Obama Under Fire for Terri Schiavo Remark

HampsteadPete »

Fri Feb 29, 2008 6:40 am Agree: 4   Disagree: 9

"The misconceptions about Terri Schiavo must be corrected. Terri was not in a comatose state; she was responsive to human voices; she was able to visually track with her eyes; she expressed emotions; she even cried tears. Terri was disabled."

The misconceptions that "must be corrected" are yours! As the below autopsy results clearly shows, she was simply not capable of any of the responses you mention. They existed only in the wishful thinking of her family.

Did you pay no attention to the autopsy results when they were published, or did you ignore them 'cause they didn't fit in with your prior convictions? Either way, you are wrong, dead wrong.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8225637/

Or do you think the results were somehow faked?

Obama Under Fire for Terri Schiavo Remark

HampsteadPete »

Thu Feb 28, 2008 8:28 pm Agree: 5   Disagree: 13

Gee, a presidential candidate who actually admits mistakes! George Bush has been the worst president in history and has never admitted any of his gross errors. How refreshing! That Schiavo thing was America's dumbest hour. So many pandering politicians, it was hard to keep track of them all, and in the middle of it, our president flying in like Mighty Mouse to save the day.

My heart goes out to the family, but poor Terry had been, in nearly every sense of the word, dead for quite some time.

Student Club Aims to Proselytize Atheism

HampsteadPete »

Thu Feb 28, 2008 8:16 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 2

"What are the reasons for creating an atheist organization? To discuss someone you don't believe in?" Sorensen said.

No, atheist organizations spend zero time discussing god, there are real things to discuss. Such things as first amendment issues, education issues, birth control issues, woman's rights issues and trying to be a voice of reason in an unreasonable society.

If you think we are annoying now, just wait a few years. Look at the polls, your children are leaving the churches in droves, each generation since the 50's has been more godless then the last. Whether you will admit it or not, science is daily rolling back the last bastions of ignorance and shrinking the realm of the god-of-the-gaps.

It won't be long now....

Pro-Gay Booklet's 'Facts' Draw Criticism

HampsteadPete »

Thu Feb 28, 2008 6:15 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

"Prophet - Homosexuality can be a sin, just like heterosexuality can be a sin. But two monogomous, committed gay people who love each other are not sinning. Homosexual rape, etc is a sin. The Bible is clear on that."

I'm not picking on you, just using your words to make a point. If you read this entire thread, you will see what's missing when comparing your alleged "sins" to real crimes, and that's simply what we call "case law."

There are no precedents to go by 'cause none of you, no matter how certain you are, have the slightest idea what really happens after death. You just don't have a clue, so you bandy possibilities back and forth as though you did know.

Obviously, you can't all be right and that's why I and others choose to believe that none of you are. The correct answer isn't always in the middle, sometimes things are simply true whether you believe them or not.

Observation and data tell us that nothing, nothing whatsoever survives the death of the brain. When consciousness is fully understood, you won't have anywhere to hang the "soul" you keep searching for.

So keep jousting back and forth, but consider that you don't really know any more than I do right now, but soon we both will.

Evangelical Leader Calls for 'Ceasefire' on Sharia Controversy

HampsteadPete »

Wed Feb 27, 2008 7:57 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 2

"There's a story out here on the Christian Post that over half of Britons have no religion. Half! Imagine."

Yes, imagine! Isn't it wonderful, and the best part is that fear and superstition is dissipating in most civilized countries, including ours. More and more people are admitting to no religion in the US, and as the stigma of atheism grows less, and it is, more are admitting to that as well.

People who are parents now may be the peak generation for religion in this country, at least I hope so.

Pro-Gay Booklet's 'Facts' Draw Criticism

HampsteadPete »

Wed Feb 27, 2008 1:42 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

"HampsteadPete, then please explain to me why our pledge of allegiance says "One nation, Under God." This nation was founded on Protestant Christians. The laws were laid in place by those Christians. Now explain to me how that doesn't hold place in our government?"

"Under God" was added to the pledge in 1953 as a knee-jerk reaction to McCarthyism. Our laws are based upon English Common law, certainly not the bible.

Prior to the Constitution, many states had established state religions, and various penalties for various heresies and blasphemies. The framers of the constitution were wise enough to create the world's first secular republic. The only mention of religion or god in our constitution is exclusionary.

This protects me from you, but at the same time it protects you having to perhaps support a religion other then your own, and guarantees you the right to worship in your own way without interference. It does NOT give you the right to impose your religious dogma on me or anyone else, hence the only enforced crimes under our law involve actual injury to persons or property.

Pro-Gay Booklet's 'Facts' Draw Criticism

HampsteadPete »

Wed Feb 27, 2008 12:38 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 1

"if our government is going to define one sin as a crime they should define them all."

Oh, I see, you think the police power of the government should be used to punish what YOU think is immorality. Sorry, sin is purely a religious concept, and varies from religion to religion. I'm sorry to have to be the one to tell you this, but our government is a secular entity, with a constitutionally enforced neutrality towards god or religion.

Laws deal with crimes, not sins. If you don't know the difference, I suggest a high school civics class (if indeed they still have them).

Pro-Gay Booklet's 'Facts' Draw Criticism

HampsteadPete »

Wed Feb 27, 2008 11:15 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 2

"Homosexuality was long recognized as aberrant in our country. Virtually every state had laws against sodomy, just as they did against bestiality, since both are sexual perversions."

You are correct, in fact many states still have sodomy laws on the books (along with co-habitation, by the way), but that doesn't necessarily make homosexuality "wrong." The laws merely indicate that there was a period of time in this country when religion-inspired laws were put on the books in an attempt to legislate morality. For the most part, they are, thankfully, no longer enforced.

Hatred and bigotry continue, however, nearly unabated. Perhaps some day Christians will learn to live with the rest of us without trying to enforce their ancient moral code with the police power of the government. Starts with minding your own darn business, and staying out of other people's bedrooms, where you don't belong.

Pro-Gay Booklet's 'Facts' Draw Criticism

HampsteadPete »

Wed Feb 27, 2008 6:45 am Agree: 3   Disagree: 4

"I just don't get it. We can punish murder by law and even to some extent alcholism or any other addictions but we can't punish homosexuality?"

I suppose you want to hang 'em all! If ignorance were a crime, the prisons would be full of Christians. Wait a minute - they already are!

Now, Shuck, look at your statements and tell me the difference between "Christian law" and Islamic Sharia law. It's Christians like you that give religion a bad name.

Pro-Gay Booklet's 'Facts' Draw Criticism

HampsteadPete »

Wed Feb 27, 2008 5:16 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 8

GMG:

I didn't say genetic, and perhaps proof may have been too strong a word, but here is a study that certainly indicates there are hard-wired differences among individuals.

http://sexualhealth.e-healthsource.com/?p=news1&id=525660

The story contains a couple of other interesting links.

Revjim:

Calling homosexuality a "sin" like murder, etc.. is just plain ignorant! Morals should be about how we treat one another, and about the alleviation of human suffering, not about 2500 year-old tribal law.

Pro-Gay Booklet's 'Facts' Draw Criticism

HampsteadPete »

Tue Feb 26, 2008 7:26 pm Agree: 4   Disagree: 4

“The APA is no better. In the past few decades, the group has gone from listing homosexuality as a mental disorder to becoming one of its biggest champions in the public square,” he added."

Oh yes! Those pesky research findings that proved homosexuality to be hard-wired in certain individuals, and not a choice or mental aberration at all. And of course those dumb doctors decided to go with the proven facts, and change their opinions. Hey, know what? Geologists did the same darn thing in the '60's when the evidence for plate tectonics became overwhelming.

Darn scientists! Always changing their minds when new data becomes available! Why can't they be more like theists & keep the same dogma for thousands of years?

Oxford Probes Why People Believe in God

HampsteadPete »

Thu Feb 21, 2008 7:59 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

"ALL worldviews are on the line, including mine and yours. The point is to find the truth."

I disagree here. Science is not going to confirm a supernatural event, by definition that would be impossible. We live in a universe created by natural processes - we just haven't quite quantified them all yet, but that is no reason to give up & say god did it.

"If you were the least bit reasonable about this, you might concede that a supernatural explanation for this is possible, especially since there is no known or even plausible natural explanation."

Simply not true. There are many possible, plausible theories, just none that have been substantially proven. There is much controversy on the fringes of knowledge, and this has always been so. I don't know of any cosmologists ready to throw in the towel just yet.

"Has there been one for evolution? I wasn't aware that they've been able to repeat this in a lab."

Other than relativity, evolution is the most tested theory in all of science. Like any other theory, it makes many predictions, the failure of any one of which would be sufficient to cast parts of it into doubt. Repeatability does not always mean replicating in a lab. We can't duplicate gravitational lensing in a lab, but we know it works. The eye has evolved dozens of times in different species, each time in a manner consistent with the particular evolutionary preassures present. How's that for repeatability?

"I don’t think all religions are true and I think one would be foolish for believing anything that isn’t true. But, it is logically possible that one of them is true."

Really? What is your evidence for this? Who gets to choose? Based upon what evidence? There is simply no logical reason to believe any of them true. All of them sprung from the same root - attempting to explain natural processes, and fear of death. From earliest times they have been the best method to control the ignorant ever devised

Oxford Probes Why People Believe in God

HampsteadPete »

Thu Feb 21, 2008 5:04 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

"I don’t know where you get the idea that there is a Christian crusade against science. And most of what I’ve seen of atheist posts on this site are misunderstandings of Christian positions, close-mindedness to even the possibility of the supernatural, bad reasoning, and just plain ranting and insulting"

A common Christian point-of-view, and one I can understand. You might consider that it is not OUR worldview that is on the line every time another fossil or scientific fact is discovered, but yours. Why should any reasonable person give credence to the supernatural? There hasn't been any repeatable, verifiable and falsifiable evidence for supernatural events in all of recorded history.

You feel insulted? I feel insulted every time I attend a board of education meeting and have to listen to the morons trying to water down the teaching of evolution yet again, 'till the teachers won't know what to teach. You want equal time to teach your myths? How about the Scientologists? They have at least as much evidence for their foolishness as you do.

If you let one myth in, you have to let them all in, and they are all an insult to the intelligence of any reasonable person.

Oxford Probes Why People Believe in God

HampsteadPete »

Thu Feb 21, 2008 11:58 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

"God is required for morality and justice."

Nonsense! Every single bit of real morality in the bible (old or new) was in the culture thousands of years preceding "god's holy word." By real morality, I mean those things dealing with how we treat one another, and the alleviation of human suffering, which is what morality is all about.

Oxford Probes Why People Believe in God

HampsteadPete »

Thu Feb 21, 2008 10:20 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 2

"Many atheists (and many science loving Christians) are fed up with this Christian war against science."

Yes! The Christian crusade against science is precisely what motivated me to "come out of the closet" five years ago and begin writing letters to the editor and posting on sites such as this. If those of us who are appalled by the Christian attacks sit by and do nothing - we deserve what we get.

Those of you who would like to repeal the enlightenment and return us to the middle ages should be aware that we are awake now, and will NOT go quietly into that good night.

Oxford Probes Why People Believe in God

HampsteadPete »

Thu Feb 21, 2008 6:55 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

"If you think about, there are many aspects of our personhood that are not material. "

Oh my, did this thread get real big in a hurry, all this testimony!

Of course anything going on in the brain needs interpretation. There is no way to see pain or pleasure either, directly, human "readout" is needed for both. There is simply no other place for Consciousness to go on other then the brain, and when the brain dies so do we.

Having said that, there is some really interesting work going on (to me) concerning planck-level quantum effects able to act at a distance (entanglement), and the possibility that there could be some sort of wider-level Consciousness then we currently are aware of. This research is very much in the realm of science, not the supernatural.

If your theory was correct, we would expect to see different results from brain injury and stroke, would we not? How, by the way, is Uncle Joe's "last good working personality" stored for the hereafter, in spite of his last two years of dementia?

No, the evidence is that the brain is all there is, and we are within perhaps only a few years away from unlocking most of it's mysteries. Of course, we could always say "God did it," but what a tragedy that would be for all those that could be helped

I think we have had enough of the effects of superstition, don't you?

Oxford Probes Why People Believe in God

HampsteadPete »

Wed Feb 20, 2008 7:38 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

"’m afraid you’re exposing your own ignorance of Christianity. We have no fear of death because we know what comes afterwards. I would think your atheism would experience more fear and ignorance about things like the afterlife and meaning and purpose in life."

No, you missed the point, and I can understand why. Fear of death is what originally led to the idea of a "soul" in the first place. The absurd idea that there is somehow some magical something that survives the physical death of the body and somehow encapsulates the "personhood" of the dear departed.

The idea becomes totally ridiculous, if you think about it a bi, but for those who can believe it, it should relieve the fear, of course that was it's purpose in the first place. Death is nothing more than going to sleep, or going under general anesthesia, if you prefer, without waking up. Why should one fear that?

Of course, every major religion in the history of the world, just about, has had some sort of afterlife myth, and they are quite pervasive, after all, who would not like to believe it?

I think it was Epicurus who said "If I am, then death is not. If death is, then I am not. Why should I fear something that is not here when I am?"

Gavulav:

How did I become an atheist? I guess the short answer is, I asked questions and didn't accept the answers I received at face value. After all, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and it was not forthcoming. I have made quite a study of the origins of Christianity and other religious myths over the years, and found them all lacking in one particular area - compelling evidence!

McCain Cruises to Wis. Win, Faults Obama

HampsteadPete »

Wed Feb 20, 2008 9:28 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

"Or will we risk the confused leadership of an inexperienced candidate who once suggested bombing our ally, Pakistan,"

This is the height of hypocracy!! O'bama suggested a surgical strike to get terrorist leaders would be OK even if in Pakistan territory, without checking with Pakistan. The Bush administration mocked O'bama for saying it, and then, two weeks later, did precisely what O'bama suggested without clearing it with Pakistan first, and even bragged about it!

Where does McCain get off attacking O'bama in this manner, for suggesting what our so-called commander-in-chief has already done.

Anti-Christian Barrage at the Movies

HampsteadPete »

Mon Feb 18, 2008 2:06 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 10

If Christians are portrayed as hypocrites, it's because they are, and talking about sexual predators, if thousands of priests aren't enough to prove the case, Barna's own research shows that a woman's chances of being raped or beaten by her spouse increase with the degree of fundamentalism of the spouse. Something about women as chattel in the bible, I guess. Started with Abraham pimping his wife out to the Egyptian Pharaoh, continued with Lot impregnating both his daughter's, and on to Jesus rebuking his own mother. Why any woman is a Christian is as much a mystery as why gay's are. Clearly, it is as much a "man's religion" as Islam. Only thing missing are the Burka's.

Brian McLaren: Postmodern Christianity Understood as Story

HampsteadPete »

Mon Feb 18, 2008 1:48 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 13

"He contends that the reason the younger generation leaves the faith is not because of superficial reasons such as worship style or preaching style, although those can be factors, but because of the “deeper” issue of the shift in the way they believe and how they believe in the Christian faith and other religions."

I'm hopeful that some of the reason is a shift to a more rational way of looking at things. As human knowledge has grown, there is less and less need to view the world through a supernatural lens. Science has "pushed back the dark," and left very little room for the twin pillars of all religion: fear and ignorance.