Argue over the superior religion / belief

[Ben Grapevine]

In the most recent debate, Romney brought up his religious views, trying to use them as a form of credibility.  It is accountable for and otherwise acceptable to protest against this statement.
You obviously don't have a clue as to what atheism is.  This has nothing to do with any scientific theory.  Are you really so far in denial that you have to make up portions of an argument to try and defend yourself?

What are you even talking about?

[Ad Bot]

[Lalam24]

What are you even talking about?

Again, can you learn how to adapt to modern day reading comprehention skills?  At least, before trying to present an argument?

[Ben Grapevine]

Again, can you learn how to adapt to modern day reading comprehention skills?  At least, before trying to present an argument?

So how do you, the intolerant, almighty, critical atheist think the universe was created?

[Narkro555]

Ordinarily, when things sound silly and have no proof, people consider it imaginary. Why is religion exempt from this?

Also, 'atheists doesn't know therefore my religion is the truth' is a flawed argument.

[Lalam24]

So how do you, the intolerant, almighty, critical atheist think the universe was created?

..What the forget does this have to do with the initial argument?  I've never once described scientific theory to argue against your religion, I've only used mathematical fact.  Why do you keep trying to avoid the argument at hand?

[Ben Grapevine]

..What the forget does this have to do with the initial argument?  I've never once described scientific theory to argue against your religion, I've only used mathematical fact.  Why do you keep trying to avoid the argument at hand?

Why are you avoiding my question?  I'm asking what you believe in to prove a point here.

[Lalam24]

Why are you avoiding my question?  I'm asking what you believe in to prove a point here.

How could you possibly prove a point by asking me a question I'm unaware of?  We do not know how the universe started, it's physically impossible to prove any past occurance.  The theory of the big bang is bleak and reasonable, but I would never use it as an argument.  So, wait, I have to immediately answer all irrelevant questions before you can read through my argument and make the attempt to argue against it?  Your priorities are skewed, pal.

Your religion contradicts its text.  According to the most absolute form of proof in the universe (mathematics), it's incorrect.  If you're simply ignoring it because you've realised that trying to refute fact is silly, then bravo.  But, please, give us your opinion on it before trying to jump towards another, completely irrelevant argument.

[Ben Grapevine]

How could you possibly prove a point by asking me a question I'm unaware of?  We do not know how the universe started, it's physically impossible to prove any past occurance.  The theory of the big bang is bleak and reasonable, but I would never use it as an argument.  So, wait, I have to immediately answer all irrelevant questions before you can read through my argument and make the attempt to argue against it?  Your priorities are skewed, pal.

thanks, pal

[Lalam24]

thanks, pal

Are you genuinely mentally handicapped?

Your religion contradicts its text.  According to the most absolute form of proof in the universe (mathematics), it's incorrect.  If you're simply ignoring it because you've realised that trying to refute fact is silly, then bravo.  But, please, give us your opinion on it before trying to jump towards another, completely irrelevant argument.

[Nymethus]

There most certainly is.  Do I have to say it again?  Catholicism doesn't contain any proof, therefore implying it is untrue.  However, once again, going beyond reason, let's say they didn't need proof.  The original testament displays depictions of knowledge which were widely accepted at the time (sun revolving around the earth, etc).  We later found out this wasn't true, and, in turn, the book was changed (new testament) to adapt to modern day HUMAN knowledge.  If God created us and the universe, wouldn't he have known about the universe before his creations did?  This is one of many examples of the book and its presenters contradicting their original viewpoints.

There's still no proof for or against anything. No proof doesn't prove anything.

Ordinarily, when things sound silly and have no proof, people consider it imaginary. Why is religion exempt from this?

I don't know if you've noticed, but... it's kind of popular... not many people know this but dude I'm telling you there's like at least a thousand people who believe in it! Can you imagine?

[Gojira]

What the hell guys
Stop writing huge walls of text over religion
Besides
Is it really so loving important that you prove your own religious views as true (which I'm assuming some experts have tried to do and failed) that you ignore the original purpose of this thread?
You derailed it, crashed it through the side of a mountain, threw it into a river, sailed it to the ocean, bombed it, and crashed it into an undersea orphanage.
God damn.

[Ben Grapevine]

Are you genuinely mentally handicapped?

Your religion contradicts its text.  According to the most absolute form of proof in the universe (mathematics), it's incorrect.  If you're simply ignoring it because you've realised that trying to refute fact is silly, then bravo.  But, please, give us your opinion on it before trying to jump towards another, completely irrelevant argument.

I accept your applause

[Lalam24]

There's still no proof for or against anything. No proof doesn't prove anything.
I don't know if you've noticed, but... it's kind of popular... not many people know this but dude I'm telling you there's like at least a thousand people who believe in it! Can you imagine?

Again, could you read further into the statement before posting?  The lack of proof is the definition of an impossibility, actually.  However, it's contestable and otherwise dynamic impossibility.  What I stated further is absolute impossibility, and cannot be refuted.

I accept your applause

Do you enjoy living in denial?

[Ben Grapevine]

Again, could you read further into the statement before posting?  The lack of proof is the definition of an impossibility, actually.  However, it's contestable and otherwise dynamic impossibility.  What I stated further is absolute impossibility, and cannot be refuted.
Do you enjoy living in denial?

I enjoy lots of things :)

[Big Brother]

OP is dumb for including extremely stupid people to vote for in the poll








like Mitt Romney