Proposal: No God in NCAP. (1 Viewer)

[Comrade nathan]

God has been proven to be non existant.

 

[HotShot]

God has been proven to be non existant.

and he has been proven to exist.

 

[davin]

God has been proven to be non existant.

and he has been proven to exist.

neither of those are true....while one cannot prove something does not exist, there is also no proof that a god does exist...though this is more suited for the thread about God existing.

the issue at hand is that i don't think we can simply say "don't mention religion" in any given discussion because thats like saying "well, what do you think about this, but you cna't mention anything related to capitalism". its difficult to draw a line, i'd think. it would more just be that threads shouldn't be sidetracked in debating over god when thats not the focus of that discussion.

 

[HotShot]

neither of those are true....while one cannot prove something does not exist, there is also no proof that a god does exist...though this is more suited for the thread about God existing.

the issue at hand is that i don't think we can simply say "don't mention religion" in any given discussion because thats like saying "well, what do you think about this, but you cna't mention anything related to capitalism". its difficult to draw a line, i'd think. it would more just be that threads shouldn't be sidetracked in debating over god when thats not the focus of that discussion.

perhaps then we shouldnt question if GOd exists or not., and continue with discussion.

 

[davin]

well, the one issue with that is that any statement i make in a debate is based on certain premises that i expect to be a common ground, or at least be convincing enough to be accepted as true. however, if something is based entirly on "the bible/quran/god/l. ron hubbard says this:" then its very hard for anyone else to comment on it without it turning into a religious debate.
which is why not-that-bright proposed leaving out anything like that from debates to avoid sidetracking

 

[leetom]

BUt we cannot put aside religious matters, as they crucial to our societal matters. Excluding religion from discussion is basically a discussion on that is biased. As such in order for balance discussion should invovle religion.

Religion is mainly concerned with GOD.

Under NTB's suggestion, we can contiue to discuss religion and it's social applications, it's effects etc. Just not the complexity of the question of God or gods in itself/themselves.

We just want to be able to discuss religion without you lambasting us for not beleiving in your deity. Unlikely, but you have to understand the frustration of the common pragmatist when he is confronted with your constant God-backed arguments.

 

[HotShot]

Under NTB's suggestion, we can contiue to discuss religion and it's social applications, it's effects etc. Just not the complexity of the question of God or gods in itself/themselves.

We just want to be able to discuss religion without you lambasting us for not beleiving in your deity. Unlikely, but you have to understand the frustration of the common pragmatist when he is confronted with your constant God-backed arguments.

so r u saying that believers are not frustrated by your lack of faith?

 

[Not-That-Bright]

The thing is...with our arguments, you can actually defeat us, we give you some criteria to defeat our arguments - your arguments use a supernatural power, so no matter WHAT we say nothing can ever 'defeat' your argument.

 

[breaking]

Isn't it funny though that this thread was IMMEDIATELY hijacked by HotShot and turned into a clone of the other God discussions?

It's almost like what happened with the cartoons

hahaha i know, right

 

[seremify007]

ROFL i misread this topic as talking about NCAP- the new car assessment program?... LOL.

 

[veterandoggy]

well, to go ahead with this idea would be somewhat troublesome for the mods. i dont really know how they can "enforce" this policy, and by saying that we can ignore such posts like they arent there doesnt seem likely to happen too, because although it might be easy for you ntb (and others) it can be a bit difficult to make such a big transition for others.

i myself would have no troubles in making sure my posts dont try converting you on that note.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

It's got nothing to do with converting people... it had to do with the endless arguments which would always end up being based on the existance of god - these have however stopped.

 

[soha]

jerkface you've just made another "God thread"

and in defence God does exist ..im sick of peopel saying "proove it' or there is no "evidence"
its like fark....yes there is...hence the reason many .. people moresobelieve in God rather then not believing....

blah etc that is all
i hate these threads too
im over it i really am
thats my contribution going shopping now...(yay)
love and peace to all my peeps

 

[Lundy]

and in defence God does exist ..im sick of peopel saying "proove it' or there is no "evidence"
its like fark....yes there is...hence the reason many .. people moresobelieve in God rather then not believing....

Argumentum Ad Populum

 

[HotShot]

Ahh... that makes me happy.

Soha, God cannot be quantised.

I say we ban the notion of God from these forums and say "Religious teaching say BLAH"

Instead of constantly touting this 'will of god' excreta. It's tired, it's hackneyed and it's starting to make my eyes bleed.

.. yes that m akes sense...