Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

Atomic_G wrote:

<quoted text>
A piece of plastic went through my foot, right after I received someone else's work load because they are sick today. Hmmm!

Double Fine wrote:

<quoted text>
And your beloved Waratahs lost to my Stormers...

Double Fine wrote:

<quoted text>
And your beloved Waratahs lost to my Stormers...

Double Fine wrote:

<quoted text>
Yep.
Bad days and worse days.

River Tam wrote:

<quoted text>
In other words, today.

Atomic_G wrote:

<quoted text>
If you had notice I have not brought the game up :(

Atomic_G wrote:

<quoted text>
It's NRL's State of Origin tonight. GO THE BLUES!!!!

Hidingfromyou wrote:

<quoted text>
Hey, Eagle, I came across this nice video that was made for you. It's by a Christian. By the Christian who demonstrated what lay people call proof that humans evolved from a last common ancestor with chimps. He talks in lay person English, so you should have no troubles understanding what he's saying.
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
It's only 4 minutes long and badly titled. I am pretty sure you won't watch it, but here you are anyways. Plain English, proof that humans and chimps share a common ancestor.

Hidingfromyou wrote:

<quoted text>
hahaha! How you see Mormonism I see every religion!
I think if I were to become Christian, I'd be a Jehovah's Witness. They have the best arguments out of all you guys - they gave up the idea of hell and free will, since they're untenable positions.
Mormons focus on the family, you know! Those who aren't crazed and use the religion well, have pretty good family lives. So what's the problem?
Eagle, science has advanced every single body of knowledge. There's no body of knowledge that religion has advanced - not a single one.
If your myths are real, why not? If your god is really smart and powerful, why didn't he get science right?

Double Fine wrote:

<quoted text>
Okay...
Allow me to improve your day somewhat:
http://www.youtube.com/watch...

Double Fine wrote:

<quoted text>
We were crap in the second half, though. Who do you think will take the competition?

Double Fine wrote:

<quoted text>
Rugby Union > Rugby League

-Skeptic- wrote:

<quoted text>
Eagle12 will probably ignore you, given that he realises that he's wrong.

River Tam wrote:

<quoted text>
That was cool but I was thinking more like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch...

Atomic_G wrote:

<quoted text>
At the moment I am thinking your Stomers.

Double Fine wrote:

<quoted text>
Very good.
How's about some Alice in Chains?

Judged:

1

1

1

Atomic_G wrote:

<quoted text>
Where is your link?

Double Fine wrote:

<quoted text>
If the Saders can get home Semi...I would go with them.
Yeah, the Stormers look good, but we still give our opponents too many chances. We outplayed you guys completely in the first half, as we did to all teams the entire competition, but then fall flat in the second half. We have not scored four tries in a match yet! That is a major flaw, methinks. Bonus points are worth gold.

Tony Longfellow wrote:

<quoted text>
Not being able to back his claim that the "highest court in the land" called atheism is a religion, he seems to have decided to rely on pilfered text from a silly Christian blog here:
http://kevinchilds.com/...
What the US Supreme Court actually has said of atheism is just the opposite of his claim:
"Just as the right to speak and the right to refrain from speaking are complementary components of a broader concept of individual freedom of mind, so also the individual's freedom to choose his own creed is the counterpart of his right to refrain from accepting the creed established by the majority. At one time it was thought that this right merely proscribed the preference of one Christian sect over another, but would not require equal respect for the conscience of the infidel, the atheist, or the adherent of a non-Christian faith such as Islam or Judaism. But when the underlying principle has been examined in the crucible of litigation, the Court has unambiguously concluded that the individual freedom of conscience protected by the First Amendment embraces the right to select any religious faith or none at all. This conclusion derives support not only from the interest in respecting the individual's freedom of conscience, but also from the conviction that religious beliefs worthy of respect are the product of free and voluntary choice by the faithful, and from recognition of the fact that the political interest in forestalling intolerance extends beyond intolerance among Christian sects - or even intolerance among "religions" - to encompass intolerance of the disbeliever and the uncertain."
-- Wallace v. Jaffree