English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

19 answers

There is no question here.

Interrogative sentences are used to form questions. One form of an interrogative sentence is a declarative sentence followed by a question mark. In verbal communication, the final syllable of the last word of a question is pronounced with a rising pitch or intonation.

2007-05-19 14:55:03 · answer #1 · answered by Fluffy Wisdom 5 · 2 0

An agnostic is an atheist. Thomas Huxley coined the term in the 19th century. It means "not knowing". An atheist does not believe in the existence of gods, an atheist has no beliefs. An agnostic is an atheist who qualifies his/her lack of belief by saying it is impossible to know that there is or isn't a god. The agnostic is still an atheist.

2007-05-19 14:49:51 · answer #2 · answered by tentofield 7 · 1 0

OK. So what's your point? Does being so obviously antagonistic make you feel good? It surprises me that with an attitude like that you have any friends at all. Personally, I think us "boring nerds" are just smart enough to avoid you. Have a nice life.

2007-05-19 14:55:21 · answer #3 · answered by link955 7 · 0 0

You aren't asking a question you are making a statement.

I happen to disagree with your statement myself as I am an agnostic who likes having friends from all sorts of diverse backgrounds; the last thing I do is run a 'belief-check' before making friends with someone.

2007-05-19 14:49:02 · answer #4 · answered by genaddt 7 · 0 0

Let me suggest that sweeping generalizations like this are almost always wrong. "All" atheists are boring nerds? Statistically, at least once in a while you'd find an interesting one. Have whatever friends you like, but don't make silly statements like this.

2007-05-19 14:50:28 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

So? You sound like you know few atheists that you know of, Many of them choose anonymity because your Christian buds actually still have a strangle-hold on society here in the U.S.

Being "out" could cost them jobs, careers, political positions, relationships, family. Stick with your Christian friends - they will abandon you eventually if you refuse to convert. It is their way.

2007-05-19 14:51:18 · answer #6 · answered by Skeff 6 · 2 0

I'm a boring nerd? Methinks not. I've been called a lot of things, but never boring.

2007-05-19 14:52:00 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

u.s. is fairly at odds with Atheism. the reason being the theory of our form of authorities is the self-glaring reality that human beings are endowed by technique of their author with unalienable rights. What which potential is that human beings have rights regardless of authorities. Rights that go beyond authorities. Rights that do not come from nor can they be bumped off by technique of any authorities of guy. those rights come from the author. That precludes any Atheist being ideal because if he/she does no longer comprehend the moral Absolute Authority of the author, he/she can't comprehend or settle for that the author is the source of our rights. that could propose those rights come from authorities and are not unalienable. there's no considered necessary that our President be a Christian or a member of any faith in any respect. even though it does require that he/she trust in a author because the moral Absolute of our lives. because of this Socialists continuously outlaw faith and promote Atheism. by technique of eliminating God from the equation, they eliminate moral Absolutism and substitute moral Relativism. once you boil all of it down, Socialism isn't some thing better than a totalitarian device in accordance with rationing of modern wealth until eventually it truly is exhausted. there's no thanks to have sufficient skill to make your innovations up existence and shortage of existence in accordance with rationing except one first receives rid of moral Absolutism. This leaves the perfect arbiter of suitable and incorrect to be the only with the most skill. That, in a Socialist form, is the imperative authorities. moral Relativism helps them to outline suitable and incorrect in any way which will in effective condition their needs. So, if there is no longer sufficient drugs, in simple terms declare that it truly is morally stunning to disclaim it to the infirm or elderly. If there's a scarcity of foodstuff, in simple terms declare that it truly is morally stunning to allow the susceptible to starve. finally, there is scarcity after scarcity. This commonly ends up in human beings speaking out hostile to the authorities. yet, they in simple terms declare that speaking out hostile to the authorities is immoral and imprison those who talk out. So, what has saved American from growing Socialist is the moral Absolute that our rights come from the author. i do no longer imagine you're going to work out an Atheist elected to be our chief. it would want to be like electing someone who does no longer trust in democracy. There honesty although. *

2016-11-04 12:18:51 · answer #8 · answered by bason 4 · 0 0

I prefer to talk about science, art, and philosophy.

If you prefer to talk about what celebrity is dating some other celebrity or what kind of dress your sister's best friend bought, then be my guest. Just don't bother me with that inane rubbish.

2007-05-19 14:52:18 · answer #9 · answered by Ben 7 · 2 0

roflmao... ok... so?

The nerds make the world go round honey. If the nerds didn't, you wouldn't have that computer you're typing on.

2007-05-19 14:56:17 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers