Tis the season...deja vu anyone?

[alphabassettgrrl]

Originally Posted by €uroMeinke

You know, as an atheist I first thought I had a problem with religion, but I've come to discover my real problem is with dogma - atheist dogma is just as fowl to digest as religious dogma and equally ignorant.

Excellently stated.

Originally Posted by Sir Dillon

There is no atheist domga...i.e. a doctine presented without proof.

Atheist have nothing but proof (at least far more than religious folk do) to substantiate their viewpoint.

I disagree. "God does not exist" is as much an opinion as "God does exist". Neither can prove their point.

Originally Posted by Morrigoon

But a lack of display at holiday time... could be interpreted as supporting the atheist viewpoint.

Really? Huh. I didn't see it that way.

We're just questioning the merits of that particular sign.

Originally Posted by Sir Dillon

Which is akin to questioning its legal right to be presented on public property!!

No- not the same. Posted anywhere, I would question its merit.

[Sir Dillon]

Originally Posted by alphabassettgrrl

No- not the same. Posted anywhere, I would question its merit.

The same can be said for any posted religious display just the same.

Do you not see/understand the inherent irony/hypocrisy in this position?

To defend a religious display simultaneoulsye disagreeing with a non-religious display on public grounds, both having the same 1st Amendment rights of that display, is inherently just that...ironic/hypocritical.

S.D.

[Sir Dillon]

Originally Posted by alphabassettgrrl

I disagree. "God does not exist" is as much an opinion as "God does exist". Neither can prove their point.

Notwithstanding this fact, there is more empirical evidence supporting the former (making it a substantiated opinion) than the latter (an UNsubstantaited opinion)!

S.D.

[alphabassettgrrl]

Originally Posted by Sir Dillon

To defend a religious display simultaneoulsye disagreeing with a non-religious display on public grounds, both having the same 1st Amendment rights of that display, is inherently just that...ironic/hypocritical.

I'm not sure I defend public religious displays either.

Originally Posted by Sir Dillon

Notwithstanding this fact, there is more empirical evidence supporting the former (making it a substantiated opinion) than the latter (an UNsubstantaited opinion)!

One can't prove a negative, only fail to prove a positive. So I disagree that there is evidence for the nonexistance of god. One can think of god as unnecessary, possibly, but non-existance cannot actually be proven.

People believe things. Some believe in god, of various forms, and some believe in a lack of god. Both are opinions.

[Sir Dillon]

Originally Posted by alphabassettgrrl

I'm not sure I defend public religious displays either.



One can't prove a negative, only fail to prove a positive. So I disagree that there is evidence for the nonexistance of god. One can think of god as unnecessary, possibly, but non-existance cannot actually be proven.

People believe things. Some believe in god, of various forms, and some believe in a lack of god. Both are opinions.

Agreed.