Why I take both sides (Atheist and Religious)

Jump to Last Post 1-14 of 14 discussions (98 posts)

60
mischeviousmeposted 12 years ago
Like the Rockafellers, I think both sides need weopans and while I am neither religious or atheist, I think it's only fare. This may seem strange to some, but to me it makes perfect sense. The problem lay in words, not in method. does this make sense?
reply report
1. 58
  MelissaBarrettposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  If you gave them all weapons, the Christians would win every time... Apparently Jesus was an active NRA member.
  reply report
  63
  amymarie_5posted 12 years agoin reply to this
  Lol!
  reply report
2. 60
  Jesus was a hippyposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  Atheism is simply the lack of belief in a god. Anyone who doesnt believe in a god is an atheist just like a new born baby is an atheist. You cannot be neither, you have to be one or the other.
  reply report
61
paradigmsearchposted 12 years ago
Come to think of it, so do I.
reply report
60
rbe0posted 12 years ago
They are both wrong. I'm right.
reply report
1. 60
  mischeviousmeposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  Not "weopans", Verbal weopans...
  reply report
  60
  mischeviousmeposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  Using guns to resolve religious diputes yields no winners. It should just be that both sides eventually agree that it is how it's going to be and things won't change just because they want them to.
  reply report
59
knolyourselfposted 12 years ago
Weapons of word. They say if people read history, history wouldn't repeat itself. The trouble is, people who make history often can't read, like George Bush Jr.
reply report
59
knolyourselfposted 12 years ago
How are people going to thieve from each other if their Gods are not at war?
reply report
1. 60
  mischeviousmeposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  They kill eachother until weopans won't solve anything. Waring with finesse and verbal candor can solve more problems as many may assume otherwise. Take Reagon for that matter, they do call him the great negotiator for that reason. He was an intelligent spinner of words.
  reply report
2. 60
  Edwinoel Tanglaoposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  There is no greater God than Jesus who is All in All, the King of Kings and the Lord of Lords. That is why his cross, the protein molecule 'laminin' taking the form of a cross, is in every human being as he created us all. And like Christ, it binds the human body together, without it, the human body may fall apart. All mankind should rejoice in Christ Jesus, as he is in all of us, yes, in our body. May we be guided more to be in his light that we may all be stronger against all evil in this world. Merry Christmas to one and all! Show love to all as we keep Jesus in our hearts or KJOH. Btw, thank you knolyourself for your views, may we grow more in the love and the light of Christ.
  reply report
0
ShadowKing!posted 12 years ago
The conflict could be settled if Christians/Muslims would realize that their God has appointed the Millennium: "a time for SHOWING the world what is the real deal" and if Atheists would optimistically say, "Okay, I'll wait til then for proof."

With all the religious deception no logic-think atheist will ever believe in an almighty God unless that almighty God visually reveals Himself. And if one--anyone--actually thinks with logic, then, you can't condemn an atheistic mindset. Because it's practical if there is no irrefutable, tangible evidence.
reply report
1. 60
  mischeviousmeposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  I agree with both sides. I really just go where ever I may go. I am a spiritual drifter, both in and out. I am an atheist and yet I'm not. I cannot explain this to anyone because they see it as obsurd, though to me it makes perfect sense. So I decide to see it from both angles, maybe I'll finally hear something that really means something and maybe I'll gain some higher knowledge of myself, through the eyes of others.
  reply report
  0
  ShadowKing!posted 12 years agoin reply to this
  I respect your belief. Know this, that logic is "thinking that conforms to facts" and common sense is "the greatest denominator of mentally understanding things".
  No matter what is taught by man, there is logical evidence that some sentient being or sentient force does exist that created the physical matter we know.
  Pure logic refutes the notion that nothing can come from nothing...thus the Big Bang Theory is essentially flawed.
  Common sense begs us to reason that an intelligent mind had to have created the complexity of the universe. Only a source of vast intelligence could've designed the cosmos and set in motion the unbreakable laws to which it operates.
  
  Knowing this is based on our own inherent intellect and not an influence of another human being. So no man needs to prove to you the existence of a greater intelligent being, because your own intelligent mind refuses to not ask itself that question.
  And that is the problem with both die-hard atheists & Christians, they believe and insist it is their DUTY to prove to us that a superior intelligence does exist. To each one's end--they have proven nothing (as you've stated before).
  
  Proof lies in the tangible and that is all the evidence one needs to form and adhere to any belief system--that they can prove their belief by what is physically seen and what can be physically demonstrated to bring about a physical manifestation of a result--no matter what it is--so long as it is governed by tangible evidence that can be implemented into "a cause and an effect".
  reply report
59
A Troubled Manposted 12 years ago
Nothing worse than a fence sitter.
reply report
1. 81
  Philanthropy2012posted 12 years agoin reply to this
  Better to sit on the fence than to blindly fall off it.
  reply report
  60
  mischeviousmeposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  I am nothing more than an observer....
  reply report
  60
  rbe0posted 12 years agoin reply to this
  me too
  I will not take part in a misguided war.
  reply report
  59
  A Troubled Manposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  Nice.
  
  Yet, I have a nagging and lengthy rebuttal scratching at the back of my pea brain but fear if unleashed would have me wallowing in despair at the thought of coming back to it full circle and facing up to lost cause.
  
  So, I'll just leave my response in the form of a question.
  
  What if everyone sat on the fence?
  reply report
  61
  Disappearingheadposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  The fence would break under all that weight.
  reply report
  60
  rbe0posted 12 years agoin reply to this
  The weight of an invincible army.
  reply report
  0
  ShadowKing!posted 12 years agoin reply to this
  Everyone wouldn't.
  
  Human history and human nature has given our intellectual minds the proof that such a pure-hearted decision of oneness among ourselves is not plausible. Due to the fact that we are divided not in a slice of two or three, but in multiple beliefs, theories, and faiths.
  
  There exist too much going-against-the-grain and opposition among the "intelligence" of our minds for us to ever reconcile to one unanimous agreement to just sit on the fence.
  
  The question itself is flawed.
  
  My statement is based on if our "traditional idea of an intervening Supreme God" is not part of the equation. So no need to response with defenses imparting God into it. Because my comment is based on if there were no God to intervene then this would be the outcome mentioned by A Troubled Man.
  reply report
  59
  A Troubled Manposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  It does not appear there is a God intervening.
  reply report
0
Muldaniaposted 12 years ago
I agree that it is possible to take both sides. I tend to feel for the believer who is being criticised for their beliefs. This can mean that I defend the religious when they are criticised, but also the atheist when they are. And, as I find my own opinions changing almost by the day, I can see both sides. At Christmastide, I am usually a believer, as I get carried along by the positive message that Christmas brings, even if logically I have many reasons against it.
reply report
0
Emile Rposted 12 years ago
I think most agnostics agree with points on both sides of the religious debate. I don't think that is fence sitting. It's honesty. I can't understand how a thinking person could become doggedly entrenched. Neither side has ever proven their case.
reply report
1. 60
  mischeviousmeposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  If everyone sat on the fence, now stay with me here. Wouldn't there be more to talk about, besides petty religious squabling?
  reply report
  0
  Emile Rposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  Most assuredly. And, by 'fence sitting' we put ourselves in the position to learn, which is the only logical stance if you are truly interested in finding truth; since neither side can prove their case, as of yet..
  reply report
  60
  mischeviousmeposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  As we drift further toward becoming a level 1 civilization, we will eventually reallize that things that make us happy as individuals will be alright with everyone else. We will stay level 0 unless we can somehow come up with a sollution to being so self centered, as a species.
  reply report
  59
  A Troubled Manposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  Not really. Learning would imply one is no longer sitting on the fence but is actually thinking and has an intelligent opinion.
  reply report
  60
  mischeviousmeposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  That's why one should learn about something, not completely submerge one's self. This how we get fanatics, they read a little and because they have some small connection to the magical and somwhat dangerous words of other men. One should just read it as a book and say "Ok. I'll just pick up another book and move on"
  
  I love to read, but I don't base all my beliefs on what I read either. I see that their is logic to be found from it, but more in the way of seeing how we've changed as a species and how we still act so primatively. I think religion haulted our evolution as a species for a time. Once the atheists got control of things (in the science department), it only took us 100 years to get where we are now. Up until that time science and religion were clashing and religion was winning. Now they are a bit more even and The christians are going after atheists now.
  
  Books can lead to all sorts of reallity based problems, especially when people that take things to litterally get hold of one. I think one should scrutinize everything they read and be open minded to all other ways of thinking. A book is a book is a book.
  reply report
  0
  Emile Rposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  Aw gee ATM. Attempts at insult. That is so unlike you. You don't understand the position I find myself in. The god of religion is obviously not real. I know this. Creator of reality is a term I find myself uncomfortable with also. Billions of years is a very long time.
  
  However....(this is where you start formulating how many laughing faces to respond with) I'm still at a loss to explain certain things so I listen carefully to those such as you. I read and attempt to stay abreast, as best I can, of every amazing thing science discovers. I also listen to alternative ideas on the spiritual and write them off one by one. If the day comes when my questions have all been answered I'll be more than satisfied. Whichever answer I find.
  
  So, if there is some type of a deity that lies somewhere outside of my ability to believe it could exist, I can't fathom how my stance could be perceived as a problem.
  reply report
  59
  A Troubled Manposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  I must say that you still have retained an amazing ability to read words in posts that aren't there.
  
  A lack of critical thinking skills is the problem and the reason why we have fence sitters.
  reply report
  0
  Emile Rposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  Since you obviously appear to want so very much to understand....you said Learning would imply one is no longer sitting on the fence but is actually thinking and has an intelligent opinion.
  
  So, to recap. Per your post you are saying fence sitters are not thinking and don't have an intelligent opinion. Does that about sum it up?
  
  Are you sure you aren't pentecostal because....darn....your posts can sometimes mirror one of theirs.
  reply report
  59
  A Troubled Manposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  It really doesn't matter what I say, does it? Your beliefs rule your worldview.
  
  Yes, I spread hatred and lies everywhere.
  reply report
  83
  Pcunixposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  I've often wondered what drives that? Are they afraid to have real opinions because it might offend people? Obviously most really are atheists - they know it's all silly, but they are reluctant to say so. I know that, as you say, most may not have really examined the issue in depth, and simply choose the believe the "we can't really know" blarney that so many spew, but I really wonder about the "fear of offense".
  reply report
  60
  mischeviousmeposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  I am just being as pollite as possible. I think etiquite and social empathy is important when talking to others. People have a tendancy to see the small details between the lines and it may not be agreable to everyone so I am apologizing to the individual.
  reply report
  83
  Pcunixposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  Ahh. The emotional need to be polite.
  
  How wonderful it is that this emotion determines your beliefs.
  reply report
  0
  Emile Rposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  So. Being polite is bad to an atheist? Interesting. This explains a lot.
  reply report
  83
  Pcunixposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  I don't believe that I have to pretend that your opinions have value to be polite. It's quite enough that I will stand to defend your right to hold them - I don't have to give them false respect.
  report
  0
  Emile Rposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  No. I don't have to respect your silly ideas either; but sometimes it makes me feel good to pretend I do. And I would always defend your right to have them. Even if they didn't create such amusement.
  report
  83
  Pcunixposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  Oh, you are amused :-)
  
  How utterly fascinating. No doubt that is supposed to imply that agnosticism is the intelligent stance. Yet you still refuse to read anything that might challenge that false belief..
  
  Have a nice day. I'd be interested in how you'd have responded in another thread. Here is what I had to say:
  
  http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/89085?p … ost1914424
  report
  0
  Emile Rposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  I read it. That was nice. I agree, except for the wishy washy agnostic part.
  report
  0
  Emile Rposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  Hang around for a while. I may be agnostic, but being agnostic appears to be more offensive than being atheist or hard core religious. We get harrassed by both sides and respond in kind.
  
  Whatever delusion works for you.
  
  We say the same about atheists and the religious. Fancy that.
  reply report
  83
  Pcunixposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  Yet you have not even read my arguments. I HAVE read all the "but we cannot know" nonsense.
  
  Fancy that, indeed.
  reply report
  0
  Emile Rposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  You do realize you aren't the preeminent atheistic opinion? I don't have to know what your argument is, anymore than you care to know mine. I think, each of us knowing the definition of the word the other defines them selves as has been enough to seal each of our opinions of the other.
  
  I'm sure you consider your reasons for your stand as convincing as I consider mine to be. I was raised to be polite and give leeway for freedom of conscience. And you?
  reply report
  83
  Pcunixposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  No, I don't realize that.
  
  I happen to be of the opinion that my arguments and opinions are as good or better than anyone else's. I think Dawkin's and the rest of the "popular" atheists (if there can be such a thing) are quite wrong in their "can't prove it either way" stance.
  
  I CAN prove it.
  
  Oh, and I was raised to say what I know to be true.
  
  I'm done here, so feel free to take your least shot and say something demeaning.. I won't be back to retort.
  report
  0
  Emile Rposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  Good for you.
  report
  59
  A Troubled Manposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  Believers believe their beliefs should have top priority and be respected, honored and taken seriously. The person is irrelevant as they are nothing more than a "fleshy suit" worn by some spiritual entity.
  
  Hence, respect the beliefs but not the person.
  
  You and I look at it the opposite way.
  reply report
  0
  Emile Rposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  No. you do not spread lies. I do think sometimes you foster hatred, but that's just an opinion. And, honestly, I figure it's calculated. So, maybe you have a good reason.
  
  But, I'm not sure how my beliefs are bad. I believe all people are basically good and should follow their hearts and their conscience. Is that bad? In your opinion?
  reply report
  59
  A Troubled Manposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  Was it the consistent use of laughies that gave it away? --->
  
  I think that once you come to that understanding as opposed to that belief, you'll be well on your way.
  reply report
  0
  Emile Rposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  Words, words, words ATM. I see that as a basic difference between you and I. You attempt to use word choice against people when, basically, you are saying the same thing. That's why I like you. I know you'll never see this, but we are very simpatico.
  reply report
  59
  A Troubled Manposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  No, I'm not saying the same thing and my choice of words are directly correlated to their definitions and that usage in any given sentence.
  reply report
  0
  Emile Rposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  I choose my words, also. Probably not as carefully, but I am in the habit of giving others the benefit of the doubt and keep forgetting that isn't the norm here. But, let's take a look at what was said.
  
  I said I believe all people are basically good and should follow their hearts and their conscience.
  
  You said 1. I think that once you come to that understanding as opposed to that belief, you'll be well on your way.
  
  Which means we are in agreement, from where I'm standing. I use the word believe, because it is my understanding that people are basically good; but it is also my understanding that not everyone agrees. So I label it a belief. I am not arrogant enough to think I know everything. I could be wrong. Maybe it is simply that those I have come into contact with in my lifetime have led me to come to this conclusion. I haven't met everyone in the world yet. And I'm not trying.
  report
  60
  mischeviousmeposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  I do not think it is bad, I am speaking of how the knowledge ot it can be used in sometimes negative ways. It can be seen on both sides, but the intellegent people on the fence would rather talk about it than create an argument. Sometimes it may get a little heated. but what should one expect when one is talking about personal philosophy?
  reply report
  0
  Emile Rposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  You are correct. I have a bad habit of stooping to the argument. Definitely something I need to work on.
  reply report
  60
  mischeviousmeposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  We're all like that. I think we may be hardwired to act in such a way.
  reply report
  77
  Castlepalomaposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  Me too, lately I've given too many snappy answers and questions
  reply report
  60
  mischeviousmeposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  Just because one sits on the fence, does not mean they aren't educated to to some degree. It just means they don't like to act the same way everyone else does. I don't by fashionable clothes because I don't care to. It doesn't mean I don't like to watch the game being played either. The game that has 2 goals with the same idea. One is to live life and have God, the other is to live life without god. It's a game of opinion and self dellusion.
  
  I do not boast to have any of the answers, these are just some observations I've made and in no way are intended to offend.
  reply report
  59
  A Troubled Manposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  Critical thinking skills are not fashionable nor do they make you act the same way everyone else does.
  reply report
  83
  Pcunixposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  i disagree. I can't prove that there is no "creator", but that could be a 4th year physics student in some other Universe. It could even be creatures like us accidentally creating other Universes while we fumble our way into learning about particle physics.
  
  I can prove that such a creator, if it exists at all, is no "god". I can't prove it to the religious, of course: they have emotional need to believe and I wouldn't even want to take that way from them - we all have irrational beliefs and if they make us happy and bring no harm to others, we should be allowed to have them.
  
  But no person without that emotional need should accept the argument that "it can't be proved either way". It can, and there are no gods.
  reply report
  0
  Emile Rposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  I'll be honest. I haven't read your hub. But, I think it should be easy to explain away the religious idea of God. But, at this point, many things are possible. I simply believe it would be arrogant to say we know enough to know for sure that some type of extension to reality as we know it does not exists.
  
  I think heaven, hell, and souls hanging in the balance here are ridiculous concepts. And I don't anticipate dancing for Jesus, or any such silly idea. I'm sorry, but I can honestly say I honestly don't know. And I haven't heard a reasonable argument that makes me believe anyone does.
  
  I know you probably think this implies you are right. I think it could mean that, or something else entirely.
  reply report
  83
  Pcunixposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  I am uninterested in disabusing anyone of either religious belief or fence sitting. If it makes you happy and you are not hurting anyone, I'm fine with it.
  reply report
  0
  Emile Rposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  You are fine with it? Gee. That's a load off my mind. I was soooo very worried.
  reply report
  83
  Pcunixposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  :-)
  
  Well, you said that I probably think I'm right. That's correct, I do.
  
  I have no problem with you or anyone else being wrong, though :-)
  reply report
  0
  Muldaniaposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  I agree that religious belief of any kind is not in itself a bad thing. As far as we know we are only passing through this life once, and are only here for such a very short time. Therefore belief in gods, devils, angels or fairies is not harmful. It is only when people insist on forcing their own beliefs onto others that the human species encounters probelms, which leads to wars and acts of terrorism. It should be possible to disagree very strongly with the views of others, without the need to force others to agree with us. Agreeing politely to disagree is what raises us above the savages.
  reply report
60
Druid Dudeposted 12 years ago
Well, I can't claim to be agnostic, and I'm certainly way beyond being atheist. I believe in logic, and science, yet, I also believe in God. I believe that all sides make the whole. Everyone has something to contribute. I believe that we are really close to a revolution of thought. We stand on the threshold of what amounts to a quantum leap for the entire species. Keep searching for the truth.
reply report
1. 77
  Castlepalomaposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  Middle grounds was my first thread here on this forum and both Religion and Atheist seem too extreme, yet it has helped me find a middle ground better, Thank You all
  
  Never been much of a fence sitter though and hope you people out in the forum do not think my intention is to down your way of thinking or belief, I'm sometimes just too honest to a fault and want to get a closer understanding and do what it takes to learn
  reply report
  60
  mischeviousmeposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  Learning is a necessity for all complex life forms. By this I am asking... Does a tiger not teach it's young to hunt? does a whale not push it's calf to the surface? Etc;. Tine is short for us in the scheme of things. Much too short for anything so small to be so serious. It is what we make of ourselve's and how we take others in that really counts for anything.
  
  So many words for a simple idea. I need to learn to speak english!
  reply report
60
ThoughtPoliceposted 12 years ago
So much crime going on in this thread.. No I must call backup... noooo
reply report
1. 60
  mischeviousmeposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  It's inner dialogue getting mixed up with what I am typing. It does have some understandable points to a degree. Plus I was talking to somebody else as well.
  
  Sorry...
  reply report
  60
  ThoughtPoliceposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  No worries friend, you have commit no crime. The thought police use reverse psychology to promote free thinking. Is it Working??
  
  (practices harder to be psychic)
  reply report
0
Emile Rposted 12 years ago
Hey mischievousme. I thought of another reason I don't agree with atheists or the religious all of the time. They are arrogant. That's irritating.
reply report
1. 83
  Pcunixposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  Ayup. It's really hard to deal with rational people, isn't it? They are just like irrational people - except they are rational.
  reply report
  0
  Emile Rposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  No. Not in the least. But people who claim knowledge they don't possess aren't that rational. Imo.
  reply report
  83
  Pcunixposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  But I DO possess the knowledge. You admitted that you haven't read my arguments, so how can you possibly say that I am irrational?
  
  Unless, of course, it is that you have an irrational reason to want to straddle the fence - which is what I strongly suspect is the case for many so-called agnostics. With that need driving your thinking, you'll be no more convinced than any bible-thumper - because you have already made up your mind.
  reply report
2. 60
  mischeviousmeposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  This is why I am neither atheist or religious. People are arogant, not just the to sides. Everyone is prideful in some way or another. I am no more guiltless than anyone else in this world of being this way. This is the way things are and it is a universal truth.
  reply report
  0
  Emile Rposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  Well, I agree. But, on some subjects some stands appear to be more arrogant than others.
  reply report
  60
  mischeviousmeposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  Arrogance has little to do with the belief itself, so much as the individual point of view. We can all be arrogant and it is a result of our pride to act the way we do. They are aspects of ego and self affirmation, arrogance and pride.
  reply report
  60
  ThoughtPoliceposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  pssst.... i am sending you an application to join the thoughtpolice...
  reply report
  60
  mischeviousmeposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  Lol
  reply report
  0
  Emile Rposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  I'm afraid I would have to disagree. Firmly held beliefs are ego. Plain and simple. Ego, self affirmation, arrogance and pride are what entrenches the belief and makes us push it as truth.
  
  Now, if you argued that arrogance was not meant to be a by product of the teachings of a belief; I'd agree. But belief is simply a shadow of what has been taught. Each person internalizes the things taught in their own unique manner.
  reply report
  60
  mischeviousmeposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  Well it is the ego that harbors the reservations that we have for new ideas, though many of the ideas we are introduced to are older than the one's we know.
  
  The fence sitting aspect comes from Sidhartha. Sit in the middle and observe. This is how old fence sitting is. Older than Christianity, yet younger than Budhism. The ideas seem new to us but are older than we know. This is why one should do research and listen. Be part of everyone, not just inside the finite mind. One must remember that we live with other people and that we are not alone in our suffering, nor are we totally individual of others. You have worries and so does everyone else. You have happiness sometimes and so does everyone else. This is to say that, our ego keeps us separate and that we will never get allong with others as long as there are cliques and special clubs to join.
  
  For me, the right group of people, are people in general. I do not hang out with same people all of the time, it is bad for the individual in us. To remain confined to a certain group can make one absorb the traits of the group itself. One should hang out with as many different groups as possible and be integrated into society as possible. What makes us look smart in one group, makes us look dumb in another. This is why I observe and speak. I think it is better to know who I speak with, rather than what we are talking about. Talk to people, not at them.
  reply report
70
Kalvin19posted 12 years ago
See the definitions of "Agnostic Atheism" and "Agnostic Theism" they might be of interest to you, they have certainly been for me. They approch the issue in a more intelligent manner.
reply report
1. 59
  A Troubled Manposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  "Agnostic atheists are atheistic because they do not hold a belief in the existence of any deity and agnostic because they claim that the existence of a deity is either unknowable in principle or currently unknown in fact." wiki
  reply report
2. 83
  Pcunixposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  No, they don't. They simply define positions that are already obvious from the phrases themselves.
  reply report
61
paoloumaliposted 12 years ago
What works for one person doesn't mean it will work for another. If you agree, then you take both sides and you are being tolerant of others. If you dont, then you are selfish. Fame, power, money are the usual motives/driving force for one's belief.
reply report
1. 60
  mischeviousmeposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  I agree totally. It is true that it works this way. To each his own, so to speak.
  reply report
  61
  paoloumaliposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  That's right. However unaccepting you are with the logic in their belief, if they are not causing any harm, probably we can just be tolerant about it. Unless arguing really results to something special/productive/beneficial to someone, then so be it. But if not, just understand that everyone has experienced the world differently. Taste, smell, touch, experience is not the same for everyone. And that makes the world colorful and interesting!
  reply report
  60
  mischeviousmeposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  Myomoto Musashi said "You truly don't know yourself until you do battle with someone else". Though this may be the philosophy of the warrior, we all have the propensity to argue.
  reply report
  77
  Castlepalomaposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  Yes! lots of tolerant, like the way you think mischeviousme
  
  When I tell atheist or Religious people I'm not arguing just having a friendly discussion they still don't think so. I try to learn something and test somtimes being in their shoes, because I don't belong to any group (maybe optimist club). No need to be against anyone, it's just odd thing I'm not for.
  
  Why have an angry discussion about God, neither side can not proved or disprove, just share and enjoy the wonders of life in it all.
  reply report
  60
  mischeviousmeposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  Try to enjoy the company and walk away feeling a little more enlightened.
  reply report
  61
  paoloumaliposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  Well discussions make you sharp. And discussions usually lead to new ideas and innovation. So if there is a good outcome, that's a great discussion.
  reply report
  60
  mischeviousmeposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  How to be a team player with out being on the team. That would be a great title for a book.
  reply report
  77
  Castlepalomaposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  write it
  reply report
  77
  Castlepalomaposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  I would buy it anyways
  reply report
  60
  mischeviousmeposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  Lol. If only I could write.
  reply report
  77
  Castlepalomaposted 12 years agoin reply to this
  Me too, yet have worked in the film business and have a plan for making films
  reply report

Post a Reply

jump to first post

Necessary
HubPages Device ID	This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
Login	This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google Recaptcha	This is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
Akismet	This is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google Analytics	This is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic Pixel	This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web Services	This is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
Cloudflare	This is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted Libraries	Javascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)

Features
Google Custom Search	This is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google Maps	Some articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google Charts	This is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host API	This service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTube	Some articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Vimeo	Some articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Paypal	This is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Login	You can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Maven	This supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)

Marketing
Google AdSense	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClick	Google provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index Exchange	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Sovrn	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Ads	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad Marketplace	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexus	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Openx	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon Project	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLift	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say Media	We partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing Pixels	We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking Pixels	We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.

Statistics
Author Google Analytics	This is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
Comscore	ComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking Pixel	Some articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
Clicksco	This is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)

Why I take both sides (Atheist and Religious)

Arts and Design

Autos

Books, Literature, and Writing

Business and Employment

Education and Science

Entertainment and Media

Family and Parenting

Fashion and Beauty

Food and Cooking

Games, Toys, and Hobbies

Gender and Relationships

Health

Holidays and Celebrations

Home and Garden

HubPages Tutorials and Community

Personal Finance

Pets and Animals

Politics and Social Issues

Religion and Philosophy

Sports and Recreation

Technology

Travel and Places

About Us

This website uses cookies

Why I take both sides (Atheist and Religious)

Related Discussions

This website uses cookies