People everywhere make bad decisions. These guys don't seem any different from any other group of teens out doing dumb things aside from their faith. They are owning their mistake and testifiyng how they are getting through it. Let people believe what they want, and who are you guys to state categorically that they are wrong. You realize there's no real proof that there isn't a God either right?
I believe that Homer Simpson proved that there was no God. If The Simpsons can predict President Trump I trust Homer's claim regarding God.
Whether or not God exists their belief in God is clearly is helping them cope with a traumatizing event. Their faith appears to be having a positive affect on them being able to live normal lives after the event.
Humans are creatures of ritual
Or they're playing it up to pull on heart strings and try and avoid a lawsuit.
To me, it seems even more reckless than I originally thought, not less. They had done it before, with helmets and lights the first time. Then they purposely and willfully chose to go back again without lights or helmets, piled on together with the express purpose for increased momentum and speed, and brought in more people for the thrill and escalation.
exactly.
I was more forgiving thinking it was a spur of the moment one time thing that went wrong.
but bragging about it, going back for more, and then making it more dangerous with less safety gear?
this is less about god and more about Darwin, if you know what I mean.
The Following User Says Thank You to GordonBlue For This Useful Post:
Good for them. I'm sure opiate addicts also have no trouble with insomnia either.
THat implies that their religion somehow has a negative affect on their life. At the individual level generally I'd argue that religion is positive for its practitioners. At the macro level it's a destructive political force.
You criticizing their praising god is like saying someone with a support animal at the airport to help their fear of flying is stupid.
It doesn't really matter, at the end of the day one of us believes and the other doesn't. And no amount of debate will change that.
I can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into.
Quote:
Originally Posted by speede5
But that doesn't mean insults and the like need to be thrown around.
I haven't been insulting people. Respect people not ideas. If an idea cannot be accepted on its own merits it should be insulted. This is the most sincere form of criticism.
Quote:
Originally Posted by speede5
We could go circular all day on who needs to provide proof. Doesn't matter if you've already made up your mind.
No, the maker of the claim has to provide proof. This is the basis for seeking knowledge. Also, I am more than willing to accept religious claims if supporting evidence is presented in observable, measurable terms. I don't claim there is no god; I simply have yet to see any evidence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by speede5
I can prove you can't fly but you're not going to like the experiment. :P
No, you can't. The only thing you could prove would be at the time of your data collection that no flight was observed. You can't prove a negative.
So you're saying that the rate of teenage bad decisions is higher amount Christians than non christians.
I'm interested in seeing the statistical backup for this assertion.
I never made that claim. I'm saying that accepting ideas without evidence means that an idea is not being accepted on its own merit but rather the suggestion of merits made by those making said claim. I would hypothesise that accepting ideas as fact without evidence makes one more likely to do so in the future. I am more than willing to examine evidence to the contrary and accept the resolution should it lead us to the scientific conclusion.
That is evidence of a dog existing not of the effectiveness of the Dog.
Basicly if a dog has magical powers why can't an imaginary God also have magical powers to calm someone.
In both cases it's a persons own psychology providing the affect.
Now you're moving the goalposts.
Dogs have not been observed to have magical powers in any scientific manner that has been peer reviewed.
Support animals can provide comfort by easing anxiety in those people who pet them in times of stress. The effectiveness of petting animals in reducing stress levels in the "petter" has been studied extensively. This is not even in question any more. No one is claiming that support animals are magical or whatnot.
I don't doubt that a person's faith can provide them with comfort. We hear loads of anecdotal evidence to support this. The placebo effect is a helluva thing. A misguided comfort, while misguided, is still a comfort. I don't dispute this. I may take great comfort in the notion that a giant, pipe smoking rabbit controls everything but without evidence it is an unsupportable idea. Thus, if I believed such a thing, I would keep it to myself rather than run it up the flag to see who salutes. I wouldn't put it out there and expect no criticism and unwavering acceptance. Perhaps I'm too self aware for that sort of thing.
I simply have yet to see any evidence that any deity exists and choose to live my life based on evidence and reason as opposed to blind devotion. It helps me be more present in my day to day life and helps me to make the most of it.
The great thing about arguments between religious folks and atheists is that they often find middle ground and it never turns into pages of insults and standing their ground.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to jayswin For This Useful Post:
The great thing about arguments between religious folks and atheists is that they often find middle ground and it never turns into pages of insults and standing their ground.
I've insulted no one and yet have not been insulted in this thread. I'm also not arguing.
__________________
Don't fear me. Trust me.
The Following User Says Thank You to Reaper For This Useful Post:
