Previous 11 - 20 Next
In response to:

The Atheist Response to Sandy Hook

Stephen288 Wrote: Jan 15, 2013 12:35 PM
No, I don't give up trying to figure it out, and I certainly don't say both sides are wrong in their fundamental beliefs. I just know too many on both sides, devoutly religious or aggressively, defiantly atheist, who are positive that they are right, and everyone else is both wrong, delusional and irrational. I see no evidence that convinces me that either side's position is supported by logic. Both boil down to belief. So I say I don't know.
In response to:

The Atheist Response to Sandy Hook

Stephen288 Wrote: Jan 15, 2013 12:30 PM
>>To even make the claim that you cannot have absolute knowledge, assumes you HAD such knowledge to draw that conclusion in the first place!<< Quite the opposite. The universe is vast, at least many billions of light years, perhaps infinite. Our view is tiny. Lacking the boost of "faith," I see no objective evidence that proves God's existence to me. Proving the NON-existence of anything, let alone God, is well-nigh impossible. So I confess I just don't know. And I don't know what I don't know. I'm open to any argument or evidence. But in 65 years I've yet to be convinced that either side is right, however sure they are of their positions.
In response to:

The Atheist Response to Sandy Hook

Stephen288 Wrote: Jan 15, 2013 12:22 PM
I stand corrected, but that doesn't change my overall point. Apologies to Mr. Prager for placing him in the wrong pigeonhole, though in the right category.
In response to:

The Atheist Response to Sandy Hook

Stephen288 Wrote: Jan 15, 2013 10:45 AM
... Agnosticism, the acknowledgment that we do not and cannot really know what's out there or what comes next, isn't terribly comforting, and makes both the religious zealot and the pugnacious atheist angry, but is the only logical position for anyone who agrees with Clint Eastwood that a man's got to know his limitations. To posit a God who having created this vast universe is endlessly concerned with this one pesky species on this one little planet is more than a little presumptuous. To insist that no God exists anywhere in that universe is preposterously so. To contemplate Alexander, Napoleon, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Obama is more than enough reason to doubt God's existence or benign intent. Hence: agnosticism.
In response to:

The Atheist Response to Sandy Hook

Stephen288 Wrote: Jan 15, 2013 10:35 AM
It is clearly more comforting to believe in an eternal afterlife bathed in the glow of a loving deity than in cessation and extinction. But there is no correlation between belief and wisdom. Religious belief always ultimately becomes a matter of faith, and the billions of often very clever words that have been written and argued over the centuries to try to prove or disprove God's existence demonstrate that profound intelligence and wisdom can come down on both sides of the question. Dogmatic atheism is as much a religion as Prager's dogmatic Christianity in that it relies ultimately on faith that its conclusions are the only correct ones despite the complete lack of objective evidence.
You keep carrying on about Mormonism as a CULT, but so what? I lived in Mesa, Arizona for years, which used to be a Mormon town and still has a large Mormon population. Yeah, their beliefs seem kind of weird, but they are among the best citizens on the planet -- sober, hardworking, public-spirited, productive, deeply decent people. What do you care what they do in their temple? None of their rituals carry over into their public life, and when they are in government, they govern as citizens, not as emissaries of their church. For people who strut their Christianity to allow Obama to destroy our country because they don't like Mormons' religion is sheer insanity. We will all suffer the rest of our lives for your narrow-minded foolishness.
"We Aren't Quite as Stupid as They Think"? Yeah, we are. Maybe not all of us, but it doesn't matter. We proved on Nov 6 that about 70% of "us" are either stupid enough to swallow the transparent lies that Obama shovels their way or oblivious enough not to have seen the life-and-death importance of voting to end his presidency. So as those of us cursed with the intelligence to understand watch in horror, our beloved country will sink beneath the waves and join the lost civilization of Atlantis as an interesting myth for future anthropologists and novelists to play with.
"Are Americans really so petty and covetous that we are comforted when “rich” people have their money taken away from them? Or do sufficient numbers of us still understand America to be a meritocracy – a society where we all achieve in different measures, yet we are all blessed with the freedom to try and achieve all that we can? " Tragically, I think the results on November 6 tell us that the answers, for just over 50% of people who care enough to vote, are "Yes" and "No." Conservatives keep thinking that logical, coherent, intelligent arguments will win our country back. But the socialist education industry, the endless "gifts" that Mitt Romney cited, and the stupidity of the public have doomed us.
. . . they also gave the Obama lie factory the ammunition to make single women nationwide believe that Mitt Romney was waging a "war on women." And that helped reelect Obama. Social conservatives have a simple choice. They can work to nominate and support Republicans who can actually win elections and then go on to put conservatives on the Supreme Court. Or they can harrumph, nominate losers like Todd Akin, or stay home, and watch Barack Obama and his ilk destroy everything they care about. There are no other choices.
This column is absurd because the basic premise is wrong. No one is saying that social conservatives aren't also fiscal conservatives, nor that they should be "purged from the party." The point is that if social conservatives want to see their values preserved in a culture whose majority is now very far from those values, they need to mute their strident message and join moderate Republicans - yes, even the dreaded, demonized "RINOs," in pushing a positive image of what conservatism can do. It's not just that Todd Akin, Richard Mourdock, Paul Broun (who was running unopposed and therefore kept his seat), and before them Sharron Angle make fools of themselves and turn off the voters who would have helped elect a more moderate Republican,
In response to:

Why Conservatives Should Cheer Up

Stephen288 Wrote: Nov 20, 2012 12:04 PM
" 'We got run out of Burma and it is humiliating as hell. I think we ought to find out what caused it, go back and retake it.' And you know what? We did just that. " Hopeful words, to be sure. But the "we" who retook Burma and crushed the Japanese and Nazis was a vastly different species from the "we" who fell for Barack Obamas vicious lies and elected him not once but twice. A country whose population is that stupid is probably no longer capable of much of anything.
Previous 11 - 20 Next