Why do people not believe in God?

Because your god does not exist.
that is a reason
...and because there are better gods. like Jupiter!

macumazahn wrote:

<quoted text>Which part of "retired" do you not understand?
And Nymph doesn't share confidences with anyone.

I know exactly what "retired" means, fool. Do you want me to explain it to you? Do you know what "confidences" means? You're the first one to mention it.

Thinking wrote:

"RESP0NSE."
<quoted text>

It was stupid of you to say that.

Why?

RESP0NSE wrote:

<quoted text>It was stupid of you to say that.

Amateur Philosopher wrote:

<quoted text>
I know what you mean, that bastard never makes sense or appears to know what he's talking about.
I mean, after all, the guy claimed that most religious folks suffer from the Stockholm Syndrome, an affliction usually conferred only on those who've suffered from traumatic instances of abduction and imprisonment.
What a crazy weirdo! That sort of hyperbole and broad, sweeping generalization that completely ignores differences among groups of people, clearly ignores the plethora of examples of group member's whose behavior could never plausibly be construed as conforming to the description of the Stockholm Syndrome, it just has no place in rational discussion and prevents clear, meaningful dialogue from taking place.
And when you confront and criticize the man for advancing what is undeniably an absurd proposition, he dodges and deflects by employing personal attacks.
I'm with you, Bob, this guy is full of nonsense.

I hope you realize that Bob is actually agreeing with Water Nympho's derogatory statement about you.

Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:

<quoted text>
Yes, he is a stalker. That much is evident.

I didn't track you down. You gave it away yourself.

What's this gang P0NSE keeps talking about?
I know you know Mac, but I don't see nor seek any gang.

water_nymph wrote:

<quoted text>You said I tracked someone down. When I tell you I don't know someone named Patty and haven't tracked anyone down, you now say I'm guilty by association. What association would that be? I don't even know anyone that I talk to that posts to a Patty.
You were incorrect and can't admit it.
Your opinion of me is none of my business.

Genie2 wrote:

Because your god does not exist.
that is a reason
...and because there are better gods. like Jupiter!

I rather like the sun myself.

Without a doubt, the sun literally gives all life on earth it's daily dose of enriching energy, without which, life as we know it would not exist.

There is no need to pray to the sun, either-- it has no massive, bloated ego that needs soothing with "hosannas".

And the sun does not punish... anyone... well, apart from the one thing:

If you look at it directly too long, you actually >>do<< go blind.

And if you bathe in it's rays for extended period, and you've too pale of skin, you'll get burned.

But the sun is not capricious, and does not do these things out of spite, or malice (unlike the desert gods like YAWEAH)-- no the sun has to do it's job of delivering the daily quota of life-giving energy.

And foolish humans to fail to take that into account have only themselves to blame-- that level of energy delivery has consequences if you get too much of it at once.

But since the sun has no ego? It won't grant your wishes either (prayers).

If you need help? The sun is what it is, and you'll just have to figure out how to help yourself.

Or not-- the sun does not care either way-- it will continue to deliver it's life-giving flow of energy regardless of your behavior.

Indeed, the sun shines on everyone with equal abandon, regardless of your past behaviors.

It's an equal-opportunity shiner of energy, the sun is.

I say we nominate the SUN as our "god" of choice!

We can write songs about it's life-giving energy.
We can tell stories about how the sun does not discriminate.
We can dedicate special days---

--wait--

--- didn't we already do that?

Oh yeah! It's called "Sunday".

Silly me.

Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:

<quoted text>
I rather like the sun myself.
Without a doubt, the sun literally gives all life on earth it's daily dose of enriching energy, without which, life as we know it would not exist.
There is no need to pray to the sun, either-- it has no massive, bloated ego that needs soothing with "hosannas".
And the sun does not punish... anyone... well, apart from the one thing:
If you look at it directly too long, you actually >>do<< go blind.
And if you bathe in it's rays for extended period, and you've too pale of skin, you'll get burned.
But the sun is not capricious, and does not do these things out of spite, or malice (unlike the desert gods like YAWEAH)-- no the sun has to do it's job of delivering the daily quota of life-giving energy.
And foolish humans to fail to take that into account have only themselves to blame-- that level of energy delivery has consequences if you get too much of it at once.
But since the sun has no ego? It won't grant your wishes either (prayers).
If you need help? The sun is what it is, and you'll just have to figure out how to help yourself.
Or not-- the sun does not care either way-- it will continue to deliver it's life-giving flow of energy regardless of your behavior.
Indeed, the sun shines on everyone with equal abandon, regardless of your past behaviors.
It's an equal-opportunity shiner of energy, the sun is.
I say we nominate the SUN as our "god" of choice!
We can write songs about it's life-giving energy.
We can tell stories about how the sun does not discriminate.
We can dedicate special days---
--wait--
--- didn't we already do that?
Oh yeah! It's called "Sunday".
Silly me.

How would you like for your mom to get a copy of all your posts?

Another empty threat from another empty christard.

RESP0NSE wrote:

<quoted text>How would you like for your mom to get a copy of all your posts?

Thinking wrote:

Another empty threat from another empty christard.
<quoted text>

Indeed.

Thinking wrote:

Another empty threat from another empty christard.
<quoted text>

And she'd find this one funny and clever:

"http://www.topix.com/forum/topstories/T8BEMVP... ;

RESP0NSE wrote:

<quoted text>I don't know if I can admit it if I am wrong or not. I'll let you know if it ever happens.
Ever heard of Yellow Dog?
"None of your business"? There's a hell of a lot on here that is none of your business. Say something else stupid.

In other words, you know you were wrong but can't admit it out of ego.

Anything that is posted in public is _everyone's_ business, silly.

Amateur Philosopher wrote:

<quoted text>
Since you seem to prefer trivial quarrels over substantive, informed, civil discussions on interesting topics, I'll entertain you just a little while longer, but not much, you're tiring me out.
You have no real interest in making an honest effort to understand what someone intends to say or mean, but rather willfully misinterpret them for the purpose of quibbling over trite, completely meaningless discrepancies. I'll spell it out. I meant to say that it's not my job to scold and attack you at a very personal level. Some of my comments can certainly be viewed as personal and negative, as well as attacks on your ability to carry on rational discussion, but I always tie my comments back to something specific you've said or done. I don't simply state X or Y about your character. I'm more interested in how your comments and behavior towards others reflect on you, and more specifically only because I'd like some of these unfortunate topix members to on occasion be exposed to cogent argumentation and give a clear demonstration why some of these topix members ought not be taken seriously.

I have no interest in reading self-congratulatory, bloviating BS.

Don't worry about how what I do reflects on me. Worry about how what you do reflects on you.

Amateur Philosopher wrote:

<quoted text>
I know what you mean, that bastard never makes sense or appears to know what he's talking about.
I mean, after all, the guy claimed that most religious folks suffer from the Stockholm Syndrome, an affliction usually conferred only on those who've suffered from traumatic instances of abduction and imprisonment.
What a crazy weirdo! That sort of hyperbole and broad, sweeping generalization that completely ignores differences among groups of people, clearly ignores the plethora of examples of group member's whose behavior could never plausibly be construed as conforming to the description of the Stockholm Syndrome, it just has no place in rational discussion and prevents clear, meaningful dialogue from taking place.
And when you confront and criticize the man for advancing what is undeniably an absurd proposition, he dodges and deflects by employing personal attacks.
I'm with you, Bob, this guy is full of nonsense.

Can't take your own advice, eh?

Thinking wrote:

What's this gang P0NSE keeps talking about?
I know you know Mac, but I don't see nor seek any gang.
<quoted text>

I know several people from topix in real life. We do not constitute a 'gang'. Now, as for Mac and I, we might be considered a gang in the same way that Hepburn and Tracy were a gang, but otherwise (?) I don't see it.

RESP0NSE wrote:

<quoted text>How would you like for your mom to get a copy of all your posts?

I don't know about Bob's Mom, but mine (if she were living) would love them and high 5 me. She believed in bluntly getting to the point instead of dancing around it.

water_nymph wrote:

<quoted text>I know several people from topix in real life. We do not constitute a 'gang'. Now, as for Mac and I, we might be considered a gang in the same way that Hepburn and Tracy were a gang, but otherwise (?) I don't see it.

Hepburn and Tracy were lovers.

good wife wrote:

<quoted text>Hepburn and Tracy were lovers.

And your point is?

water_nymph wrote:

<quoted text>I know several people from topix in real life. We do not constitute a 'gang'. Now, as for Mac and I, we might be considered a gang in the same way that Hepburn and Tracy were a gang, but otherwise (?) I don't see it.

Hey, we're a gang!

Excellent!