Books should be read. Sarah Hannah- would know what i meant and would not have jumped to the conclusion that i was calling her stupid if she read more. jk
I'm a nice guy and I'm married to the finest woman I have ever known -- and she's dated bad boys in the past. Humphrey FTW.
Bill Gates is most certainly an evil and immoral and ruthless, self-centered, berk of a businessman -- but I don't think he should be considered the Devil. I'd say the people who helped to contribute to a society that believes the Almighty Dollar should determine the value of everything, that rich = valuable = good, are the evil ones. Oh wait: that was the Libertarians. jk.
Books should be read. No question, no contest.
Sarah would have understood if you had been more careful with your wording, and if she wasn't so quick to jump to the defensive.
It may not be a circular argument, but it is impossible to answer with any assurance: you see the uses of the word God as Christian because you have grown up in a heavily Christian-influenced society; a society in which the word God seemingly appears quite often, which increases the impression that the society is heavily influenced by Christianity. But is it actually so influenced, or is it only your perception of it as such? Do you really see Christian words and symbols that often? Compared to, say, Ducks and Beavers? In other words: are you, like Sarah, jumping to conclusions because you feel on the defensive? Or is society really putting you on the defensive? You yourself probably can't answer, since you can't step outside yourself.
Im confused on your last post Mr. Humphrey. I do not understand whether or not you are pointing out that America was Not built on Christian ideas, and is not heavily influenced by christian beliefs. Or, were you just pointing out my problem of not being able to, "Step outside myself".
To Sarah Hannah, I am very sorry. What i said was uncalled for, and very tasteless humor. I'm sorry if you took offense, and i apologize to the class for my judgment of others. I don't want you all to think i think i'm better than any of you. I'm not, and all of you are going to always be better than me.
To Bill Gates, i called you the devil as a joke, and that is very uncalled for. I do believe that you are an evil man and no amount of charity will EVER make up for that, but i am sorry.
Right: I probably should have written that comment better. I was a little defensive myself, because I realized that I used the wrong term: it's not a circular argument. And then in trying to explain what I had originally meant by calling it a circular argument, I got flustered and started babbling.
So here's the deal: you feel bothered/annoyed/affected by what you see as Christian references in our official government things (Can't think of a better word) like money or the Seal or the Pledge of Allegiance. But it is possible that those references are meant to be innocuous and harmless, and most emphatically inclusive rather than exclusive of any particular religious belief, and you only see them as influential because you are a bit defensive and hypersensitive to religious references. But that doesn't mean the references themselves are meant to influence you or that they are harmful in any way; you just see them that way. It's the equivalent of being paranoid while someone is following you: no question that someone is following you, but they may not be AFTER you except in your own mind. And if you are bothered by the idea of people following you, you tend to think that people are really AFTER you, when they just might be following you, as in walking the same way as you. You following me? The question is, does a paranoid person have the right to tell everyone else to stop following him, because he feels it is harmful? Or do other people have the right to walk on the sidewalk behind Mr. Paranoid, and he should deal with it?
Even if "In God We Trust" was intentionally placed on money to promote Christianity specifically doesn't mean that is the reason it is still on there, nor imply that it has that effect on the populace. The words "Under God" were added to the Pledge of Allegiance during the 1950's in order to root out Godless Communists (who would object to swearing an oath to a nation under God, don't you know), but that doesn't mean people are still thinking of that when they say it today. I sometimes say the Pledge (sometimes I don't), and when I do, sometimes I leave out "under God" and sometimes I keep it in there. Whenever I say it, I don't think, "As an atheist, I am being excluded by this oath!" I think, "There are lots of people in this country who really appreciate this phrase being in the Pledge. Good for them. Here, I'll say it too, just so they'll be happy." Doesn't hurt me to say it, doesn't influence me in any way.
That's my perception of it. I honestly think my fellow atheists should let this one go, and focus on arguments that actually matter.
And by the way: you said "Is Bill Gates evil?" as a suggestion of a topic. I'm the one that called him the devil. I've done it for years, and I stand by it. I apologize for nothing.
I'm a nice guy and I'm married to the finest woman I have ever known -- and she's dated bad boys in the past. Humphrey FTW.
ReplyDeleteBill Gates is most certainly an evil and immoral and ruthless, self-centered, berk of a businessman -- but I don't think he should be considered the Devil. I'd say the people who helped to contribute to a society that believes the Almighty Dollar should determine the value of everything, that rich = valuable = good, are the evil ones. Oh wait: that was the Libertarians. jk.
Books should be read. No question, no contest.
Sarah would have understood if you had been more careful with your wording, and if she wasn't so quick to jump to the defensive.
It may not be a circular argument, but it is impossible to answer with any assurance: you see the uses of the word God as Christian because you have grown up in a heavily Christian-influenced society; a society in which the word God seemingly appears quite often, which increases the impression that the society is heavily influenced by Christianity. But is it actually so influenced, or is it only your perception of it as such? Do you really see Christian words and symbols that often? Compared to, say, Ducks and Beavers? In other words: are you, like Sarah, jumping to conclusions because you feel on the defensive? Or is society really putting you on the defensive? You yourself probably can't answer, since you can't step outside yourself.
Im confused on your last post Mr. Humphrey. I do not understand whether or not you are pointing out that America was Not built on Christian ideas, and is not heavily influenced by christian beliefs. Or, were you just pointing out my problem of not being able to, "Step outside myself".
ReplyDeleteTo Sarah Hannah, I am very sorry. What i said was uncalled for, and very tasteless humor. I'm sorry if you took offense, and i apologize to the class for my judgment of others. I don't want you all to think i think i'm better than any of you. I'm not, and all of you are going to always be better than me.
To Bill Gates, i called you the devil as a joke, and that is very uncalled for. I do believe that you are an evil man and no amount of charity will EVER make up for that, but i am sorry.
Right: I probably should have written that comment better. I was a little defensive myself, because I realized that I used the wrong term: it's not a circular argument. And then in trying to explain what I had originally meant by calling it a circular argument, I got flustered and started babbling.
ReplyDeleteSo here's the deal: you feel bothered/annoyed/affected by what you see as Christian references in our official government things (Can't think of a better word) like money or the Seal or the Pledge of Allegiance. But it is possible that those references are meant to be innocuous and harmless, and most emphatically inclusive rather than exclusive of any particular religious belief, and you only see them as influential because you are a bit defensive and hypersensitive to religious references. But that doesn't mean the references themselves are meant to influence you or that they are harmful in any way; you just see them that way. It's the equivalent of being paranoid while someone is following you: no question that someone is following you, but they may not be AFTER you except in your own mind. And if you are bothered by the idea of people following you, you tend to think that people are really AFTER you, when they just might be following you, as in walking the same way as you. You following me? The question is, does a paranoid person have the right to tell everyone else to stop following him, because he feels it is harmful? Or do other people have the right to walk on the sidewalk behind Mr. Paranoid, and he should deal with it?
Even if "In God We Trust" was intentionally placed on money to promote Christianity specifically doesn't mean that is the reason it is still on there, nor imply that it has that effect on the populace. The words "Under God" were added to the Pledge of Allegiance during the 1950's in order to root out Godless Communists (who would object to swearing an oath to a nation under God, don't you know), but that doesn't mean people are still thinking of that when they say it today. I sometimes say the Pledge (sometimes I don't), and when I do, sometimes I leave out "under God" and sometimes I keep it in there. Whenever I say it, I don't think, "As an atheist, I am being excluded by this oath!" I think, "There are lots of people in this country who really appreciate this phrase being in the Pledge. Good for them. Here, I'll say it too, just so they'll be happy." Doesn't hurt me to say it, doesn't influence me in any way.
That's my perception of it. I honestly think my fellow atheists should let this one go, and focus on arguments that actually matter.
And by the way: you said "Is Bill Gates evil?" as a suggestion of a topic. I'm the one that called him the devil. I've done it for years, and I stand by it. I apologize for nothing.
ReplyDelete