Discussion: com_dotnet
Afficher un message
Vieux 19/09/2007, 12h17   #192
The Natural Philosopher
Aucun Avatar
 
Messages: n/a
Hébergeur:
Par défaut Re: OT - Oh, so OT.

Jerry Stuckle wrote:

> So you profess a belief in no god. A disbelief is also a belief.


Only a fundamentalist can say that.

And it isn't true.

You really don't understand anything abut faith and belief, do you?

It is not a disbelief. It is simply absence of belief.

Having faith in nothing, is not the same as not having faith in anything.

YOU are saying that $GOD=NULL; is a statement in *my program*.

I am telling you that there is no $GOD variable to be found anywhere in it.

Which surprises you, because you assumed that it came with the whole
language. I am telling you it doesn't.


>
>> I also profess no belief in leprechauns. Does that make me some kind
>> of religious person?
>>

>
> Leprechauns are not gods.
>


How do you know that?

>> In fact there are thousands of things I do not believe, up to and
>> including that GW Bush is the reincarnation of Immelda Markos.
>>
>> Like my non belief in god, the are simply not worth mentioning.
>>
>> What religious people do not like at all, is that to an atheist, the
>> issue of whether god exists or not is simply irrelevant. Uninteresting
>> in the highest degree. Its useless to believe or disbelieve. It has
>> little objective effect either way.
>>
>>

>
> I really don't care one way or the other what you think. Your religious
> views are your own. Just don't infringe on my right to believe as I
> choose.
>


I don't have any religious views, Jerry. That is the whole point.
I live a life in which religion *of my own* simply DOES NOT FEATURE.

Days and weeks go by without me even thinking abut religion. And dare I
say it, its the better for it.



>>> And you have a belief in the lack of a god.
>>>

>>
>> No, simply no belief in its existence. And no need to have or not have
>> the belief.

>
> Same idea, different words.
>


Not at all.

An act of disbelief is an act.

Simply not believing in the first place is not an act. Its the absence
of an act.



>

  Réponse avec citation
 
Page generated in 0,05465 seconds with 9 queries