Religion

pinto

(106,886 posts)

250. The line I think we can all support is separation of church & state. I strongly support that.

Sun Jul 13, 2014, 03:08 PM

Jul 2014

The other stuff - I agree it's pretty divisive. We all, as progressives, liberals espouse the value of embracing diversity. Valuing it.
I'd suggest that diversity in matters of faith, belief, non-belief be included in that picture. Doesn't seem a stretch to me.

Institutional issues are a hurdle. I think we all get that. Yet the rank and file for the most part move on. And the younger generation (I'm of an age where I can say that. LOL) will define where we go from here. I'm really optimistic seeing the views of my younger cousins, nephews and nieces. A small sample, but they have friends who have friends who have friends, etc.

My take from a US perspective. How it goes in Europe, the Middle East, Africa, Asia may have a different course.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

300 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Carl Sagan denied being an atheist. So what did he believe? [Part 1] [View all] cbayer Jul 2014 OP

So Carl Sagan didn't believe in God yet denied he was an atheist. Jim__ Jul 2014 #1

Wouldn't you just love to see that debate? cbayer Jul 2014 #2

I'd take on Sagan or NDT about the meaning of the word. Goblinmonger Jul 2014 #10

I think you would do great in a debate. hrmjustin Jul 2014 #17

Thanks, boss Goblinmonger Jul 2014 #33

How are you at astronomy? rug Jul 2014 #141

Yeah realized that after I posted Goblinmonger Jul 2014 #148

The fault, dear Goblinmonger, is not in our stars, rug Jul 2014 #150

I smiled at the John Green reference Goblinmonger Jul 2014 #190

You must have some powerful degrees Goblin! Nitram Jul 2014 #49

I was responding to cbayer's desire to see a debate. Goblinmonger Jul 2014 #66

So why mention your degrees? Nitram Jul 2014 #79

Sagan is an scientist and has degrees in sciency things. Goblinmonger Jul 2014 #84

This message was self-deleted by its author Starboard Tack Jul 2014 #157

So was this supposed to be one of those intelligent and civil contributions skepticscott Jul 2014 #158

"Sagan is an scientist and has degrees in sciency things" Starboard Tack Jul 2014 #160

I found that edhopper Jul 2014 #182

Thank you. That was the intent. Goblinmonger Jul 2014 #188

When they are reduced to making fun of edhopper Jul 2014 #191

And to accusing people skepticscott Jul 2014 #199

By Gob, it was clear indeed. Starboard Tack Jul 2014 #233

Don't ever talk to me about tone in here again. Goblinmonger Jul 2014 #189

The devil made you do it. okasha Jul 2014 #221

what the fuck are you talking about? Goblinmonger Jul 2014 #225

I don't think I have ever talked about "tone" Starboard Tack Jul 2014 #234

So you never said this? skepticscott Jul 2014 #235

Giving you a lesson in manners is hardly "talking" about tone Starboard Tack Jul 2014 #236

Only you or a member of your clan skepticscott Jul 2014 #237

Oh, he didn't have to search. rug Jul 2014 #252

Really? You think Sagan was an astrologer? Starboard Tack Jul 2014 #155

Maybe he had a Secret Life. okasha Jul 2014 #161

Maybe he was a "closet" atheist astrologer. Starboard Tack Jul 2014 #172

To take a step back from the monkey-shit-fight for a second AtheistCrusader Jul 2014 #70

Atheism is not the state of non-belief. Nitram Jul 2014 #77

You'd like that wouldn't you? AtheistCrusader Jul 2014 #82

Ah, the last refuge of a scoundrel. Nitram Jul 2014 #85

To me, the last refuge of a scoundrel is to sieze upon a detail like that and completely ignore AtheistCrusader Jul 2014 #92

Sorry Crusader Nitram Jul 2014 #99

YOU'RE RIGHT. AtheistCrusader Jul 2014 #102

Agnostic is not Atheist Cayenne Jul 2014 #226

Please stop telling atheists skepticscott Jul 2014 #242

Claiming that your statements are logical and your opponents are "spin." AlbertCat Jul 2014 #223

That is just no true Goblinmonger Jul 2014 #86

Atheism is not a statement of belief of any kind. phil89 Jul 2014 #159

Why would you think that anyone wants you to believe? cbayer Jul 2014 #171

Extraordinary claims require edhopper Jul 2014 #186

They would require extraordinary evidence if one was claiming they could prove it. cbayer Jul 2014 #230

Nothing juenile about comparing god belief with santa. phil89 Jul 2014 #240

Can you provide evidence that they are both made up? cbayer Jul 2014 #241

But that's not how it works. trotsky Jul 2014 #247

Oh, not true skepticscott Jul 2014 #248

You don't believe. That's cool. AlbertCat Jul 2014 #224

Say what? I think it's perfectly cool. cbayer Jul 2014 #229

I think they want me to believe so I won't burn in hell phil89 Jul 2014 #239

Well for those that tell you that they want you to believe, I think it makes sense to cbayer Jul 2014 #243

Strictly speaking, you don't get to define them... cbayer Jul 2014 #96

Tyson has already settled this, in a video I have repeatedly supplied you with, and you have not AtheistCrusader Jul 2014 #100

I watched that video way before you posted it and I don't think it's settled in the same cbayer Jul 2014 #137

Why would you love to see that? skepticscott Jul 2014 #108

"This is such a silly debate" trotsky Jul 2014 #121

Who could blame him? trotsky Jul 2014 #3

'the usual suspects' - such a classy way to state your argument. Warren Stupidity Jul 2014 #4

Or... LostOne4Ever Jul 2014 #5

Jim, I guess you are not familiar with the term "agnostic." Nitram Jul 2014 #6

A person can be both an atheist LostOne4Ever Jul 2014 #7

I guess you need further education on the meaning of "atheist" skepticscott Jul 2014 #9

Yes, I know several. Nitram Jul 2014 #12

For your consideration Goblinmonger Jul 2014 #13

Your Venn diagram is simplistic... Nitram Jul 2014 #16

Um, no, it isn't. That venn diagram is 100% accurate, and you have no idea what gnostic/agnostic AtheistCrusader Jul 2014 #20

AtheistCrusader Nitram Jul 2014 #26

I don't need to 'hit the books', there's a simple synopsis of the history of these words here: AtheistCrusader Jul 2014 #47

"Literally no idea what you are talking about." cleanhippie Jul 2014 #44

Trolling? Nitram Jul 2014 #52

Sure, if you're just going to kep making up words as you go, it can mean anything! AtheistCrusader Jul 2014 #57

No, it is your definition that is a contradiction. LostOne4Ever Jul 2014 #75

Please point them out skepticscott Jul 2014 #23

Scott, I am sticking to the accepted meanings of English words Nitram Jul 2014 #27

In other words, you can't back up your horseshit claim skepticscott Jul 2014 #110

Actually that is not true Joe Turner Jul 2014 #255

+1 rug Jul 2014 #256

Actually, I'm quite familiar with it. Jim__ Jul 2014 #11

No no no no no LostOne4Ever Jul 2014 #22

Here is what the Urban Dictionary has to say. Jim__ Jul 2014 #24

Urban dictionary is hardly an authorative source LostOne4Ever Jul 2014 #36

Well, based on your claim, I also get a say in the definition. Jim__ Jul 2014 #38

Multiple? LostOne4Ever Jul 2014 #42

Yes multiple. Jim__ Jul 2014 #51

I hope they have more repute than the ones you listed so far LostOne4Ever Jul 2014 #54

Two references in agreement with Sagan's use are sufficient to establish the point. Jim__ Jul 2014 #59

And the OED, as well as the statements of AA and FFRF is sufficient to refute that point. (nt) LostOne4Ever Jul 2014 #61

It's usage. Two dictionaries and Sagan's explicit usage confirm that it's a common use. Jim__ Jul 2014 #64

This is a debate in which you are entirely correct but will never win. cbayer Jul 2014 #71

I know. Thanks. Jim__ Jul 2014 #88

No. LostOne4Ever Jul 2014 #80

Are AA and FFRF the authoritative voices of atheists? rug Jul 2014 #147

They represent thousands upon thousands (maybe even millions) of atheists LostOne4Ever Jul 2014 #175

Are there any other representatives of millions of atheists? rug Jul 2014 #176

Well there are the libertarian atheists LostOne4Ever Jul 2014 #179

Merriam Webster okasha Jul 2014 #81

It is derivative upon his dictionary LostOne4Ever Jul 2014 #89

Who is "his"? okasha Jul 2014 #95

Noah Webster LostOne4Ever Jul 2014 #106

You have strong feelings about this. TM99 Jul 2014 #116

Yes I have strong feelings about this. LostOne4Ever Jul 2014 #127

How to reply to this? TM99 Jul 2014 #138

I'll respond tomorrow LostOne4Ever Jul 2014 #144

Absolutely. TM99 Jul 2014 #170

Back LostOne4Ever Jul 2014 #178

I am sorry, I have a busy weekend with a conference. TM99 Jul 2014 #203

No problem take your time (nt) LostOne4Ever Jul 2014 #206

Back now as well. TM99 Jul 2014 #270

That is absolutely fine with me LostOne4Ever Jul 2014 #283

It isn't always easy to disagree TM99 Jul 2014 #284

Of course you're right about modern dictionaries being descriptive. Jim__ Jul 2014 #94

Exactly. okasha Jul 2014 #98

Soooo LostOne4Ever Jul 2014 #113

No. There are 2 meanings in common usage. Jim__ Jul 2014 #118

Except the OP jumped the shark with the subject line itself. AtheistCrusader Jul 2014 #119

The article is explicit about what Sagan meant by "not being an atheist." Jim__ Jul 2014 #125

It's also clear what he meant about being an atheist. trotsky Jul 2014 #126

I am fine with there being more than one usuage. LostOne4Ever Jul 2014 #184

I've read your posts throughout this thread, okasha Jul 2014 #164

Addendum: I'm puzzled okasha Jul 2014 #166

Second post. okasha Jul 2014 #169

That's probably the most interesting point on the thread for me Goblinmonger Jul 2014 #254

Compiling my responses LostOne4Ever Jul 2014 #185

Post removed Post removed Jul 2014 #73

I think he understands that. cbayer Jul 2014 #46

Or one could put the shoe on the other foot... trotsky Jul 2014 #48

It is NOT a modifier. It speaks to a different question entirely. AtheistCrusader Jul 2014 #50

Lol, same circular argument, different day. cbayer Jul 2014 #69

Someone's going to lose, all right. AtheistCrusader Jul 2014 #72

Woohoo!!!! cbayer Jul 2014 #90

I don't like that one, at all MannyGoldstein Jul 2014 #183

Lol. I did not really notice the score until you just said this. cbayer Jul 2014 #227

IIRC, it was *the* game in 2011 where the Sox imploded MannyGoldstein Jul 2014 #228

I have seen far too many games like those, but I have also seen cbayer Jul 2014 #231

So when people use "literally" wrong Goblinmonger Jul 2014 #8

Agnostic and gnostic are two very different things. Nitram Jul 2014 #14

You are confusing the religious viewpoint with the word it is based on. Goblinmonger Jul 2014 #15

I am aware of the meaning of the root language involved. Nitram Jul 2014 #18

Who the fuck are you to presume anyone was only speaking about Christianity? AtheistCrusader Jul 2014 #21

When someone defineds the word agnosticism based only on the Greek roots Nitram Jul 2014 #25

Wrong. AtheistCrusader Jul 2014 #55

So are you arguing that the English word is devoid of any draw from another language? Goblinmonger Jul 2014 #30

Wrong Monger Nitram Jul 2014 #45

I have no idea what that sentence is getting at. Goblinmonger Jul 2014 #68

OOps Nitram Jul 2014 #76

Knowledge and belief aren't the same thing Act_of_Reparation Jul 2014 #31

Yes, I believe that people have the ability to use "literally" however they want. Jim__ Jul 2014 #19

The definition of Atheist From the Oxford English online dictionary LostOne4Ever Jul 2014 #28

Did you miss this under disbelief: mental rejection of something as untrue? Jim__ Jul 2014 #34

Untrue LostOne4Ever Jul 2014 #37

Yes, I disbelieve you. I believe you are not heading west. Jim__ Jul 2014 #53

Thus a lack of belief LostOne4Ever Jul 2014 #56

No. Thus a positive belief that you are not heading west. Jim__ Jul 2014 #60

Again LostOne4Ever Jul 2014 #62

Once more and that's it. Jim__ Jul 2014 #114

You ignored the point again LostOne4Ever Jul 2014 #117

Try refuting the logical statements in post #114. Jim__ Jul 2014 #120

Why? LostOne4Ever Jul 2014 #129

It eliminates the ambiguity of natural language. Jim__ Jul 2014 #130

Here goes LostOne4Ever Jul 2014 #181

Try phrasing the statements without using the weasel word "believe" skepticscott Jul 2014 #136

From post #119 down, this subthread is about "belief" and "disbelief." Jim__ Jul 2014 #139

I can't help that an inappropriate word was used up to now skepticscott Jul 2014 #151

Technically... trotsky Jul 2014 #131

Jim, youre right. Nitram Jul 2014 #29

Those two words deal with two different things. Goblinmonger Jul 2014 #32

Thanks Nitram. Welcome to the Religion Forum. Jim__ Jul 2014 #35

When people are trying to misrepresent an entire group LostOne4Ever Jul 2014 #39

Yeah, they do. trotsky Jul 2014 #40

I'm not surprised. Nitram Jul 2014 #43

Can you point to someone here using 'agnosticism' as the same as atheism? AtheistCrusader Jul 2014 #65

Nice strawman you built Goblinmonger Jul 2014 #67

Atheism and agnosticism are indeed mutually exclusive Nitram Jul 2014 #78

Fucking. Face. Palm. AtheistCrusader Jul 2014 #83

there you go again with that irreffutable logic of yours Nitram Jul 2014 #91

How does that even make sense? Goblinmonger Jul 2014 #87

Monger, belief is a feeling of being sure that someone or something exists or that something is true Nitram Jul 2014 #93

Who the fuck is Miriam-Webster? AtheistCrusader Jul 2014 #97

Merriam-Webster Nitram Jul 2014 #103

Spelling? Please, you can't even get whole WORDS right. AtheistCrusader Jul 2014 #104

So you are saying that if someone says they belief in god Goblinmonger Jul 2014 #101

Ok Nitram Jul 2014 #105

Except several of us have pointed out groups that are theists that are also agnostic. AtheistCrusader Jul 2014 #107

Not what I'm saying Goblinmonger Jul 2014 #111

Quick, you better delete this wiki page for being a contradiction in terms! AtheistCrusader Jul 2014 #112

which would be a good time to bring up Warren Stupidity Jul 2014 #153

Can't speak for the others, but I'm a Jewish atheist, and not religious. immoderate Jul 2014 #163

I think that would make you a secular/cultural jew. There are religious jewish atheists. Warren Stupidity Jul 2014 #167

You flatter me. immoderate Jul 2014 #168

Atheism is non-belief, not necessarily a positive 'firm belief'. AtheistCrusader Jul 2014 #63

Congratulations, you are an agnostic, Agnostic Crusader! Nitram Jul 2014 #122

I'm an agnostic atheist. AtheistCrusader Jul 2014 #123

I'm an atheist, and I have no firm beliefs. immoderate Jul 2014 #165

Kurt is your avie, didnt know we could have him as an avie... randys1 Jul 2014 #152

He's still available as an avatar - under people. Jim__ Jul 2014 #154

Boy, did you ever predict that one. rug Jul 2014 #258

Who knew? Jim__ Jul 2014 #264

Well then WovenGems Jul 2014 #259

He believed in what he believed in, when he thought about it in private. haele Jul 2014 #41

"he thought it should be only his concern what he believed in" cbayer Jul 2014 #74

Sagan was a scientist TheSarcastinator Jul 2014 #58

True, and anyone who thinks this TM99 Jul 2014 #109

Oh, you're so right skepticscott Jul 2014 #115

Makes sense to me. pinto Jul 2014 #124

Neil Degrasse Tyson made an exceptional point in Cosmos. Maedhros Jul 2014 #133

Neither science nor religion can achieve total understanding of the universe, imo. pinto Jul 2014 #142

Why did you post this? LostOne4Ever Jul 2014 #128

Best post of the thread. n/t trotsky Jul 2014 #132

She's posted just above skepticscott Jul 2014 #134

Of course you don't cbayer Jul 2014 #135

You have no answer, so you go for the personal attack. trotsky Jul 2014 #140

Thanks for the response LostOne4Ever Jul 2014 #143

You were at one point so able to relate to others across a wide range. cbayer Jul 2014 #145

Really? A parting shot like that? trotsky Jul 2014 #146

Thank you! LostOne4Ever Jul 2014 #187

This thread needs a soundtrack. rug Jul 2014 #149

Carl Sagan was wrong on his definition... MellowDem Jul 2014 #156

Yes, I am certain Carl Sagan was wrong and TM99 Jul 2014 #173

And which of those things would preclude him from being wrong? skepticscott Jul 2014 #174

Teaching critical thinking, for one thing. rug Jul 2014 #180

From the same people edhopper Jul 2014 #192

Yes, I wonder how our friend skepticscott Jul 2014 #195

So you are fine with his definition of atheist? Goblinmonger Jul 2014 #207

How many logical fallacies can you fit in one response? MellowDem Jul 2014 #288

There are several meanings of the words atheism and agnosticism that have been mentioned TM99 Jul 2014 #291

Look up appeal to authority... MellowDem Jul 2014 #293

You really don't know what you are talking about. TM99 Jul 2014 #295

Nope. Act_of_Reparation Jul 2014 #298

Only the West has concepts of atheism? MellowDem Jul 2014 #299

These are nonsensical claims. Act_of_Reparation Jul 2014 #294

Sounds like he just didn't know and he didn't like labels. hrmjustin Jul 2014 #162

I think he dismissed the label to make a point about edhopper Jul 2014 #193

Went downhill? skepticscott Jul 2014 #197

I have no doubt you will argue your point well. hrmjustin Jul 2014 #198

I have no doubt you'll be sitting by your computer all afternoon skepticscott Jul 2014 #200

If you don't want to hear me then don't respond to me. hrmjustin Jul 2014 #205

But they he wouldn't be able to attack you with actively aggressive insults. rug Jul 2014 #209

He seems angry at the fact I answered him in seconds. hrmjustin Jul 2014 #216

You hardly had time to soak in the profundity of his comment. rug Jul 2014 #218

I feel so ashamed! hrmjustin Jul 2014 #219

Tsk. "No hope for you, though." rug Jul 2014 #220

So why did you say you didn't read this thread? skepticscott Jul 2014 #260

I read the op and a few of the early responses. I am sorry I was not clear on that. hrmjustin Jul 2014 #261

I thought you weren't interested in this thread skepticscott Jul 2014 #262

Ok you want to make this personal. I don't. I am asking you and no I don't want to read over 200 hrmjustin Jul 2014 #263

You've already been answered in posts directed at you skepticscott Jul 2014 #265

Another poster was kind enough to answer me in the other thread. hrmjustin Jul 2014 #266

I think that if Carl Sagan did not consider himself an atheist that would have been CBGLuthier Jul 2014 #177

He was an atheist edhopper Jul 2014 #194

The fact that he didn't consider himself one skepticscott Jul 2014 #196

Well bigot is edhopper Jul 2014 #201

Well, Sagan may have wished skepticscott Jul 2014 #208

yes, he was an atheist edhopper Jul 2014 #211

I don't believe in god(s)...including Dr. Sagan... Tikki Jul 2014 #202

I take issue with this statement - " An atheist is someone who has compelling evidence that there is djean111 Jul 2014 #204

I wonder if that is out of context edhopper Jul 2014 #212

It does seem like an oddly illogical statement to me - neither "side" has proof of any kind, djean111 Jul 2014 #213

Well I disagree with his definition of atheist edhopper Jul 2014 #214

That's what I am saying - his definition of "atheist" is incorrect. djean111 Jul 2014 #215

I agree that his definition in incorrect edhopper Jul 2014 #217

I can't wait for Part 2. rug Jul 2014 #210

I know! He might discuss his predilection for corn flake fried chicken. cbayer Jul 2014 #274

I hope the interview took place in an Olive Garden. rug Jul 2014 #276

Only if there were pit bulls with open carry breasfeeding kittens. cbayer Jul 2014 #282

Carl Sagan denied being an atheist. AlbertCat Jul 2014 #222

Who is the you that you are addressing here? cbayer Jul 2014 #232

Neil deGrasse Tyson says the same thing. So does Richard Dawkins when pressed. Gore1FL Jul 2014 #238

I think we are in need of a new nomenclature. cbayer Jul 2014 #244

I think belief, don't know and non-belief are all parts of a connected spectrum. pinto Jul 2014 #245

There has got to be better solution, right? cbayer Jul 2014 #246

It definitely is divisive. trotsky Jul 2014 #249

The line I think we can all support is separation of church & state. I strongly support that. pinto Jul 2014 #250

I'm with you, pinto, and remain confused at times as to why this seems such a cbayer Jul 2014 #251

Post removed Post removed Jul 2014 #253

For someone who posts drivel constantly rug Jul 2014 #257

Not sure why you'd post something like this EvolveOrConvolve Jul 2014 #267

A Washington Post profile of Carl Sagan' beliefs or nonbeliefs is perfectly apt for this Group. rug Jul 2014 #268

I had no idea that an article about Csrl Sagan's religious views would stir up a shit storm. cbayer Jul 2014 #269

"psychotic person who had a religious delusion and must, therefore, represent all of religion" trotsky Jul 2014 #271

Your hurt because she posted this op? why? hrmjustin Jul 2014 #272

It disrupts his narrarive. rug Jul 2014 #273

Do tell, then, why those articles are posted. rug Jul 2014 #275

I do think that believing one can ascertain a dead (or alive) person's thoughts and beliefs is djean111 Jul 2014 #277

Not if you use their recorded words. rug Jul 2014 #278

Fine with me! djean111 Jul 2014 #279

I like biographies. rug Jul 2014 #280

Ha! I like verbatim dialogue a lot more than reading what the biographer decides the person was djean111 Jul 2014 #281

I think rug means verbatim dialogue like this: okasha Jul 2014 #290

Ah! Yes, imagining what they said as if it was actually verbatim. djean111 Jul 2014 #292

reply #2 cbayer chuckles about how badly this thread of hers is going to go. Warren Stupidity Jul 2014 #285

Pure innocence, y'all! trotsky Jul 2014 #286

I wouldn't post this OP Dorian Gray Jul 2014 #296

Regarding the delusion threads, trotsky Jul 2014 #297

I'm in a hurry Dorian Gray Jul 2014 #300

He believed, incorrectly, gcomeau Jul 2014 #287

Further OP ideas for people that don't understand atheism... MellowDem Jul 2014 #289