that's just false mathematically (although pretty correct imo for avg ppl)

there is simply not enough stat evidence to discard H_0 = "God doesn't exist"....

agnostic are just fools to use a word "believe" as it implies (often) a stance that doesn't have enough evidence

That should concern you, Bruce.

Yes, having an open mind is the hallmark of cowardice.

Atheists are too cowardly to face the fact that they might be living all wrong and be eternally screwed for it. Ever wonder why they are so vocal in their disbelief? They could just go off by themselves and not believe, but many of them won't leave you alone about it. There is more than one reason for this, but a big one is fear.

It should be natural not to believe. You have to admit it has to be just fairy tales. It just is that stupid. But maybe you are too old to change the belief you got as a child? I'm sorry for that. I'm working for getting it eliminated. But maybe you think god will have mercy on you for leaving the door open? That looks as fear to me. Correct me if you feel I'm wrong.

"It's natural not to believe" does not imply "it's natural to disbelieve". Agonstics do not believe. Atheists disbelieve.

I have no idea what the "it" is in "it has to be just fairy tales". I had no beliefs as a child regarding religion. I know of no school of thought that says God will have mercy on me for leaving the door open.

Good for you. But if you are an American you might have got a dose of: "May God continue to be with US" or whatever W. said. It was so embarrassing.

But it is certainly natural to believe. All throughout human history people have believed in things. If you do a scholarly comparison between what peoples all over the world at different times have believed, there are some very central deep themes that run through all belief systems. This is what's natural. It has only been relatively recently, over a couple hundred years and even less, that these natural beliefs have been often superseded by science and the religion of methodolgical naturalism. In my mind, there is no conflict between the two, and they do nothing but complement each other.

This is just so embarrassing for the US. Atheists and agnostics:



As for the atheists, and their possible fear: it's not easy to be right, when you are a minority.

I don't base my religious beliefs on the statements of George Bush. I don't have any problem with his statement either. How exactly is it different from "God save the queen"? If you're in Britain, that's in your national anthem for God's sake.

We seem to do pretty well with it. Maybe the other pissant countries should give it a try.

I mean calling the country civilized...power is a different thing. Get rid or that **** soon, and also the death penalty. Then you will get my real respect. Until that it will be with a reservation.

I admit Hollywood is good though. Even Tom Cruise, and John Travolta. But try to get your business straight anyway. Please. Having Travolta and Cruise being those successes and them believing in "something that works" may be your greatest embarrassment . That goes to the core. Good, and that way off... I'm about to disintegrate...

This country was founded by people seeking religious freedom. They braved an ocean and tamed a wild continent in order to form a country based on Judeo-Christain philosophy. That process preferentially selected genes for self-reliance, hard work, inventiveness, and fighting for a greater cause. This has made us the only superpower on earth with the ability to influence not only militarily, but economically, technologically, and culturally. Because of this, we continue to attract the best, brightest, and hardest working people from the rest of the world, further enhancing our gene pool. Never underestimate the value in believing that God looks favorably on your undertaking. Other countries may not respect us, but many of them only exist because of our actions, and because we allow them to exist. They resent this, and so they rebel against it like whinny children.

As for the death penalty:

Primitive, learn from the Old World. And the US got your strength because you didn't get bombed in WW2. Nine Eleven is a farth in Sahara if you excuse me, can't believe I said that, drunk for the first time in maybe three months...

WE DIDN'T????

Pearl Harbor was a farth in Sahara compared to your resources

So which is it, we got our strength because we didn't get bombed, or we already had great resources?

I suppose D-day was a walk on the beach.

D-day is part of your mythology. In reality it wasn't a big deal. How about all the other beaches? Saving democracy is something though I don't want to take away from you. And remember this **** happened 60 years ago. What are you up to now?'

You take that back ******* or we'll shoot your ass up with shrapnel and leave you for dead like my family was. It's part of your mythology that it wasn't a big deal because you can't face the fact that we had to bale you out twice. Now? We're serving you as our de facto protectorates, that's what.

You only sent some volunteers, and nuked Hiroshima, you have so much to learn from us. The Soviet Union paradoxally did almost all the work and the dead, you only came there for the glory. I like it though, but please don't be too content. Hadn't Hitler been that stupid you might have left us there with fascism/communism. I would maybe have killed myself then. And I would have blamed...............(you)...............

If your family perished, I'm truly sorry for that.

You've got a problem with Hiroshima now too? Hiroshima arguably saved lives on both sides compared to what a full scale invasion of Japan would have cost against an enemy who refused to surrender even AFTER Hiroshima. If you're going to fight a war, you use every weapon you have to inflict the greatest loss of life and damage to the enemy you can in the shortest amount of time. And the Japanese citizens were the enemy. Every one of them was working for the cause, even children. Too bad for them. They should have been born under a better government. We didn't know how close Germany or Japan were to having a bomb, and they most certainly would have used it. Furthermore, Hiroshima and Nagasaki demonstrated the awesome power of nuclear weapons on a small scale in a way that PREVENTED their further use on an astronomically larger scale.

We have nothing to learn from you. We were formed in opposition to the antiquated ways of the old world. That has served us quite nicely, until recently when we elected a President who, rather than continuing to lead by example, is hell bent on turning the clock backwards and making us just another European style socialist state.

Now it's the first time you have a good president since Kennedy. FDR was the previous. Can't believe the parade of *******s you've had. I agree it's good a hydrogen bomb wasn't ever used, probably the Hiroshima/Nagasaki got us the warning. The power of the hydrogen bombs are that monstrous that no politician who gets a virtual demonstration will go on untouched.

And the death penalty, by the way, shows you are too immature. Killer state.

The Soviet Union would have had a hell of a lot more dead were it not for D-day.


That's from your misguided point of view as a backwards European socialist. Obama is completely incompetent at every facet of his job. Even his own party is starting to back away from him. He's nothing but a politician that got elected based on rhetoric, and now he can't deliver.
He sure does sing nice though.


I'm not pro-death penalty. I just liked that song. I see almost no good argument for it as there are many incorrect verdicts, it is applied arbitrarily, and it cost the state a fortune in appeals. It may bring closure to a few victims, but in many cases it doesn't. It's actually too easy. But being afraid to kill scum who torture and kill children for sport would NOT be an argument against it. One argument for it is that someone might think twice before taking the life of a police officer after they have already committed some other crime that would get them life in prison anyway. Other than that, it doesn't serve as a deterrent the way it's currently implemented. Perhaps if they did it like back in the old days, where families would come out to see public hangings and make a picnic out of it, that would make more of an impression on the minds of young people for what happens if you break the law.

I'll try not to politard this up too much but what's good about Obama? Just curious to hear potentially good things about him because I can't think of any (imo he's a strong contender for worst president of all time, but I won't go into detail unless asked to since this isn't the politics forum). If he were a Republican, he'd be hated almost as much as George W (since he's doing everything exactly the same as George W would, except to more extreme lengths).

Also, Kennedy wasn't the greatest either. For starters, he helped put Nelson Mandela in prison. (And then of course later, Reagan put Mandela on the US' terrorist list where he remained until 2008. Shows you what the word "terrorist" means to the US gov't.)

For you, any president even trying to be good, is good. All conservatives are too inhumane. The demorcrats may have theirs flaws, but at least they try make the world a more human place. Your conservatives are almost like Nazis, probably because of religion. **** them. It's a shame they get impact. They are simply delaying positive development.

No, Obama is the Nazi. The current administration took a page out of Hitler's playbook. Germany was massively depressed both morally and economically after WWI. To advance the cause of National Socialism, Hitler chose a group on which he could blame all the problems - the Jews. Then he built a prospering economy by taking their wealth and possessions and redistributing them. With people doing better, they didn't think too much about where this wealth was coming from and whether or not it was right. After all, the Jews were prospering as successful businessmen while others suffered, so it was easy to get people to resent them. Obama's administration and democrats in general are doing the same thing, except instead of Jews, they blame all the problems on the millionaires and billionaires. They're the reason people aren't doing well. Therefore, we should take their wealth and redistribute it. Then when the people are happy, they can retain power and all willl hail their Fuehrer. The problem with this plan is that you eventually run out of other people's money.