Atheist soldier says Army punished him

[mattskramer]

Beats me. -I- would think not, but then it's entirely possible that the military thinks otherwise.

Wow. You gave an answer. Okay. Fair enough.

 

[Diuretic]

No-one's rights come from any god, that is complete bullshit and I want to argue it here or in another thread. The referral to a god in any argument is simply an appeal to superstition and is intellectually dishonest.

 

[mattskramer]

No-one's rights come from any god, that is complete bullshit and I want to argue it here or in another thread. The referral to a god in any argument is simply an appeal to superstition and is intellectually dishonest.

Yep. "Rights" It is just a human invention.

 

[Shogun]

Yep. "Rights" It is just a human invention.

what.. as opposed to salvation in a cloudy heaven? Given the reaches of the human imagination and the reason of the enlightenment is it really that far fetched to imagine that humans have shaken off the caveman "light stick from sky make tree go fire" and developed rights through laws?


For christs sake.. Did Hammurabi's god REALLY personally come down and hand laws to him in writing? If not, then why do we take seriously anyone who suggests the same for the modern popular cult? See, I don't recall seeing jebus's name on the Declaration. I don't see how laws are intrinsically caused by the goodness of christian morals. Why? Because the claim is bullshit in light of the history of the christian religion.

Take a look at M14.. Typically christian he pretends that that some ambiguous Creator is jebus. Despite the FACT of primary documents stating specifically that this nation has never been defined by the christianity of some of its people. WHY would he totally ignore the words of JEfferson and ratified treaties? While sticking to some lame assed point about capitolizing C in creator, no less. It's not because he cares about evidence or primary documents. IT sure as fuck isn't for as benign a reason as a state having a state ice cream. He wants to piss on the tree of America and claim it for his own religion. This will never happen this side of the inquisition. He, and you, will have to face the fact of primary documents and the Constitution weather you like it or not. Weather you can fathom that Humans can invent civil rights without divine intervention or not. Regardless of what flat-earther theory is out to challenge science and hisotry in the dogma marathon of bullshit du jour.



THAT, sir, is a fact.

 

[BrianH]

Fair enough. and in the spirit of fair play I will concede that, regardless of the influence of christianity, I agree with Jefferson about the latter half of the bible and its worthwhile moral philosophy.

Righteous

 

[M14 Shooter]

Don’t give me that. I have always given my opinion and answers to questions put to me (as right or wrong – as educated or uneducated – as biased or unbiased as they may be).

And I didnt give you an answer?
Why yes, yes I did.
So, what's your point?

 

[M14 Shooter]

No-one's rights come from any god, that is complete bullshit and I want to argue it here or in another thread. The referral to a god in any argument is simply an appeal to superstition and is intellectually dishonest.

The people that founded this country thought otherwise, apparently.

 

[Shogun]

The people that founded this country thought otherwise, apparently.

No, they really didn't.



ready to address the treaty of tripoli yet?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Take a look at M14.. Typically christian he pretends that that some ambiguous Creator is jebus.

Take a look at Shogun -- taking his suppositions as fact, without any intention of backing them up, even if he thought he could.

 

[M14 Shooter]

No, they really didn't.

You yourself agreed that they were referring to some Divine Being when they announced that our rights come from our "Creator", etc.

Are you changing your mind?

If so, then to whom or what did they refer?

 

[Shogun]

You yourself agreed that they were referring to some Divine Being when they announced that our rights come from our "Creator", etc.

Are you changing your mind?

If so, then to whom or what did they refer?

"Some divine being" in the eyes of fans of Voltair, who were themselves freemasons, could have meant anything.

I've told you this.

multiple times.

Say, was there anything you'd like to say about the Treaty signed and ratified by early congress which specifically indicates how foolish is your goofy little tangent?

or are we still in full blast avoidance mode?

 

[M14 Shooter]

"Some divine being" in the eyes of fans of Voltair, who were themselves freemasons, could have meant anything.
I've told you this.
multiple times.

Yes you have.
And you have no idea why its irrelevant to my point, even though I have tried to explain it to you.

Say, was there anything you'd like to say about the Treaty signed and ratified by early congress which specifically indicates how foolish is your goofy little tangent? Or are we still in full blast avoidance mode?

Why shoudl I address something that has nothing to do with my argument?

 

[Shogun]

Yes you have.
And you have no idea why its irrelevant to my point, even though I have tried to explain it to you.


yea.. it's about as irrelevant as a carfax history at "honest" johns used car lot. Feel free to avoid the fact of this primary document though.. I mean, it's ONLY ratified by congress and signed by an acting president of the united states of America.. a man whose own status as a FF is unquestioned.


Why shoudl I address something that has nothing to do with my argument?


um, I guess because it would be smarter to debate a primary document than trying to pretend that a bunch of deists in post-enlightenment america who were already waist deep in semi-pagan organizations really meant jebus instead of Creator when imploring a theocratic king of england?


Not too quick in the morning, are you?

 

[M14 Shooter]

yea.. it's about as irrelevant as a carfax history at "honest" johns used car lot.

You obviously don't understand my point.
That's my bad -- you've been more than happy to wallow in your willful ignorace so far, so I dont know why I thought that would change.

um, I guess because it would be smarter to debate a primary document...

Tell me:
Why do you think any statement that the US is not a christisn nation does anything to affect my argument?

 

[Shogun]

You obviously don't understand my point.
That's my bad -- you've been more than happy to wallow in your willful ignorace so far, so I dont know why I thought that would change.


what the hell is there to understand beyond "the FFs used the word CREATOR in the DOI so they MUST have meant jesus christ!"?

indeed, lecture me on pitiful ignorance while you hightail it out of here without addressing the Treaty of tripoli. Clearly, you are the standard by which intellectuals set their watch.


Tell me:
Why do you think any statement that the US is not a christisn nation does anything to affect my argument?


Because you assume that Creator means something that it doesn't and was used to define the US in a way that it CLEARLY did not.

Hence the Treaty ratified by a congress FULL of FFs and signed by a standing president who was, himself, a core FF.


Any other questions you care to avoid?

 

[M14 Shooter]

what the hell is there to understand beyond "the FFs used the word CREATOR in the DOI so they MUST have meant jesus christ!"?

Please provide for me a quote from me where I said any such thing.
Unless, of course, you enjoy arguing aganst straw men.

Because you assume that Creator means something that it doesn't

Please provide for me a quote from me where I said any such thing.
Unless, of course, you enjoy arguing aganst straw men.

 

[Shogun]

Please provide for me a quote from me where I said any such thing.
Unless, of course, you enjoy arguing aganst straw men.


meh, changing your diaper is not on my agenda today. Feel free to scroll up though.. Im sure you will be able to spot the "Derrr, why did they sue the capitol C" from your perch.

Please provide for me a quote from me where I said any such thing.
Unless, of course, you enjoy arguing aganst straw men.


yea.. the guy focusing on the word creator, despite actual quotes from Jefferson AND a ratified treaty is probably the first person who should be accusing someone of a strawman..


It's cool, dude... there is a reason you are avoiding the treaty like a christian avoids pluralism.. it's probably not obvious why you are dancing around a primary document like that.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Please provide for me a quote from me where I said any such thing.
Unless, of course, you enjoy arguing aganst straw men.

meh, changing your diaper is not on my agenda today.

So, you can't show me where I made an argument anywhere near what you described. That explains why you're shadow-boxing.

Let me know when you actually have some idea what you're arguing against.
Hint: Its in the 1st post that I responded to you.

 

[Shogun]

So, you can't show me where I made an argument anywhere near what you said I did. That explains why you're shadow-boxing.

Let me know when you actually have some idea what you're arguing against.
Hint: Its in the 1st post that I responded to you.

yea.. tell me ALL ABOUT shadow boxing while you continue to avoid the treaty of tripoli and a presidential founding father!

It's probably not hilarious at ALL.



Now, run away like a little girl, dude... You are probably not obviously trying to disengage now that Im standing over your prone arguement with primary documents.

 

[M14 Shooter]

yea.. tell me ALL ABOUT shadow boxing while you continue to avoid the treaty of tripoli and a presidential founding father!

Nothnig you have posted addresses my argument.
Of course, of you had a cluse as to what I was arguing, you'd realize that.

But, instead of admitting I'm right and that you don't have a clue and then going back to see what my argument was, you'll continue with the pre-adolescent tripe you've been posting.

Be a man. Admit you dont know what I'm arguing, figure it out, and then address it.

Or, run away and prove me right.

Your call.