BookTalk.org

Anti-Christian Bias in American Society

http://www.laterralane.com/siems/antichristianbias.htm

Hogwash! Most of those examples are resistance to the spread of Christianity! Others seem in need of proof or reference. Those that are true, good for it! We need to progress into an atheist nation.

Interbane wrote:Hogwash! Most of those examples are resistance to the spread of Christianity! Others seem in need of proof or reference. Those that are true, good for it! We need to progress into an atheist nation.

Uh, Interbane, the list was a trick.

Thomas Hood wrote:

Interbane wrote:Hogwash! Most of those examples are resistance to the spread of Christianity! Others seem in need of proof or reference. Those that are true, good for it! We need to progress into an atheist nation.

Uh, Interbane, the list was a trick.

damned trolls...

I read the first two, what can I say.

That list brings together every good reason why religion should remain a private affair. The whole anti-christian bias you seem to percieve actually comes from an inability to imagine another groups percieved reality mainfested in the form of their or your own personal belief. As there are a multiplicity of people so to are there a multiplicity of beliefs. This is a major reasons why beliefs should be believed more and spoken about less.

How about spoken about more and believed less? Perhaps we should indoctrinate less, and continue dialogue to further philosophies and theories via hypotheses. Keep a skeptical mindset, but not pseudoskeptical, and believe when there's sufficient evidence and reasoning. Just playing the antagonist!

So you think that people should know less about themselves but argue their lack of self-knowledge more dominantly? You seem to confuse the separation of talking about religion and using the words as an intellectual appeal to influence any other individuals beliefs. There can be no evidence for a belief other than its pervasiveness in a persons imagination or else it would undoubtedly be termed a fact. The exposition of any belief, even one that has been poorly theorized or only weakly assimilated by the individual through introspection, serves only to “indoctrinate” or subvert another persons imagination. All words are meant to indicate position or describe the position of the speaker and as such are inherently designed to convert or subvert popular opinion.

Anti-christian bias may stem to a degree from a lack of imagination.

There are so many of you with birds in your profile pictures that I thought it prudent to remind everyone how dangerous they are by posting a warning in mine.

Birds Kill


:king:

Grim: "So you think that people should know less about themselves but argue their lack of self-knowledge more dominantly?"

You jumped three bridges and a crosswalk to reach that conclusion. People should know more about themselves, of course. That doesn't equate to what they believe. Secondly, a person who debates to correct their lack of knowledge, or to accumulate knowledge.

This is presuming people will first believe less. I mean, people should believe in facts, they should not believe in fantasy. If you aren't sure of the distinction, get rid of everything in your head and start from scratch. Learn how to use your brain - your thinking organ. It's tools are reasoning, logic, sometimes intuition, and not emotion with regards to belief. Use them in accordance with your five senses to figure out what is factual and what is not.

Then talk about it, else how would our collective knowledge ever grow? Just remember that nothing is certain and their are no absolutes, not even absolute faith. Speak all you can about all there is of knowledge and philosophy, but beware the person who tries to subvert you into believing in magical things, for it may spread across the globe. But then, you may not need to fear him if you simply use the tools of your brain.