I am sorry to post here but I am looking for some intellectual answers from an atheist perspective. www.dsoat.wordpress.com "Five indisputable proofs of God?" are questions that I have never been personally able to overcome. I do not consider myself to be closed minded or blind. Are there indisputable proofs of God?
Thank your for posting this. I just might head to Wisconsin to relieve some of the people who have been protesting if I can find a flight.
@dsoat:There is no indisputable proofs of God, else God (whichever "God" you want) would be a scientific FACT, and not religious babbling. On the consequence of that there would be no atheists, and there'd be only one religion.As you specifically gave the link where is specifically the questions, I answer them here:1) humans are not created. They are not a construct, as nobody builds them. They instead grow in a biological way. Therefor there is no "creation". The explanation of the origin of life lies in Evolution and Abiogenesis.The description in the link simply lies when it says "there is no scientific example that can be currently observed where a lesser state of matter or energy changes itself into a more complex state of matter". The easiest reply on this is the snowflake, but we can show fusion of hydrogens in the Sun, molecules...2) Bullshit. Protection and (self)decoration are way more then simply "covering ourselves from elements of cold and heat". Even if it'd be the case, it is a natural reason, so no need for a supernatural explanation.Also bullshit when it says "they do, but not the same level". So what? Every species, even every member of every species are different. This is no proof on any god.The questioner also volunteraly forgets about primitive tribes in warm climate who don't wear clothes at all (only maybe protection against mechanical damage on genitals).3) Just because a large number of people believes in something, it won't necessarily be true. Just remember how people believed that the Earth is flat.Prayer has no effect. It causes no miracles. That's a scientifical fact, proved a thousand times.Finding reason for your life doesn't require the belief of any god.The effects of believing in any god results in reduced thinking-capacity, racism, bigotism and so on. Yes, the effects should not be dismissed, bacause they are harmful.4) That is simply not true. Religion is a learnt behaviour."similar conclusion" is a lie too. Compare any two belief-system, or just check wikipedia about "crusade", "holy war", or anything similar about their strong disagreements.And as everyone borns as an atheist, and that there is no proof on any god, but there are tons of evidence on the contrary, also as ateism is the LACK of belief, it is so hard to be an atheist, as not rising up a thousand ton weight.5) Even more lie. Not every human has the "inner sense of morality". Those who don't, are called psychopats, sociopaths, or something like that.And just to mention something: budhism for example, what is a religion, do not believe in the concept of good and evil. They think from a higher perpective everything just as is.Also the sense of moral and ethic can deply differ between two person. There is no collective moral.Also only a religious person can think that "provocation" is ,when someone is in another religion, so the other person shall be killed.Actually the base of moral and ethic is each other. You don't kill unreasonably to be able to live in a working society, so there'll be milk in the supermarket every morning!Now on the other hand think about the Ten Commandments! Not working on Saturday? You really want to kill the workers in the mall, or fastfood-restaurants?Or how about one of the other commandments from the OTHER Ten Commandments (also found in the Bible): "Do not boil the goat in its mother's milk"? What that has to do at all with "moral"?Finally to help you: always check the given datas. It is most of the time easy to disprove a whole argument if you can point out, that they commited dishonesty (or a simple failure) in the very beggining. If the starting inputs do not stand, however nice the whole argument can look like, it is false.
The American dream is so apparent to families that arrive here from areas of the world that are deprived. In Dallas I met up with a Vietnamese family that sewed dress lines for designers. They couldn’t speak English at first and took instructions visually. They all worked together; husband, wife and two children. Within a few years they had paid off their home, their cars (new minivans) and the children attended private schools. The only time they complained was when there was a poor market and they didn't have enough to stay busy. I am sure their grandkids will be complaining that the government isn’t doing enough in one area or another, but at least the first and sometimes the second generation get it. Michael Moore makes the point that 400 individuals hold as much in assets as ½ the population of the U.S. This is held out there as if it we were talking about Czarist Russia where the lines for bread formed at midnight and often the bread was gone before the first hour. Those who protested the lack of bread were brutally shot as they marched in the streets. Wisconsin teachers are not starving, on the contrary, they are doing much better then the average private middle class citizen. Feb 23, 2011 ... In Wisconsin, teachers make $89000 in salary and benefits, ... For an average private sector worker, the salary in 2010 was $46000 ...The taxpayers in Wisconsin have done the math and asked themselves why they are being asked to fund pensions for their government counterparts that make almost twice as much and will retire before they do. I would argue that Moore is making a false comparison. It is not teachers vs. the 400 wealthiest, it is teachers vs. the average taxpayer. When put in this perspective it is the private citizens that should be in the street marching and protesting for equity and fairness. Oh that’s right they voted instead. Like Michel Moore said one vote one citizen. It is his crowd that is unwilling to accept the results.
well put polardan
I'm willing to admit that getting revved up by a populist, altruistic speech is as close to religious feeling as I will ever experoence. A new scientific discovery will have me bouncing out of my chair, too.But, before Christians start jumping on me with the "your religion is science/liberalism" bit, I must point out that there are real differences. For example, I would never accept the statements of any scientist or political figure as absolute truth. The second I learned that they were wrong or lying, I'd turn my back on them.
Michael Moore appeals to people's emotions. Personally what appeals to me is evidence. Trust me when I say that unionists and union members do not want American taxpayers to view the evidence. Why not? Because it's self-serving and damning as hell, that's why.In Wisconsin right now during all of this political upheaval and power-playing in Madison, school districts across the state are RUSHING to get teacher contracts signed ASAP. Why? Because the teachers are scared and want the higher pay, termination clauses, premium health care plans and large pension payouts legally renewed and secured for the future. Who on earth would be rushing to get these employment contracts signed, especially right now during a major fiscal crisis for the state, all-time low income tax and property tax revenues and record unemployment? School boards agree to these contracts. Well, surprise, it's the school boards who are rushing these through. They are under pressure from the teacher's union and because school boards are chock full themselves with members of unions, including former teachers.As far as I'm concerned, teachers should be paid as much as possible. I would not limit their compensation at all. I would remove all caps to their compensation (most of their raises are limited by the CPI inflation). There job is that important. But employment should be at will and compensation should be performance-based, just like in the private sector. That way, we (taxpayers who pay their salary through property and state income taxes) have the freedom to fire poor teachers and bring in new ones, just like a private sector org can fire poor managers and hire better ones. Take Milwaukee school district: a few years ago there were dozens of Milwaukee teachers who secured sealed fat cat contracts. Once these went under review, several teachers retired and then it was learned that many received 6 figure bulk payouts PLUS their monthly pension benefits. Some teachers got SEVEN figure payouts! We're talking Wisconsin here folks! That the state of Wisconsin is bankrupt in 2011 should surprise no one. I don't see how anyone can be against balancing the budget for sustainability.Union members and their families are delusional about the rich. Just talk to them for 15 minutes. Inevitably you'll stumble across their believe that rich people in America have these vaults with stacks of money inside them, and the only way to get the money out is to tax them into oblivion to "redistribute" the wealth to the middle class and poor.First of all, any such collected taxes from the rich is SPENT by govt and not redistributed. Second, it never occurs to them that money (or wealth) of rich people actually might be working inside investment funds, grants or businesses elsewhere, which themselves create employment, tax revenues, etc. I hate to break it to Michael Moore, but rich people do not escape Uncle Sam. Thanks to France and Napoleon, a progressive tax system exists in the USA, which hammers rich people pretty good. If Wisconsinites were wise, they'd file thousands of freedom of information act lawsuits against school districts, municipal govts and against the state about compensation plans and records for their employees. It would probably almost as bad as California's pension fraud.It's time to name and shame.
Post a Comment