| 12 months ago :: Jun 26, 2012 - 5:16PM #21 | |
|
A number of theists call themselves sheep. They need to be bossed around. I don't get it myself.
Moderated by
Merope
on Jun 28, 2012 - 03:13AM
A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider god-fearing and pious. On the other hand, they do less easily move against him, believing that he has the gods on his side. Aristotle
Never discourage anyone...who continually makes progress, no matter how slow. Plato.. "A life is not important except in the impact it has on other lives" Jackie Robinson |
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|
| 12 months ago :: Jun 27, 2012 - 5:29PM #22 | |
Moderated by
Merope
on Jun 28, 2012 - 03:14AM
|
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|
| 12 months ago :: Jun 27, 2012 - 7:06PM #23 | |
|
Steven, so you'd be nice to Fred Phelps, Pat Robertson or that dipswitch Ray Comfort? |
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|
| 12 months ago :: Jun 27, 2012 - 9:53PM #24 | |
|
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|
| 12 months ago :: Jun 27, 2012 - 10:48PM #25 | |
Dave - Just a Man in the Mountains.
I am a Humanist. I believe in a rational philosophy of life, informed by science, inspired by art, and motivated by a desire to do good for its own sake and not by an expectation of a reward or fear of punishment in an afterlife. |
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|
| 12 months ago :: Jun 28, 2012 - 2:17AM #26 | |
|
Personally, I am equally as skeptical of "teachings" from Buddha as I am the "teachings" of any of the others. I would wager that the vast majority of atheists and secular humanists are as well. Being skeptical is not the same as automatic rejection; many opinions attributed to Buddha are perfectly reasonable, just as are some of the opinions attributed to Jesus, but agreement with some of their ideas is not the same as automatic acceptance of their entire philosophies.
Moderated by
Merope
on Jun 28, 2012 - 03:23AM
Do not assume that which you seek to discover.
|
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|
| 12 months ago :: Jun 28, 2012 - 4:21AM #27 | |
One doesn't need to believe that something is "absolute truth" (as if it were declared by a divine prophet) in order to draw philosophical conclusions and have convictions regarding those conclusions. Being a skeptic simply means wanting to know that any beliefs have some sort of convincing justification. One can easily be a skeptic and a secular humanist, for instance, if one finds secular humanism convincing according to skeptical standards.
eudaimonia, Mark |
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|
| 12 months ago :: Jun 28, 2012 - 11:43AM #28 | |
|
Yes Steven, Ray Comfort is the Auzzie who claims that the calabash banana is proof of his version of god. |
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|
| 12 months ago :: Jun 28, 2012 - 12:44PM #29 | |
Well, consider that they are Christians, and Christians think you should treat others the way you want to be treated yourself. If this is the case, there is clear evidence that those gentlemen want to be treated badly, so why not oblige them?
This post contains no advertisements or solicitations.
|
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|
| 12 months ago :: Jun 28, 2012 - 6:59PM #30 | |
|
AKA said:"what I'm talking about is the skeptic secular humanist having desire/need/intention to identify themselves as a member of a group other than Secular Humanism (take your pick: Falun Gong, Confucian, Deist, or Buddhist)." ">>>And you still don't know what the **** you are talking about. Nothing says that a secular humanist can't identify as a member of another philosophy." being skeptic... by definition, overrides any "need to identify" with a philosophical ideology. >>>No, it overrides any need for believing in theistic woo-hoo of any type. It has been explained to you elsewhere that there is such a thing as secular Buddhism. The fact that you choose to ignore what you have been told is your problem, not that of Secular Humanists, Secular Buddhists or anyone else. Besides- you are a Baha'i'- why does this concern you so much, unless you are trying to continue to lie about Buddhists and atheists? |
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|