God exists because the seasons happen in the same order each year

[Nearly Sane]

Oh ffs


http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15483253.Kevin_McKenna__It_is_time_to_stand_up_to_those_who_wish_to_criminalise_faith/?ref=twtrec

[Shaker]

That's a whole lot of idiot to put on display.

[floo]

How sad and delusional that guy appears to be.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I'm getting hints of no true scotsman as in no secular humanist or fellow traveller could ever be beastly to the religious.

While this is believed and only non believers feelings and self perception counts British non theism will lack the necessary reflection.

I think that might qualify as self delusion.

[ProfessorDavey]

Oh ffs


http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15483253.Kevin_McKenna__It_is_time_to_stand_up_to_those_who_wish_to_criminalise_faith/?ref=twtrec

Clearly the section on the seasons demonstrates rank idiocy.

But there is a massive lack of self awareness and a huge dollop of hypocrisy in the whole article, the tenor of which is that society has no truck with orthodox catholic views on a range of matters and doesn't allow those views to be heard. Now I actually disagree that to be the case - quote the reverse - society and government bend over backwards to ensure that the views of religious leaders etc are front and centre on any ethical debate.

But what about the organisation this guy represents - the Roman Catholic Church - do they ensure that views from within their organisation which might not accord with the orthodox are heard and respected. Of course not. Survey after survey shows that the majority of rank and file catholics support abortion, contraception, think that same sex relationships are fine etc etc. Does the church welcome their view, provide a forum for those views to be aired and considered. Not at all - those views are simply silenced through organisational structures that refuse to hear them.

[ippy]

I'm getting hints of no true scotsman as in no secular humanist or fellow traveller could ever be beastly to the religious.

While this is believed and only non believers feelings and self perception counts British non theism will lack the necessary reflection.

I think that might qualify as self delusion.

Couldn't help noticing Vlad, your ignorance of what secularism is all about is showing yet again and it looks as though you have a very limited  understanding of humanism too, they, secularism/humanism, mostly have a differing view to yourself about superstitious beliefs, neither of them are anti theist; anti privileges for theism/theists, well most of us, yes.   

The R C's are very anti secular mainly because in the end where secularist principles are applied it will mostly effect their funding, other stuff as well, but the potential loss of funding is their main worry and I think they find it difficult to take in the very idea of having to live on a level playing field with the rest of us ordinary mortals.

Because of the above the R C church always misrepresents secularism with every chance it gets and it looks like you amongst the many have been taken in hook line and sinker with this anti secular propaganda of theirs.

Again Vlad try to find out what it is secularism actually stands for instead of showing your ignorance in this area, you're not that au fait with humanism either Vlad.

ippy

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Couldn't help noticing Vlad, your ignorance of what secularism is all about is showing yet again and it looks as though you have a very limited  understanding of humanism too, they, secularism/humanism, mostly have a differing view to yourself about superstitious beliefs, neither of them are anti theist; anti privileges for theism/theists, well most of us, yes.   

The R C's are very anti secular mainly because in the end where secularist principles are applied it will mostly effect their funding, other stuff as well, but the potential loss of funding is their main worry and I think they find it difficult to take in the very idea of having to live on a level playing field with the rest of us ordinary mortals.

Because of the above the R C church always misrepresents secularism with every chance it gets and it looks like you amongst the many have been taken in hook line and sinker with this anti secular propaganda of theirs.

Again Vlad try to find out what it is secularism actually stands for instead of showing your ignorance in this area, you're not that au fait with humanism either Vlad.

ippy

I don't think I've mentioned the word ''secularist'' once in this thread. Can you show me where I used the word ''secularist''?

[Shaker]

Actually Vlad your first reply here seemed to be responding to some entirely different thread altogether.

[Rhiannon]

Actually if god really did order the seasons you think he'd mix it up a bit to keep it fresh, wouldn't you?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Actually if god really did order the seasons you think he'd mix it up a bit to keep it fresh, wouldn't you?

If the state of being mixed up is such a commodity God has more than made up for it in his providence of many of the people around here......No names , no packdrill.

[floo]

If the state of being mixed up is such a commodity God has more than made up for it in his providence of many of the people around here......No names , no packdrill.

The belief in god you mean!

[Walt Zingmatilder]

The belief in god you mean!

Pfwar, you wish.

[ippy]

I'm getting hints of no true scotsman as in no secular humanist or fellow traveller could ever be beastly to the religious.

While this is believed and only non believers feelings and self perception counts British non theism will lack the necessary reflection.

I think that might qualify as self delusion.

I'm getting hints of no true scotsman as in no secular humanist or fellow traveller could ever be beastly to the religious.


ippy

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I'm getting hints of no true scotsman as in no secular humanist or fellow traveller could ever be beastly to the religious.


ippy

''secularist'' Ippy, not secular which in any case is attached to the word humanist to make Secular Humanist and they are not in favour of religion.

I am a secularist Ippy in at least the sense that a vicar should be able to take off his dog collar and have space not to have to carry out his ministry as opposed to a secularism which would have religion removed from the public forum.

[floo]

Pfwar, you wish.

And where is your verifiable evidence god exists?

[ippy]

''secularist'' Ippy, not secular which in any case is attached to the word humanist to make Secular Humanist and they are not in favour of religion.

I am a secularist Ippy in at least the sense that a vicar should be able to take off his dog collar and have space not to have to carry out his ministry as opposed to a secularism which would have religion removed from the public forum.

Like I've said Vlad.

ippy

[Walt Zingmatilder]

And where is your verifiable evidence god exists?

Floo. This has been gone over numerous times. If that which exists must be verifiable then you have a distinct definition of existence and how it is verified and that is your position. That position is in no way a 'default' position. In other words you have to have evidence for your definition of existence and verification.

That means we are both in the process of trying to assemble some. NPF as espoused by people like Gordon is a misunderstanding based on an incorrect assumption of the default position.

Any talk of methodology is not relevant since methodology does not establish that your definition of what exists is ''the default''.

[floo]

Floo. This has been gone over numerous times. If that which exists must be verifiable then you have a distinct definition of existence and how it is verified and that is your position. That position is in no way a 'default' position. In other words you have to have evidence for your definition of existence and verification.

That means we are both in the process of trying to assemble some. NPF as espoused by people like Gordon is a misunderstanding based on an incorrect assumption of the default position.

Any talk of methodology is not relevant since methodology does not establish that your definition of what exists is ''the default''.

Gobbledegook. All you are trying to say is that you want to believe it to be true, but cannot substantiate your belief.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Gobbledegook. All you are trying to say is that you want to believe it to be true, but cannot substantiate your belief.

You are pretending to have the default position Floo and denying you are doing that.
Of course I believe it to be true because it is my experience and you do not believe it to be true because you prefer another position that also cannot be substantiated.

[Gordon]

That means we are both in the process of trying to assemble some. NPF as espoused by people like Gordon is a misunderstanding based on an incorrect assumption of the default position.

Nope - the NPF is a fallacy whereby a reasoning error is committed: you gave us a textbook example just recently.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Nope - the NPF is a fallacy whereby a reasoning error is committed: you gave us a textbook example just recently.

No you thought I had but I never said that God exists because he can be disproved.

I think your tenure as ''Fallacyfinder general'' is looking increasingly tenuous.

[Gordon]

No you thought I had but I never said that God exists because he can be disproved.

I think your tenure as Falacyfinder general is looking increasingly tenuous.

I think you need to re-read what you post.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I think you need to re-read what you post.

whoops.

I'll say that again.
You thought I had committed the NPF but I never said God must exist because he cannot be disproved.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad the Mendacious,

...as opposed to a secularism which would have religion removed from the public forum.

Just out of interest, why have you just told that lie again?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Vlad the Mendacious,

Just out of interest, why have you just told that lie again?

Are you saying nobody has desired that or worked for it and that it never has been policy anywhere? Do you not wish for the eventual extinction of religion?