You're right, it would be pretty dull and there would be little growth if we all believed the same.
Brings us back to freedom of speech, I suppose. Malc On Apr 8, 3:41 am, the taoist shaman <[email protected]> wrote: > no , theres a fine line between promoteing your belifes and > fashisem why do others need to believe what u > [email protected] wrote: > > Pat that is quite a nice little bit of logical deduction there. As > > always I have one eye on Waterstones, let me know when the book is > > out. > > > On Apr 7, 12:57 pm, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Apr 7, 12:23 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > I have seen this kind or rhetoric before and although I must agree > > > > there is some validity in this argument, the same can be said of of > > > > any human endevour that is divisive. > > > > > An example. > > > > > I am not a patriot, I see no sense in feeling pride in the accident of > > > > the location of ones birth, of course if a patriotic person was also > > > > to feel the shame for the shamefull acts that their country has also > > > > done, then that at least is consistant. > > > > > Religion has brought gretness and great shame to it's adherance, so > > > > has patriotiism, football fandom, we have witnessed both the joy that > > > > music brings and the violence done in i's name by fans of differant > > > > genres. > > > > > Should we promot atheism? Yes why not, let people have a free, > > > > informed choice, over all aspects of their lives, Should we give give > > > > atheist fundementalist any stage time? yes of course all the while we > > > > do the same for religious fundementalists or political fundementalist > > > > it would be unfair not to. Shold we really listen to any who espouse > > > > a fundie POV, well that is up to each of us on an individual basis but > > > > me, naaaa, why would I? > > > > Yeah, the real problem is 'fundamentalism' irrespective of the faith-- > > > whether in God or opposed to. Personally, I'd love to take on Dawkins > > > in a debate. There are a few areas where he's so off-base logically > > > it's almost funny. > > > > BTW, I've finally figured out a way to PROVE that the speed of light > > > cxannot be a constant. I'll save the 'guts' of my argument for the > > > book (which, BTW, is at around 40,000 words, now and might be finished > > > by June!!!) but think about this: if space expands and the distance > > > between A and B gets larger, how can C be a constant? If it appears > > > to be a constant, then it MUST accelerate in order to make up the > > > difference in the extra distance created by the expansion of space due > > > to Hiubble's Law!! > > > > > In the interest of openess I must declare to being a theist myself. > > > > > On Apr 7, 12:09 pm, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > On Apr 7, 11:18 am, malcymo <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > I do not believe that a supreme being created the universe etc. > > > > > > > Until today, I have accepted the existence of religions on the > > > > > > grounds > > > > > > that they give hope and faith to many in the face of adversity and > > > > > > promote certain moral values. > > > > > > > This week A C Grayling brought out his book "The Good Book - A > > > > > > secular > > > > > > bible". In interview he stated that theism is harmful to individuals > > > > > > and society. Although his thoughts on this were nor expanded. > > > > > > > I live in Fiji and cannot get a copy of his book but I would like to > > > > > > hear his argument on this matter. Ie Why he thinks that theism is > > > > > > harmful. > > > > > > > I have found nothing of depth on the web. > > > > > > > If he is indeed correct then there is an argument for the active > > > > > > promotion of atheism. Perhaps we can become missionaries in the > > > > > > human > > > > > > cause. > > > > > > > What say you? > > > > > > Atheism comes in more than one variety. Which sect would you want > > > > > promoted? The kind where the individual has 'no belief about God' or > > > > > the kind where the individual accepts a religious definition of God > > > > > and actively disbelieves it? There are atheistic evangelists like > > > > > Richard Dawkins already. But his arguments have huge holes in them. > > > > > The key point to note is that there is no 'conclusive' proof 'for or > > > > > against' the existence of God, so, any belief based on a profound lack > > > > > of evidence is a belief based on faith.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -
