature and philosophy have never been my strongest points. But my Atheism has more to do with my distrust and dislike of organised religion and worship than it does the proof of God. If, as Rummy says, someone could prove to me beyond doubt they were God (and I'd expect more than a Miracle... I'm talking an Omnipotent being, not just a grasp of technology I don't understand) then I'd be a believer... that being said I would not then start to worship that being. I'd appreciate it for what it was and respect it, but I don't think I could ever worship something. I'm my own self, no one is worthy of my worship. And after all, being omnipotent means that me not worshiping should be a minor insignificance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 I may be using the wrong term I suppose, literature and philosophy have never been my strongest points. But my Atheism has more to do with my distrust and dislike of organised religion and worship than it does the proof of God. If, as Rummy says, someone could prove to me beyond doubt they were God (and I'd expect more than a Miracle... I'm talking an Omnipotent being, not just a grasp of technology I don't understand) then I'd be a believer... that being said I would not then start to worship that being. I'd appreciate it for what it was and respect it, but I don't think I could ever worship something. I'm my own self, no one is worthy of my worship. And after all, being omnipotent means that me not worshiping should be a minor insignificance. Quite right Ackey, each to their own - just don't expect me to roll over and believe any old cobblers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OminousPoultry Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 Why would they give up? An interesting point - what happens to (dis)belief when an agnostic dies? Anyway Rummy - stop sitting on the fence. I'll come out of the closet and declare loud and proud - I'm an athiest. How could any self -respecting deity allow this? or this? or this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ackey Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 How could any self -respecting deity allow this? or this? or this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 I cannot be an atheist - for me this is as bad as theism - so is extreme Scepticism. One extreme to another! For one to completely disregard something without scientifically proving or debunking is being a little short sighted. Everything that is wrong in the world is done by our own hand, we do it to ourselves unfortunately - and only we can save us from us... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ackey Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 I cannot be an atheist - for me this is as bad as theism - so is extreme Scepticism. Athesim, to me, is anti-theism... so not the same as extreme scepticism. I oppose oppresive theism, not scepticism. But, to be fair, thats my personal perception of the word, not the definition of it... I think I'm going to go read some Dawkins and watch the FA Cup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.