It seems that theists on this forum think some sort of reset switch is flicked once a new forum thread has started and that none of the points made in earlier threads count anymore...

JP,

Not only have all your arguments on this topic been thoroughly discredited in every thread you've ever posted on but my fundamental point, at the end of our first encounter, still stands:

If you honestly believe everything you claim on this topic, then you have sacrificed your humanity in deference to your God. That point of mine is still valid. It didn’t disappear with the posting of a new article.

And as someone who - from our first lengthy encounter - understands your position on this topic quite well, I feel I should remind you that the main point in my last post to you (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=13321#230298) still stands:

If you think that we’d be wise to invent a God and convince ourselves of their existence - whether or not a God actually exists - purely for the sake of maintaining morality, then not only do not understand morality and its origins, but your whole take on it is dishonest and shallow.

“The (God created) universe (demonstrates) nothing but blind pitiless indifference”
Perhaps JP can offer evidence of morality in the Universe, outside the sphere of Humanity? Perhaps in the worm that converted David Attenborough to Atheism, which slowly and with excruciating pain burrows into the eyes of it's victims?
“If that is so, slavery was morally “right” in Alabama in 1800?”
Slave owners justified themselves using the Christian Bible. Apparently God has nothing against slavery.
“Today, female genital mutilation is morally “right” in some African countries”
A religious practice, performed in the name of God.
“Are people who oppose female genital mutilation in those African countries today “wrong” for doing so?”
No, they're Atheists. At least, literally atheistic towards that particular aspect of religion.
In an earlier post, Yabby suggested JP would help a liitle old lady across the street -not because he feared the fires of hell.
That's presumably if the little old lady could prove she wasn't a witch, in which case JP should burn, stone or drown her to death, in the name of his moral God.
G'day Runner. Once again, scientific theories are accepted in science if they work. A theory works if you can use it to make accurate predictions.
Geneticists use evolutionary theory every day. So do biologists, bio chemists, botanists, farmers and dog breeders.
Tell me, were there 2 dogs on the Ark, or 2 Great Danes, 2 Poodles, 2 Australian cattle dogs...

One of the moral dilemmas being presented here, JP, is your continued pretension of logical enquiry when numerous posters have pointed out that the structures of your questions are neither formal nor valid and are most definitely circular when not implying an 'appeal to authority'.

If your enquiries are merely informal in nature, fine – accept the answers you been given and move on. If they are a mere rhetorical device then expect to be challenged.

From yesterday, one of your questions can be reflected as:

JP you may have your preference that people worship your god but if their preference is not to believe that way, why should your preference prevail over theirs?

And, from a bit later, you may as well be asked:

JP, on what basis are you saying that slavery and genital mutilation are morally wrong?

They must have been really, really unlucky, woot.

>>But I definitely know of others as mentioned where it was a definitive contributing factor to them bailing out of their industry<<

According to a poll conducted by the Christian Research Association at the end of 2009, only 16% of Australians attend a religious service "at least once a month".

Statistically, then, it has to be highly dubious that "christian groups in the small towns [who] know who goes to church and who doesn't, who is a believer and who isn't", have anything whatsoever to do with business failure or success.

I think you may be suffering from a persecution complex, if such a tiny minority of the population can cause you such distress.

"They must have been really, really unlucky, woot."

Possibly so, but it still occurred. These were two towns, one a waterside border town in Victoria, the other a gateway to the mountains.

The business 'boys club' that ran these towns decidedly favoured their own to the point of refusing to stock advertising of an accommodation in one.

"Statistically, then, it has to be highly dubious that "christian groups in the small towns [who] know who goes to church and who doesn't, who is a believer and who isn't", have anything whatsoever to do with business failure or success."

National statistics mean nothing in towns of a few people if that, running business.

But this is the problem. Folk like yourself will just refuse to see this happens. The general lack of acceptance these things happen is what people are dealing with.

But outside that, try listening to some of the video's put out by FIRIS on youtube, with non believers AND believers talking about the influence of evangelical christianities privilege in our public schools on their children. My own experiences are just one tiny section of very complex issues that come about by the general attitude of 'don't rock the boat' and 'if you complain, you are just the same as them' that abounds.

I like to try to find solutions, but I suspect you may be doomed to failure, woot. Every commercial situation and transaction ever, has been on an uneven playing field – it's only the degree of tilt that is in question.

(I am aware all generalisations are wrong)

What to do about it? Here's the best I could come up with…

Maybe it's about time we took runner at his word that atheists have faith, tenets and dogma… have the AFA register as a religion.

Then go "The business 'boys club' that ran (those) towns" on the basis of religious persecution – or its equivalent.

That might stop them bragging, "We've got woot!"

It might also be a helpful weapon for FIRIS. Best of luck.