NationStates Jolt Archive

Now under normal circumstances I wouldnt do this. But I feel this guy has got to be joking. He has basicly made a claim that religious ideas are somehow "absurd". Now that in itself is not a problem, but he has refused to back it up. He just says that religious ideas are absurd without providing any kind of back up or logic to it. I would think thats flaming but am unsure. Here is the first post of the thread in question

http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8498947&postcount=1

I don't think so. He's as entitled to his opinion as you are to yours.

He's not insulting anyone in particular. If anything, it's flamebait, but since he is stating fact (you DO have to deny a lot of scientific research if you're going to be that serious about religion), it's not that serious. Obviously, because Fris let it through.

<--- Not a mod. Just offering my own opinion in extension to Fris's post.

I don't think so. He's as entitled to his opinion as you are to yours.

I think there is opinion and just insulting. Of course it is your right to hold an insulting opinion but you rearly should attempt to back it up with some kind of fact.

I think there is opinion and just insulting. Of course it is your right to hold an insulting opinion but you rearly should attempt to back it up with some kind of fact.

Well, I think Fris has already ruled this as opinion rather than flame... but I personally don't see how a 'religious' person could find THIS post any more 'insulting' or 'unsupported', than the threads people like me see every day, telling me that 'because I am an Atheist, it means I have no morals', or that 'because I don't believe in 'god' A, B or C, I am going to burn in hell'.

And, none of those threads ever has any evidence, either...

I personally don't see how a 'religious' person could find THIS post any more 'insulting' or 'unsupported', than the threads people like me see every day, telling me that 'because I am an Atheist, it means I have no morals', or that 'because I don't believe in 'god' A, B or C, I am going to burn in hell'.

And, none of those threads ever has any evidence, either...

Well for one thing, he has stated without doubt that religion is absurd. I think most religious posts make it clear that their ideas are the beliefs of that religion and they understand that being a religious idea there is no way to prove it objectively true. However he is basicly stating that its objectively true that religon is absurd, which is wrong.

Well for one thing, he has stated without doubt that religion is absurd. I think most religious posts make it clear that their ideas are the beliefs of that religion and they understand that being a religious idea there is no way to prove it objectively true. However he is basicly stating that its objectively true that religon is absurd, which is wrong.

If you are indeed strong in your religious beliefs, then a random internet post cannot possibly shake you to your core. The man thinks religion is absurd. Being an atheist is no more insulting to followers of a theology than being a religious person is to an atheist. To you, he is wrong, just as to him, you are. To him, there may be no doubt, but to me, it seems that you're the one "doubting."

If you're strong enough in your beliefs, whatever they may be, then you could fight back or chose to ignore him. Whining about how he's saying there's no god to the moderators only makes you (and the rest of you) seem more foolish and more insecure in what you claim you believe in.

I think there is opinion and just insulting. Of course it is your right to hold an insulting opinion but you rearly should attempt to back it up with some kind of fact.

Prove to me, with some kind of fact, that god does exist. What's that? You can't? Exactly. None of these debates rely on fact, and if fact exists within the debate, it's not coming from the religious side. Instead of fact, they rely on faith, something that is supposed to override what you can touch, see, and smell. The faith vs. fact argument is neverending because there cannot be any clear cut winner. Just as you can't prove to me god exists, I nor anyone else cannot prove to you that he does not.

Now that in itself is not a problem, but he has refused to back it up. He just says that religious ideas are absurd without providing any kind of back up or logic to it.

If failing to logically back up a debate point was illegal you'd find out about it very quickly. It's not.