What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
See the new YouTube feature trailer for Dragon Age: Origins view!
youtube.com/DragonAge - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
752 Comments
- Nemmy700, on 07/19/2009, -23/+292I love how christians always feel that they are "under attack" from something. Gay people getting married? Protect the christian definition of marriage! People want to wipe "In God we trust" off the currency? Protect the christian values this country was founded on! Evolution being taught in science class? Protect our children's ears!
Where I live, Christian billboards are not uncommon.
Why are atheist ads denied? Why do they stir up so much controversy when they aren't?
Tell me, which is the truly repressed party? - TheSexyBeast821, on 07/19/2009, -21/+275Moral authority IS void. Morals were invented by humans, just like God. You wasted a lot of time putting together that argument which boils down to be complete drivel with no real point. No ***** a "moral code" can't be scientifically proven; it is an abstract idea. Morality is subjective, just the same as the rest of reality.
Your reality happens to be extra subjective. ;)
/
Thinking back to psychology, your moral development is at the stage where it should be as a 10 year old - Conventional Morality. Grow up and get with the times. - Leminnes, on 07/19/2009, -9/+188This is ridiculous. Your basic argument is "We must have got to be moral because only religion gives a moral code." That's complete *****. Humans do not need god or religion in order to be their form of moral. See, the thing is, religion is not making people act moral at all and neither is it enforcing people to be moral, because quite often religious people are very much the opposite. Many religions devolve into petty arguments between who is right and who is wrong within the religion itself, causing wars, death, and many unimaginable things to other humans.
See, I understand the metaphysical "morals do not exist" argument. But when it comes down to it, it just boils down to being kind to your fellow man. How you choose to do this is beyond anyone's power to govern, including "god" and any man who claims to follow it. Religion does not define or cause people to be moral, only themselves and their own constitution do. - Junkyarddawg, on 07/19/2009, -18/+174Actually unapologetic atheists like Richard Dawkins ARE doing atheists favors. It's wholly due to them this is being discussed in general society at all; they've pushed the envelope of what is permissible to say.
Tip-toeing, on the other hand, isn't doing anyone any favors. Being apologetic and unoffensive never broke a chain or freed a human soul. - RealSurreal, on 07/19/2009, -12/+152“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?”
Epicurus (341-270 BC) - Ghostwo, on 07/19/2009, -4/+135Instant Classic:
http://www.mrwiggleslovesyou.com/rehab477.html
And I guess this one too:
http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics& ... - sealink, on 07/19/2009, -4/+123http://tinypic.com/r/evcfg3/3
- Elsewhere42, on 07/19/2009, -10/+124This is obviously just a ploy in the overall evil atheist plot!!!
Regarding this new advertising campaign, an atheist was recently quoted as saying: "Muahahahahahahahaha!!!!"
/s - Disgod, on 07/19/2009, -5/+109Wow David... an argument from IGNORANCE. Congrats, you did exactly what I expected you to do. The argument from ignorance is the creationist version of running home and crying to mommy. An argument from ignorance is not an argument FOR anything, it is just a comment on our current knowledge. AND you manage to not understand abiogenesis, DNA did not come first, but was a later evolutionary step. RNA developed first, under completely natural conditions, and later DNA developed. But to answer your question.
Here's a video explaining how the first cell walls formed, as well as RNA chains.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6QYDdgP9eg
Here's a link to the first page of a paper explaining how they've figured out that simple RNA chains can be under natural selective pressures.
http://resources.metapress.com/pdf-preview.axd?cod ...
Here's a paper on how the Ribosomes can form naturally.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v457/n7232/ab ...
And a blog explaining that paper.
http://blogs.sciencemag.org/origins/2009/02/decons ...
Here's an entire website dedicated to the explanation of abiogenesis. I even am giving you the link to how the first protocells formed.
http://exploringorigins.org/protocell.html
Oh, and all this fits with our knowledge of physics and chemistry.
So, again, what is some POSITIVE evidence for a reason to believe in god? Not arguments from ignorance or personal incredulity. SPECIFIC FACTS which indisputably show the existence of a god. - Lunarsight, on 07/19/2009, -8/+110Atheists have as much right to get their communications posted to billboards as any other group.
It seems like hypocrisy that Christian evangelism is acceptable for billboards, yet post an atheist message, and it's suddenly an issue.
If the billboard were something graphic or vulgar, I could see a reason for people not wanting it there, but really? - it's a pretty tame message. - wefarrell, on 07/19/2009, -70/+159I'm glad to hear atheists are taking this approach. Confrontational people like Richard Dawkins, as right as they may be, aren't doing atheists any favors. You can't reason with religious people it never has and never will work. Peace love and understanding is the best way to go.
Furthermore, as an Agnostic I don't think all religious people are idiots and I think some people would be better as Hindus, Christians, and Muslims then they would if they adopted my or someone else's personal values. Even if there isn't a god it doesn't mean that religions have nothing positive to offer society. If Atheists want the same respect and stature in society as religious people they have to stop marginalizing themselves. - rodrigo74, on 07/19/2009, -6/+93Richard Dawkins is not confrontational, unless you consider yourself confrontational when you say "I don't see any reason to believe in Santa Claus".
- FoxtrotYankee, on 07/19/2009, -4/+88No.
But it is a poor argument when you imply that, if we can't show you right now, then it must not have happened.
Another poor argument is, if I can't explain how the world/life/whatever was created, it must be "god".
500 years ago, man had no capacity for weather prediction. We used to think that storms were god's wrath. But we can explain it now and we know it's raining today for reasons besides an invisible wizard that is mad at me.
Stop making up a god of the gaps to explain things are are beyond our current scientific understanding. Just find a peace with "we don't know, but we're looking into it". - hauntedchippy, on 07/19/2009, -28/+110Religion is the hangover from an ignorant and savage past. We really ought to have grown out of believing in imaginary friends at this point.
- Disgod, on 07/19/2009, -5/+78"Aside from the scientific... reasons to believe in God "
Please explain the scientific reasons to believe in god. Be specific, and don't use arguments from ignorance or personal incredulity. I'm talking about distinct, repeatable facts. - IrvineKinneas50, on 07/19/2009, -9/+82Saying Richard Dawkins is confrontational is sort of ridiculous. He is straight-forward and doesn't dance around the truth, but he simply says his opinion. He doesn't treat the criticism of religion any differently than the criticism of a political viewpoint, and some people find that offensive. Reasonable people don't.
Your entire post is the generic cringe-worthy "I am an agnostic that thinks everyone is entitled to their own beliefs, look how open minded I am" that you find all over the internet. If someone speaks their educated opinion in a straight-forward manner like Dawkins you claim he is "confrontational" and suggest he is marginalizing himself. - hawkeye17, on 07/19/2009, -2/+75"I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires." - Susan B. Anthony
- FoxtrotYankee, on 07/19/2009, -6/+79It's sad that people really think that this argument works. Let me explain to you where you fail (besides the logical fallacies pointed out above)
You say:
"Morality, in this case, is relative to each human being with zero commonality"
...and you base the remainder of your argument on this.
Except that your statement is not true. Just because there's no magical being setting the rules doesn't mean that each person's making it up in some sort of vacuum. Morality's not an individually subjective thing.(though the human mind is able to rework a previously accepted morality to fit its current needs...kind of like when a priest ***** a little boy...or when a group of god-followers decide it's OK to kill another group of god-followers because each group imagined different gods).
The social standards we label "morality" is conduct that is agreed upon by a society, whether that society is a village, town, city, country or somesuch. These are ground rules that are set to facilitate peaceful coexistence, trade, punishment of transgressors and general support for the common good, whatever that common good is deemed to be.
In 18th and 19th century, it was deemed moral in many parts of the United States to OWN ANOTHER HUMAN BEING. In fact, some followers of that thar' christian religion asserted that it was moral because their imaginary friend, "god", said it was somehow OK.
That morality changed...as morality does. A a lot of things that used to be OK that now aren't because, as a society, we determined that it was harmful.
If there was some perfect invisible man who lives in the sky who sets the pace for morality, how come it changes? And how come it varies around the world? Wouldn't an all powerful being have a strong enough "signal" to get it through to all 6 billion of us?
(And don't trot out the weak "free will" argument here because you'll just fail again. Either the invisible man sets a morality for everyone or he gives us free will to make up our own. Doing both is dumb and just provides a rhetorical trap door for easy escape from logic.)
What we label "morality" is an attribute that is set and enforced by social compact. It seems reasonable (at least, more reasonable than dictation of morality by an imaginary friend) that certain "moral" messages are common between different societies because those are the ground rules that make societies prosper. Tribes that are too hostile will kill themselves off or get bumped off by a neighbor because they were too threatening. Tribes that were too nice, that failed to enforce the rules got run over by neighbors. The ones with the right mix of right and wrong continued and propagated their rules.
Now, it isn't surprising that a successful enforcement technique was, "Follow these rules because, if you don't, an invisible man will do terrible things to you in a place from which you can't report back and tell anyone else if these threats are real". But that's not a real god from which morality springs. That's just an Appeal to Fear (Google it).
So, if you think that there has to be a genuine god to have morality, you're silly and you really should just stop it. - CrazyChair, on 07/19/2009, -2/+72Our pasta, who art in a colander,
Draining be your noodles.
Thy noodle come,
Thy sauce be yum,
On top some grated parmesan.
Give us this day our garlic bread,
And forgive us our trespasses,
As we forgive those who trample on our lawns.
And lead us not into vegetarianism, but deliver us some pizza,
For thine is the meatball, the noodle, and the sauce, forever and ever.
Ramen. - smacksaw, on 07/19/2009, -9/+74All atheists need to do is fight for their rights, not convince anyone to change. That's evangelising as well.
Some people just have innate scepticism and others are prone towards organised spirituality.
Whether you are atheist or religious should only matter if you make it a matter of public interest, ie corrupt preachers who get caught embezzling money or sleeping with women not their wife. - charm803, on 07/19/2009, -15/+77" Peace love and understanding is the best way to go."
It goes both ways. I have never met an angry atheist (yet), but I have met plenty of angry, religious people. - diskoh, on 07/19/2009, -5/+67@ashes0, yeah those are called the laws of physics. The ones that prove there is no god.
- StaticThunder, on 07/19/2009, -5/+64Not our problem. We don't have to explain everything. You however already tried and can either put up or shut up.
- kingofinternet, on 07/19/2009, -6/+64that was complete and total twaddle.
look up 'begging the question' and you'll see davidniven's argument as an example. - OmegaNine, on 07/19/2009, -3/+55Did they really take a screen shot of a youtube video? ... Umm WTF?
- Spire3660, on 07/19/2009, -1/+51Its really this simple. I cant prove to you there isnt a god, and you cant prove to me there is. Either way its pretty foolish to believe in one particular text on religion. Before you declare yourself an Baptist or a Protestant or a Muslim study the history of religion in general before you attempt to change others views and policies. Personally i believe that organized religion is mostly a sham, used to control the weak minded, but I would never say that someone's actual BELIEF in god is.
The human race has a VERY long history of all types religions, to say that YOU have picked the right one without even THINKING of studying others is hubris at its finest. - invinciblenow, on 07/19/2009, -1/+47they are more relevant... philosophy > bible
- bigbadgoat, on 07/19/2009, -3/+49Just to play devils advocate:
If you lived in a country that had "In Zeus we trust" and made you swear on the koran and take an oath swearing to Allah if you were ever a witness in a court case. Or if you went to a sporting event and they sun "Thor bless America", would that piss you off?
I'm Canadian, and our national anthem says "God keep our land glorious and free". Am I not supposed to sing that part when I show pride in being part of the country I love? I would be met with a huge ***** ***** storm for all if I ever tried to get that changed to reflect the multiculturalism and multiple religions that Canada and a nation celebrates. Hundus and Muslims and Sikhs and Jews and every other religion has to acknowledge a god they don't believe in in order to show pride in their nation. It's ***** insane. Yet, I can say with a strong degree of certainty that christians everywhere would throw their hands up and say "we are being repressed and persecuted" when all I want I to not have to acknowledge something I don't believe in, and for them to respect my beliefs and acknowledge that Canada as a nation does not have any one god.
But it doesn't stop there. In order for Athiests to limit being told off and being condemned to hell on a near-daily basis we have to pretend to acknowledge a god we don't believe in because we know if we ask for our lack of belief in a god to be respected, we'll offend someone who is absolutely blown away that anyone would ever even question god's existence. If I don't say amen at the dinner table when I visit one of my parents, they'll rip the food out from under me, and my parents would lose a great deal of respect for me if they ever found out. My parents are both highly educated people with multiple degrees (teacher and an engineer). ***** like that has happened to me dozens and dozens of times.
Now I just let the god ***** slide and keep my mouth shut and let people trample all over my beliefs just so I can live my day to day life in peace and not piss anyone off. Its ***** horrible, so yeah, I think as an athiest it's pretty ***** valid to be pissed off at all the religious ***** we have to deal with on a daily basis because of mainly christian attitudes. - sizzzzlerz, on 07/19/2009, -1/+47Atheism is a religion in much the same way not collecting stamps is a hobby.
- rocknog, on 07/19/2009, -3/+49I have observed that confrontational is basically code for "speaks openly on the subject of atheism." Really, religious people label anyone who talks about atheism as confrontational, regardless of what was actually said. You can say something as simple as "I'm an atheist," and that's being confrontational.
- blowed247, on 07/19/2009, -4/+49@Dave
I think I speak for all of digg when all we want you to do is acknowledge the real creator of us all..... the flying spaghetti monster. since you cannot prove that he does not exist, by your own logic you must believe in him and follow his teachings. - DuneChild, on 07/19/2009, -2/+46Yeah, he loves us so much, he wants us to suffer!
- vap0rz21, on 07/19/2009, -1/+44Call a waaaaambulance.
By Christian values you mean iron age mythology. - FLarsen, on 07/19/2009, -4/+46No, you idiot. There is no indication of any afterlife and choosing one out of the potential billions doesn't even increase your odds slightly.
- bsmang, on 07/19/2009, -10/+52All atheists want is an nice absence of crazy ideas. We don't want to convert anyone to anything, just throw the crazy ideas out and keep the ones that might actually lead to something. That's really all we hope for.
- NorrisOBE, on 07/19/2009, -15/+55Atheists can do whatever the ***** they want about what they believe and so do people who are Muslims, Christians, Jews, Pagans, Buddhists, Hindus, Deists and other faiths. But people should shut up about what they believe and not believe and let church and state be separated. As a Muslim, i do not want my religion to be involved in politics as politics is dirty and corrupted and will destroy what religion is meant to preach. Yes you can preach Dawkins, Muhammad, Jesus, Buddha or whatever but you should never shove your beliefs to anyone who doesn't belong to your faith.
And no one should go around the streets handing out Bibles/Dianetics/any religious books to people or putting signs on buses saying there is no God. Religion and faith should be private and only belongs to families, individuals and churches/mosques/temples/synagogues, and not in public or in government. Whatever anyone preach is not meant for a secular society. - Mujokan, on 07/19/2009, -4/+44I think by "belittle, mock, shame and terrorize" you mean "bury and be sarcastic about". I doubt any atheist has said boo to you in real life. And religious folk get dugg if they stick to common sense.
- teamgwho, on 07/19/2009, -5/+42religious person saying "you will go to hell if you don't believe as I do" - perfectly ok, is considered protected speech and is even encouraged.
atheist saying "consider my POV." - not acceptable, causes community outrage, and cries that she weighs as much as a duck therefor she's made of wood and is obviously a witch. BURN HER!
//nuff said - Kral, on 07/19/2009, -5/+42We need more controversial Atheists and less apologists. A history of tip-toeing around religion is why we're actually arguing about evolution in 2009. You can't address problems like that without directly taking on religion.
We also need some education on terminology, as most self-described 'Agnostics' still don't realize they're also Atheists and wind up arguing against the wrong people. Start here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnostic_atheist - takamalak, on 07/19/2009, -1/+36Poor baby.
- IrvineKinneas50, on 07/19/2009, -15/+50Que the "open-minded" agnostics that are so afraid of labeling themselves as "atheists" that they cannot make a single post on the topic without buffering their entire post with reassurances that they are respectful of all beliefs.
- LilRabbitFooFoo, on 07/19/2009, -19/+53It's time the world join together in education, enlightenment, and peace.
Religion is born of fear which is caused by ignorance.
The atheists are right. It's time we grow up and put aside our childish superstitions and fears. - ShingoEX, on 07/19/2009, -0/+34"Or, God values free will"
...and then punishes us for using it? Offering multiple paths and condemning all but one is hardly "free will". - vap0rz21, on 07/19/2009, -2/+35Stop worshiping iron age mythology and maybe we'll stop laughing at you.
- bsmang, on 07/19/2009, -0/+32What? Atheists convinced of superiority of their religion? That makes absolutely no sense.
- StickWST, on 07/19/2009, -1/+33About the Christian billboards-
I HATE the pro-life billboards, they are the most offensive ***** things I've ever seen legally displayed on the road. I've had to deal with the painful, difficult situation. It's not like people who make that choice are like "woo hoo! we just got rid of a lot of trouble, what a close one!". It's a painful situation, and I don't like seeing constant billboards telling me how horrible I am. - SirBruce, on 07/19/2009, -1/+32They're more relevant because we can actually debate about whether or not their philosophies are correct, rather than declare one philsopher right and all the other's wrong because he claimed he was God.
- inactive, on 07/19/2009, -2/+33DN, I'm going to be charitable and assume that you're smarter than this post demonstrates you to be. Morality has absolutely nothing to do with the truth of the situation. God's existence does not hinge on whether or not you want or need him to be real. The supernatural being either exists, or he doesn't. I'm sure that you know this, and you're going to change your password so that your younger, more belligerent, less educated brother cannot get on your Digg account anymore... right?
- Strenoth, on 07/19/2009, -4/+35nah, the odds are more stacked against you that way. as an aethist, most religions let you off as ignorant of the truth of god. But once you pick a god, you're now an infidel to all other religions.
- Kral, on 07/19/2009, -2/+31Where are Atheists pushing their views on others? Did I miss where Atheists were campaigning against straight marriage? Passing laws that all children must be lectured on the weaknesses of Christianity in public schools? No. Atheists want recognition as to get the opposite of such things to stop. We're currently being walked on by religious views and it's gone on too long.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 772 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is