Isn't this an excellent demonstration of atheists eating their own words?

Question

Check out how Paul S (the atheist hypocrite that hangs out hear slandering Christians non-stop and pretending he's wise) shows the question I asked to be true:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070920160344AAUC1Z5&r=w

This morally senseless atheist, shows by slandering, that he could care less about moral truths, he even got 4 votes up and none down. Keep on voting him up atheists, keep showing I'm right.

Answer 1

Seriously, the guy is just being polite, after sustaining a few insults due to him being an atheist.

You need a better view of morality if you think it's not hypocritical to slam the polite guy who breaks down your assumption that all atheists are immoral. Education is important, right?

And your "Chosen" avatar name seems a little arrogant, don't you think?

I don't eat words, I use them.

Answer 2

Sir,
Whatever happened between you and Paul S. you should drop. I have read the question you are referring to and would say that you asked that question with the intent of slandering all atheists. Paul S. made a simple statement regarding the fact that you were asking a "loaded" questions(or a question meant to attack atheists). and you did not like that. Which is neither here nor there. But to continue to attack the person because he argued against your original attack on atheism is not right. I am not an atheist. But I wanted to point out that there may be better ways to get your point across than some of the slanderous things you said. No one person is the same so to lump atheists as a whole would be like lumping Al'Queda groups in with all Muslims. it is not correct and it comes down to you(or anyone else) judging the whole based on a few.

Answer 3

quite slightly each of the predictions made by utilizing the tremendous bang were incorrect - and the idea changed to conform to observations. with the exception of, each of the observations might want to be defined without the want for the tremendous Bang making the tremendous Bang superfluous. Couple that with present day observations that instantly refute needed circumstances for the tremendous Bang and It amazes me why all and distinct is even speaking about it as something better than a clinical useless end like the Geocentric universe, flat earth and different clinical mythologies. All this besides the undeniable fact that is moot. Now that clinical evaluation of the info has given us an expertise of creation and how the author did it, the tremendous Bang is quite no longer needed - or perhaps supportable by utilizing the observations. authentic there are gaps, yet why might want to an already refuted concept like the tremendous Bang be invoked to fill those gaps? The info shows the creation of the universe replaced into no longer some vast Bang or quick strengthen yet an prepared affair with area being rolled out in an prepared way, count number presented and in that tiny fraction of the universe that has the right circumstances to help existence, existence replaced into presented.

Answer 4

You're simply not getting it. "Have you stopped beating your wife yet?" is a very old joke and and a reference to the underhanded way you framed your question. "Why don't atheists care about moral truths?" presumes that atheists don't care about moral truths, the same way Paul's question presumes you're still beating your wife. It's just quid pro quo. Tit for tat. Your insulting question deserved, and got, a perfectly appropriate insulting response.

Atheists are NOT morally senseless. That's actually why we're atheists. Morals are very important to us. The difference is, an atheist's morals are derived from the culture we actually inhabit, not from the ignorant solipsistic superstitions of a bunch of bronze age bigots.

Edit: For the record, "tentofield" was exactly correct. Your original question was a logical fallacy called "begging the question," as was Paul's sarcastic rejoinder.

Answer 5

Funny how it's always the level 1 noobs pointing out how incorrect the atheists are. Paul S is one of the most respectful, well spoken and intelligent PEOPLE I've encountered here, atheism not withstanding.

Answer 6

Another clueless "christian".... he calls you on a loaded question and you get your nickers in a knot.

you are helping Paul S run up a record score with all the thumbs up folks are giving him in response to your rant. I haven't seen this many thumbs up ever.

Answer 7

That is not slander, you were begging the question. Paul S merely did exactly the same thing using a famous question to illustrate the point. All his question did was point out the illogicality of yours. Try reading more, you might learn something.

Answer 8

You don't show much grace, although you have such a nick name. Anyway I am sure Paul S was sarcastic.
All in all you are not showing much intelligence nor moral yourself if you ask questions just to go into superficial arguments.
Shame on you.

Answer 9

You're wrong, but whatever makes you happy....
Now will YOU stop pretending you're wise though? Pleeease, it's kind of annoying. Meh. Ah, yes Christians are soo accepting. Oops there I go generalizing again ;)
If Atheists are so bad then why did my CHRISTIAN mom marry my ATHEIST dad? So, apparently you're very, very wrong. Read your question again, and you'll discover we're not the ones eating our own word's here.

Answer 10

Are you serious? Nono, really? ARE you?

That wasn't SLANDER. That was illustrating a point. And brilliantly done, at that. If nothing else, YOU, sir are in the wrong and are actually in violation of alot of Y!A policies.

It also proves; if nothing else, that you didn't bother to read the link he sent you.

It's easy to point that high-powered perception at others, but a whole other game when it's pointed at you, isn't it?