Total posts: 63
-->
@EtrnlVw
For starters one worldview is no more "practical" than the other in terms of what each person accepts as true. You also can't really label Theism a "false hope" unless you know for a fact a Creator does not exist and I see no reason to have such surety in that.
Your stand is backed up by a book written by peasants and strung together with faith. My stance is supported by leading scientists and millions of years of evolution. I recommend you read some of Richard Dawkins books, they really do enlighten you. I do not know that the creator does not exist, but I know enough not to be fooled. Take the garden fairies for example. What if I told you that there are faires in your garden which you cannot detect with any of your senses? What if I gave no evidence? What if I told you that it is real and that you have to "have faith" in order for it to work. True, I do not know with 100% conviction that the fairies do not exist, but I am pretty damn certain. I do not believe in God as certainly as I do not believe in garden fairies.
Why do you get to be the arbiter of truth just because you're an atheist lol?
Because I have something called facts. I have scientists. I have proof and as I said, I have millions of years worth of evolutionary science on my side. You have a book which is written by peasents and endorses slavery. I am not the arbiter of truth, I am simply a moth who is drawn to truth. I simply stand with truth.
This is where you lose any form of good conversation and often the path atheists love to delude themselves with, as if they are the higher species who are not in any way blinded to the truth lol. Let me remind you, your personal worldview is not superior, it's simply your personal choice of what you believe exists.
"Athiest love to delude themselves". Funny coming from a religious lad from you, considering your life revolves around a musty old fictional book. I am a higher than you. My personal view is superior, because it can be backed up with facts. My views are supportable. My views can be proven. My views are testafiable. My views are logical. My views have withstood intense questioning. And yet they stand.
Yet your stands, well, it is all faith. Blind belief. It really is pitiful how gulliable one can be.
The question is not "are you happy" (at least from my point of view). The question rather is are you reaching the full potential of what you truly are and the implications of that, have you accepted an error about reality..... You can be happy atheist or theist because beliefs will never make you happy, the truth can make you feel satisfied but you may not even know what truth is when you see or hear it. You believing atheism is truth may give you a sense of pride because you think it is true but you could be dead wrong. In this sense objective truth simply evades you. Just because you're an atheist doesn't mean you stand for truth.
One of RationalMadmans questions was how an athiest can be happy knowing that they are just a organism on a spinning ball in a void of nothing. That was my answer. As to you question of happiness between athiest and religious folks, I still stand by my statement.
I am happy that I can face the world without needing to be wrapped in cotton. I am happy I can face the truth. I am happy that I don't need God to look over me in order to feel secure.
I believe that (to a certain extent), but have you considered what it means to be created by a Creator?
Sure, spending early mornings in churches praying to what you believe loves you can be a great comforter. People want to be loved. People want to be cared about. People want to be noticed. But I do not want love from a fictional character. I am proud that I am strong enough to love myself without needing assistance from God.
The universe is run by the laws of cause and effect (Karma) and beliefs are irrelevant to cause and effect. What's relevant to cause and effect are the things you actually do.
Karma is not real. When I say this, I mean the kind of karma which takes note of your evil and bites you back. Karma is just a label people put on unlucky events. Take this as an example. I hit a schoolmate in class and then fell over at lunch, breaking my leg. Karma did not snap my leg. Karma did not direct me to fall. I fell because of my own physical carelessness.
If you need help escaping the arms of religion, I recommend you read the book God Delusion. It uses logic, facts and reasoning to convince one that God is not real.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
You've avoided my question skilfully. Also, it's not good for them because they are committing suicide at higher rates than American slaves, even post transitioning.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
Well what about my kangaroo example.
It's like if you take a person who wishes to be a kangaroo and asked them what they wanted, they would say they wanted to be a kangaroo. They would want snuggery. Is that the best thing for them? No. Is it what they want? Well, yes.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
Would you ask an illegal immigrant about migration? Would you ask a Barcelona fan about which team is the best? Would you ask a patriotic American which country is the best?
The fact that one is transgender means they suffer from a mental illness therefore making them unsuitable to be questioned. A trans individaul FEELS like transitioning is the best thing for them but it is not, as studies have shown. It's like if you take a person who wishes to be a kangaroo and asked them what they wanted, they would say they wanted to be a kangaroo. They would want snuggery. Is that the best thing for them? No. Is it what they want? Well, yes.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
That's never a good idea.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
So if a biological Chinese painted himself white (You can't say this is racist as this is exactly what trans folks are doing), is he biologically white? You can call yourself American. You can act like an American. Everyone in the world can call you an America, but that doesn't change the fact that you are not biologically an American
I just want to clear up the fact that I would call a trans man a man, but will not acknowledge them as a BIOLOGICAL male.
Created:
Posted in:
Here's a verse for yall religious folks
Judges 19:23-24
23 The owner of the house went outside and said to them, “No, my friends, don’t be so vile. Since this man is my guest, don’t do this outrageous thing.
24 Look, here is my virgin daughter, and his concubine. I will bring them out to you now, and you can use them and do to them whatever you wish. But as for this man, don’t do such an outrageous thing.”
25 But the men would not listen to him. So the man took his concubine (wife, women who lives with a male) and sent her outside to them, and they raped her and abused her throughout the night, and at dawn they let her go.
26 At daybreak the woman went back to the house where her master was staying, fell down at the door and lay there until daylight.
27 When her master got up in the morning and opened the door of the house and stepped out to continue on his way, there lay his concubine, fallen in the doorway of the house, with her hands on the threshold.
28 He said to her, “Get up; let’s go.” But there was no answer (dead). Then the man put her on his donkey and set out for home.
I assume Jesus was having a smoke or a quick beer while this girl was being gang-raped.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
Of course, we have a different definition of men and women. I assume you would believe a white man who is convinced they are black would be biologically black when they perform blackface then? I assume if a 3 year old said they wanted to be a transformer, then you would stick on some metal limbs and say they legally identify as a robot? I assume if a furry was convinced they are a fox, then they would be a fox after applying some makeup?
I'm quite surprised there are people who disagree with me because I consider myself quite rational. I came to my conclusion after listening to talks and lectures and was convinced by facts. Why don't you watch some Ben Shapiro? If you want someone less aggressive, then watch Jordan Peterson. If you want to be offended watch some Milo.
Created:
Perhaps this is because atheists are more practical and are not blinded by the false hope of a next life in eternal bliss. Being depressed because you are sane and in touch with reality is better than being happy while misled, deluded and clouded from the truth. As to how I am a happy atheist, despite knowing that I am just a small particle in an infinite space with no meaning, I am happy with truth, even though it may not be favourable.
It is like the book 1984 by George Orwell. Would you rather be a happy mindless drone who is blinded from truth, or Winston (protagonist), who understands himself and the errors of his society? Though Winston bears the burden of truth, he is enlightened by it.
I am happy that my happiness does not come from a book written out by peasants centuries ago. I am happy because my happiness does not rely on eternal bliss. I am happy that I do not fear eternal burning. I am happy that I am not morally commanded by a superior being. I am happy that I have the freedom of thought.
I am happy that I am an atheist.
Created:
Posted in:
Who is the most confident leftie on this topic? I am quite confident on my stand that men are men and will be willing to debate someone who is as confident.
Created:
Posted in:
Is there anyone here who agrees with me? Or am I the only conservative around here.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
I am against anyone who says “transgender male” is a gender. A female-to-male trans person is male alright, and Juice will probably say that he’s a female. “Immigrated American Citizen” is not anywhere on the nationalities record because it isn’t.
There's a difference. Saying you are an American Citizen doesn't change your biological ethnicity. Saying your a women while your a man does. Saying you are an American man while you are a biological Chinese would be incorrect, just like calling a trans man a man.
A male to female individual is still a male, just like how I am a human even though I go through surgery to look like a panda.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
Saying “I want to be a panda” 1,000 times is easy, becoming one is hard. Changing your species thousands of times is harder than you think and using it as a concern is absurd. If one’s species is constant: only inconsistent with the species, then it is unrealistic for him to change more than 2 times.
It's quite a good analogy but it doesn't account for one wanting to change their species.
In order for you to find a good analogy, it needs to be one which only accounts for GENDER but not for my species. By your logic, I can change my species. The difference between being a piolet and being a man is that one has intrinsic value and the other doesn't. Anyone can be a piolet if they trained, but I cannot be a man if I wish, just like how I cannot be a panda if I wish.
Created: