I don't see why not. If a guy decides not to go on a killing spree because he fears going to , a lot of livew get saved.
No.
Fearing society's wrath for breaking the law might be a good thing, but it's debatable.
There is absolutely no good that can come from promoting fear of a magic man's wrath for being bad.
I don't see why not. If a guy decides not to go on a killing spree because he fears going to , a lot of livew get saved.
I think it has a lot to do with the fact that we are, in essence, trapped in our own bubble of consciousness so we get this impression that we must have a purpose, else why am I here, now.. in this reality? Basically why is this my view portal? Individually and collectively we more easily accept that we are the intended outcome than just a part of the whole. That's a simple explanation of a much more complex issue.
We have to define "good". It would be good for me if people dropped sacks of money off at my home, but not good if people did so because they thought I was going to kill their child if they didn't.
Blake Almighty would never understand this point of view.
He is too busy either criticizing valid reasoning or when that ruse fails, as it inevitably always does, accusing of poor reading comprehension, which also fails miserably.
![]()
Blake is saying that ends don't justify the means. Hitler's (yes I'm invoking the Hitler fallacy) regime made many medical discoveries that we still use today however they did so by torturing human beings. The product is great, but the means to get there is unacceptable. The means to get desired behavioral response from society is unacceptable if it means perpetuating a lie, because people remain prisoners to their own stupidity. Freedom means knowing the truth and making decisions based on it. It doesn't mean being coerced by dogma.
Sure. But that's rights theory. Not killing someone is different than giving away property. I don't care why someone decides to be a good citizen. I see little wrong with lying to folks who need to be lied to lest they harm others.
Post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy you just used there though. Just because people have been lied to for centuries doesn't mean they needed to be lied to. Were we to not have any such thought of a supreme being or an afterlife, we could still survive. Animals do.
Besides, religion also coerces people to commit heinous acts. I'd prefer people know the truth about our existence. If they still wanted to kill me, I'd deal with that then.
many of you look at different collages and think because its hard to be accepted it must be "smarter" not true. I joined the military after the 11th grade got a government GED and was sent to MIT to take a reverse engineering course and some of them had no idea what a "Tamale" was.
point is its not the "college" it's the "job" you get afterwards.
This is something MIT students and Professors fail to admit. But that's another debate they are losing in.... this one is really about "facts" and "Evidence"
![]()
I'm still trying to figure out what mouse is saying about evolution tbh...
Humans could survive without a lot of things. Other animals survive without all intellectual pursuits. But I wasn't saying that humans in general needed religion to survive. I was speaking about cases in which fear of a deity leads to good things. If certain people can't be reasoned with and need to fear something supernatural in order to stay in line, I'm all for it. We lie to people all the time to keep them in line. A lot of hostage negotiations are settled with lies.
I didn't say religion doesn't lead to bad acts. I think people will do good or bad things and just make up whatever explanation they want to justify it. Both theists and atheists have done greats acts of good and evil (for lack of a better term). You just said that nothing good can come from lying to people, and that was my counter example.
He's just trolling. He may not believe in evolution, but he certainly must know he's providing no strong counter-evidence.
That Evolution (micro) dose "Exist" "species" of "their kind" will evolve, So it's never really been about "Evolution"
It's about "macro" Evolution when some creature becomes something "other" than it's own "kind"
for example.... you can get lizards and snakes and tadpoles and salamanders to for 100s of years and produce a Horny toad that doesn't mean some day you get an Elephant and later a chimp who becomes a man.... .....how stoned do you have to be to eat this ?
![]()
Last edited by mouse; 02-09-2014 at 10:25 PM.
Try harder
Try making it simple. If you deny evolution and don't believe in creationism or whatever religious explanation. What's your belief then ?
see simple
Translation: Help me make you look bad online.
What part of A.D. do you not get?If you deny evolution and don't believe in creationism or whatever religious explanation. What's your belief then ?
see simple
Alternative Design allows you to stay away from the Childish arguments and feel good knowing the facts. Your like a super hero "untouchable" you notice the lack of replies for myself?
the Alternative Design will be the way of the Intelligent.
bull still in the texts books.
![]()
Last edited by mouse; 02-09-2014 at 10:13 PM.
Oh ok the pandas.. Gotcha.
I did not know we had an alternative creationist among us
now it explains the butt hurt over the scientific community and the conspiracy theories
thanks mouse
see simple
When did I mention a "creator"?
If your going to debate do some research first.
(heads up #1200)
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)