What Is Your Evidence?

[jcribb16]

You inserted yourself in a post to someone else that was a clarification to that person about a comment made to you. Now, if you wish to debate that, that's one thing ...

How can I 'insert myself' into a post where you mentioned me by 'nym, (trolled me)?  I have no desire to debate your trolling since you'd deny doing it despite direct evidence of it.  Neither am I answering 'for' "alaric" since he is capable of doing so for himself.  My response to your hypocrisy was to point it out in relation to your general hypocrisy regarding the context of this thread.  You have no substantive evidence to support your speciously-claimed religious beliefs and that's pretty much the end of the debate you didn't participate in.

You are getting nowhere except for going in circles.  No one's trolling anyone.  It's over and done with. 

[jcribb16]

I have had a angel appear one night while I was in the church.  It was amazing.

That sounds neat!  What happened?  (That is, if you don't mind sharing.)  I can totally understand if you don't want to. 

[alaric99x]

It's not over and done with until people like you stop trying to impose your beliefs on the rest of us.  "Freedom of religion" doesn't fully exist in the US when people like you are repeatedly trying to convert me to your own personal religion.  Keep your god to yourself and your own personal mythological delusions.

[ptfunds]

I don't have any particular evidence, but I can tell you I do feel guided in my life.  It's difficult when life seems to have gotten a bit touch and there are numerous challenges to deal with, I always feel guided and have faith I'll get through.  We all have pain thresholds. I appreciate your topic as it gave me an opportunity to share my thoughts on the subject and reinforce my faith that everything always turns out.  -

[falcon9]

I don't have any particular evidence, but I can tell you I do feel guided in my life.  ... and reinforce my faith that everything always turns out.  -

As "belief" and "faith" do not consitute evidence, this is merely an instance of randomly attributing a religious cause to some vague effect.

“You can not convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it is based on a deep-seated need to believe.”
-– Carl Sagan

[darrell1960]

went through cancer in my 20s and transplant in my 40s - miracles happen all the time

[Falconer02]

Falconer2 you are absolutely correct.  I have mistakenly posted this subject on the wrong discussion board.  So I am moving it.

Cool. Thanks. Though it looks like this thread will stay alive here. Ah well!

I'm not religious but I say that our thoughts are our own and as long as they don't hurt others why not believe what you want. If I believe I am as hot as a supermodel, or god exists or people who bullied me in the past are now getting some kind of justice through karma.. and it makes me feel better each day to think that. What is the problem. Even if I am wrong it might make me feel better to believe in something that isn't true. Kinda the same effect as a placebo sugar pill. If your placebo worked because you believe it worked would you keep taking it. of course. I say let people deal with life in the way they want to that makes them feel better.

I have no problem with placebo effects if they're on an individual level. But when 1 person says it works when there's no viable evidence of it actually working, things can get extremely dangerous. Examples being homoeopathic medicine to faith healers. People who support and praise such things are a major problem with the world.

Oh well, the Star Wars ranger, predictable that you would show up with your repetitive "hater" comment.  It's not hatred, that's actually an insulting assumption you have about people who disagree with you, but the term is very appropriate in expressing your degree of religious fanaticism.  In earlier centuries you would have burned people like me at the stake, do you wish you still had the power to do that?

I think you should just learn to grab the popcorn and smile at his 8-yr-old antics.

[jcribb16]

It's not over and done with until people like you stop trying to impose your beliefs on the rest of us.  "Freedom of religion" doesn't fully exist in the US when people like you are repeatedly trying to convert me to your own personal religion.  Keep your god to yourself and your own personal mythological delusions.

I'm not trying to impose my beliefs on anyone.  "Freedom of religion" does exist, just as "freedom of no religion" does.  I'm not repeatedly trying to convert you - I don't even speak to you much.  And since this is an open forum, I can share things, just as you can, whether it's of God or not God.  You seem to enjoy "bossing" others and telling others what they should do and shouldn't do, yet you keep right on telling others to keep their "god" to themselves.  You are pushing your anti-god agenda on others in here, and with an attitude of intolerance, and with calling names.  I sure haven't called you any names through this, yet you have felt the need to do so to me.  Very adult of you (not.)  Also, Debate and Discuss, even says "Enter at your own risk."  If you come in, not to debate, but to be mean and bossy to others instead, you aren't going to get very far with that. 

[Abrupt]

It's not over and done with until people like you stop trying to impose your beliefs on the rest of us.  "Freedom of religion" doesn't fully exist in the US when people like you are repeatedly trying to convert me to your own personal religion.  Keep your god to yourself and your own personal mythological delusions.

I'm not trying to impose my beliefs on anyone.  "Freedom of religion" does exist, just as "freedom of no religion" does.  I'm not repeatedly trying to convert you - I don't even speak to you much.  And since this is an open forum, I can share things, just as you can, whether it's of God or not God.  You seem to enjoy "bossing" others and telling others what they should do and shouldn't do, yet you keep right on telling others to keep their "god" to themselves.  You are pushing your anti-god agenda on others in here, and with an attitude of intolerance, and with calling names.  I sure haven't called you any names through this, yet you have felt the need to do so to me.  Very adult of you (not.)  Also, Debate and Discuss, even says "Enter at your own risk."  If you come in, not to debate, but to be mean and bossy to others instead, you aren't going to get very far with that. 

It seems insane to me at the lengths that the anti-religious will pursue religions discussions and then complain about them containing religious topics.  They claim discrimination if they can find any people discussing religion and they propose that the only way for them to not be discriminated against is to ban with force any religious topics or material.  They would go to church and complain about it mentioning God.  You hear certain ones on these forums always crying about a theocracy in America where there is no evidence of any such thing and yet when the positions of an Atheistic dictatorship and Atheistic Totalitarianism are displayed frequently they are silent.

[falcon9]

It seems insane to me at the lengths that the anti-religious will pursue religions discussions and then complain about them containing religious topics.

You are not alone in your inability to comprehend that religious adherents such yourself are starting threads/posts about their religious beliefs which are replied to by either those who agree or disagree with those initial posts.  This means that such initial religious proselytiation is being opposed, not that "anti-religious" posts are being initiating by others.  Such 'complaints' about replies which oppose such proselytization are therefore post hoc attempts to censor opposition to religious blind faith.

They claim discrimination if they can find any people discussing religion and they propose that the only way for them to not be discriminated against is to ban with force any religious topics or material. 

That's a false accusation, there is no evidence of any propositions to "ban with force any religious topics or material" on FC.  You are a liar since there is no evidence to support your lie.  In fact, what has been posted is that both religious adherents and those who oppose such specious propaganda are able to post such with FC guidelines & the TOS.

“Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel.”
-– Ambrose Bierce

[Abrupt]

It seems insane to me at the lengths that the anti-religious will pursue religions discussions and then complain about them containing religious topics.

You are not alone in your inability to comprehend that religious adherents such yourself are starting threads/posts about their religious beliefs which are replied to by either those who agree or disagree with those initial posts.  This means that such initial religious proselytiation is being opposed, not that "anti-religious" posts are being initiating by others.  Such 'complaints' about replies which oppose such proselytization are therefore post hoc attempts to censor opposition to religious blind faith.

Show me where I have started a thread about religions beliefs?  To enter into a thread that is clearly religious in nature by its title and to then complain that you are offended by the subject contained within is not 'opposition' it is an active anti-religious pursuit.

You clearly display a dedication to pursue any topic regarding religion and to attempt to reply to every single post made.  I would suspect that you have the highest post count within religious subjects compared to the totals of every single other individual together on this site.  You are not displaying 'opposition', but instead a crusade to silence the voices of others through obfuscation and abusive behavior.  You have even cried repeatedly about certain things being offensive to you and yet you continue with your blind hatred.  The only person you might fool with this weak denial now is yourself as it is clearly obvious what is the case to the rest of us.

They claim discrimination if they can find any people discussing religion and they propose that the only way for them to not be discriminated against is to ban with force any religious topics or material. 

That's a false accusation, there is no evidence of any propositions to "ban with force any religious topics or material" on FC.  You are a liar since there is no evidence to support your lie.  In fact, what has been posted is that both religious adherents and those who oppose such specious propaganda are able to post such with FC guidelines & the TOS.

“Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel.”
-– Ambrose Bierce

As is typical of you, your vision is blinded and limited in scope (this is most likely due to your hate filled beliefs).  Your ability to comprehend is so juvenile that you cannot even distinguish obvious keyword separations in language.  How is it that you are so weak in understanding as to assume my thread was about FC when I clearly give indication on my closing sentence that shows a deviation to topics of these forums?  You are obviously oblivious to the events in the current media today and of the past few years.  You are seemingly unaware of the proposed ban by radical liberal mayors and anti-Christian organizations on a business known as "Chik-fil-a" simply because their owner is a Christian and holds to Christian values. 

[falcon9]

Show me where I have started a thread about religions beliefs? 

Acquire a reading comprehension ability; the posted reply didn't name any particular xtian proselytizer starting such threads/posts.

To enter into a thread that is clearly religious in nature by its title and to then complain that you are offended by the subject contained within is not 'opposition' it is an active anti-religious pursuit.

First, the 'offending' post, (xtian proselytizing), precedes posts opposing such propagandizing.  That means opposition doesn't occur pre-emptively but, is a response to the initial proselytizing.  Some xtians have repeatedly demonstrated an inability to perceive the accurate sequence of events in this regard.

You are not displaying 'opposition', but instead a crusade to silence the voices of others through obfuscation and abusive behavior. 

False.  I have not attempted to "silence" the xtian proselytizers by posting a dissenting viewpoint, (and in fact, have continually emphasized the 'freedom' of both the proselytizers and those opposing such to post).  Conversely, the repeated attempts by xtian fundies to "silence" opposition to their INITIAL proselytizing is evident in numerous archived posts.  If the fundie xtians were to stop proselytizing, what basis would others have to oppose it?

They claim discrimination if they can find any people discussing religion and they propose that the only way for them to not be discriminated against is to ban with force any religious topics or material. 

That's a false accusation, there is no evidence of any propositions to "ban with force any religious topics or material" on FC.  You are a liar since there is no evidence to support your lie.  In fact, what has been posted is that both religious adherents and those who oppose such specious propaganda are able to post such with FC guidelines & the TOS.

“Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel.”
-– Ambrose Bierce

[falcon9]

As is typical of you, your vision is blinded and limited in scope (this is most likely due to your hate filled beliefs).  Your ability to comprehend is so juvenile that you cannot even distinguish obvious keyword separations in language.  How is it that you are so weak in understanding ...

Your moronically-childish flaming has been stale for some time now.  Perhaps your blind-faith has affected your severely-curtailed ability to discern context.  The context of this thread's subject regarded evidence.  It then shifted away from this by xtian fundies unable to provide evidence to support their specious claims.  While you disingenuous fundies can shift the context in your weak efforts to obscure the continued lack of evidence for your religious claims, complaining when someone won't be diverted into your pecular contextual-shifts is petulently-idiotic.

... as to assume my thread was about FC when I clearly give indication on my closing sentence that shows a deviation to topics of these forums?

I don't give a fake supernatural entity's fart when you want to "deviate" from a context under discussion.  I find your irrationality, attempts to twist logic into some self-deluded sophist crap of your own device and garden-variety trolling to be droll.

You are obviously oblivious to the events in the current media today and of the past few years.  You are seemingly unaware of the proposed ban by radical liberal mayors and anti-Christian organizations on a business known as "Chik-fil-a" simply because their owner is a Christian and holds to Christian values. 

No, I don't eat at Chik-fil-A however, I am aware of when someone, (you, in this instance), falsely characterizes the situation.  The xtian fundie owner apparently has been using discriminatory hiring practices to screen-out non-xtians.

http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2007/0723/080.html

[jcribb16]

It's not over and done with until people like you stop trying to impose your beliefs on the rest of us.  "Freedom of religion" doesn't fully exist in the US when people like you are repeatedly trying to convert me to your own personal religion.  Keep your god to yourself and your own personal mythological delusions.

I'm not trying to impose my beliefs on anyone.  "Freedom of religion" does exist, just as "freedom of no religion" does.  I'm not repeatedly trying to convert you - I don't even speak to you much.  And since this is an open forum, I can share things, just as you can, whether it's of God or not God.  You seem to enjoy "bossing" others and telling others what they should do and shouldn't do, yet you keep right on telling others to keep their "god" to themselves.  You are pushing your anti-god agenda on others in here, and with an attitude of intolerance, and with calling names.  I sure haven't called you any names through this, yet you have felt the need to do so to me.  Very adult of you (not.)  Also, Debate and Discuss, even says "Enter at your own risk."  If you come in, not to debate, but to be mean and bossy to others instead, you aren't going to get very far with that. 

It seems insane to me at the lengths that the anti-religious will pursue religions discussions and then complain about them containing religious topics.  They claim discrimination if they can find any people discussing religion and they propose that the only way for them to not be discriminated against is to ban with force any religious topics or material.  They would go to church and complain about it mentioning God.  You hear certain ones on these forums always crying about a theocracy in America where there is no evidence of any such thing and yet when the positions of an Atheistic dictatorship and Atheistic Totalitarianism are displayed frequently they are silent.

I see what you are saying.  The blame is put on the Christians for "INITIALLY" starting a religious post.  It's not against the forum rules to begin a religious post, especially for discussing, sharing, and within D&D, debating.  What concerns me is the "blame" that is being placed on the Christians, which gives a couple the "RIGHT" to complain about even the "INITIAL" starting of the thread.  That is a lame excuse when all see and know it is the under the carpet goal of trying to keep the Christians from exercising their freedom of religion, speech, and expression.  I have no issues when challenges are made and discussion/debates take place, including points of reason, etc.  The issue I have is when there are hateful remarks, disrespect, and total intolerance of whatever comments are being made.  That is really pushing the boundary line of the Golden Rule of the forum.  It affects the attitude and tone of the whole topic of the thread then, and this is very unfair.

[falcon9]

The blame is put on the Christians for "INITIALLY" starting a religious post.

Not the "blame" per se but, the instigating responsibility is placed on the religious adherents responsible for such posts. 

It's not against the forum rules to begin a religious post, especially for discussing, sharing, and within D&D, debating.

True and neither is it against forum posting rules/guidelines to debate, refute or oppose such initial religious proselytizing posts. 

What concerns me is the "blame" that is being placed on the Christians, which gives a couple the "RIGHT" to complain about even the "INITIAL" starting of the thread. 

Since you're the one characterizing the responsibility for instigating contentious religious propaganda with an inherently biased adjective, ("blame"), as a way to dodge that responsibility, that ought to concern others who hold the same specious religious beliefs.

That is a lame excuse when all see and know it is the under the carpet goal of trying to keep the Christians from exercising their freedom of religion, speech, and expression. 

No one except for some xtian fundies is calling challenges/opposition/refutations to their unsupported religious claims "trying to keep the Christians from exercising their freedom of religion, speech, and expression".  This strawman accusation is specious and blatantly false.  Since another one of you has made such a claim, it is your responsibility to support such a claim with evidential facts ... unless, of course, you're dodging that responsibility too, (as usual).

I have no issues when challenges are made and discussion/debates take place, including points of reason, etc.

On the contrary, numerous message IDs showing the exact opposite of your assertions above could be produced as evidence disputing/disproving your assertions.
 

The issue I have is when there are hateful remarks, disrespect, and total intolerance of whatever comments are being made.  That is really pushing the boundary line of the Golden Rule of the forum.  It affects the attitude and tone of the whole topic of the thread then, and this is very unfair.

Since any valid objection using lines of reasoning, logical challenges which the xtian claimants have repeatedly failed to meet are someone considered to be "hateful remarks, disrespect, and total intolerance of whatever[religious proselytizing]comments are being made", your objection is specious.  Apparently, you want to such opposition to consist of some vaguely politically-correct nice way of objecting to blind faith-based religious superstitions.  Let's see ... are such beliefs blind faith-based?  Yep, can't really sugar-coat that.  Do such consist of religious superstitions, sans evidence?  Yep, can't varnish that one over with political correctness either. 

In point of fact, the archives hold numerous examples of a few xtian fundies attempting to censor opposition to their religious superstition posts by characterizing them as "hateful remarks, disrespect, and total intolerance of whatever[religious proselytizing]comments are being made" and in violation of the "Golden Rule" in a post hoc manner, (e.g., the censorship attempts on opposition are made after the initial Golden Rule-violating posts).