Ammonite: Believers don’t have the sole mortgage on goodness, although many through their intolerance of others think they do. I know there are good believers and good disbelievers. As I stated before I have no problem with simple belief if some want to believe in god(s), so be it. At that level we could all coexist in a secular society, no problem. The trouble starts when the believers want to impose their values, laws, rules call it what you like, not only onto other believers but onto all and sundry and will go to any extreme, including waging war, to get their way. A man who believes God is on his side is a very dangerous man, he can do no wrong.

Paul1405

Yes I know. And agree.

I am not making myself very clear when other atheists feel they must explain such issues as people forcing their ideologies on others - something with which I most vehemently disagree - the forcing of ideas. The explaining from you and David is just becoming a tad boring. If not outright condescending.

However, the posts exchanged between myself, you, David and other atheists proves the claim that atheists are individuals and not brainwashed into a single ideology. And thank the universe for that.

Oh dear : (

Atheist Foundation of Australia Inc, you are the one who invoked the Nazis--Saturday, 10 September 2011 7:14:47 PM--implying via the poem that holding one's peace is dangerous. I agree, which is why I speak out when I see blatant hyperbole and hate speech, which I have "quoted" above and taken to task, and for which I've been summarily judged and executed--figuratively speaking--via that uncanny gift you share with all petty tyrants.

Now would you mind "quoting" the passages by me where I have "projected false views" or said or implied that the convention was "dastardly"? And while we're at it, Ammonite, perhaps you'll quote some of my, <increasing hate filled rants and deliberately false assumptions>? You are the one who is exposed here as false in your eagerness to toady-up to his lordship.
The more I learn about you, David, the more I think my accusation of projection, made in jest, might be correct.
You say: <I know it’s difficult when only text is involved to ascertain the correctness of this [your surmise] but it becomes a matter of best guess. That is par for the course with internet forums>

This God-like ability to "divine" personalities is a rationale for summary (blind) logic and judgements, and shows all the makings of a megalomaniac. Should you ever have real power, I think it would be unwise to contradict you.

Now I really have better things to do than go on defending myself from the distortions and misrepresentations that appear to be your preferred mode of attack (as defence)--and yours too Ammonite it seems--so I'm going to make a concerted effort now to ignore further calumnies.

Ammonite,

Yes, the mournful and melodious Kenny Rodgers, hey. I agree with most of that post except we have a different interpretation of ‘to know when to fold them’.

I have no problem with the boring posts of others; I just disregard them. It’s a mind trick.

Been desperately seeking good things said about atheists, atheism and the GAC from ‘some’ other people on this thread. Except for a few purposed ambiguities there doesn’t seem to be too many words of praise.

I’ll have another look when I get time. It could all be in the fine print.

David

I am always seeking and have found someone who also likes to question - everything. Hoping this link is of benefit:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exlCxmU4bR0&feature

Ammonite,

Regarding your spirituality, it seems you have a similar outlook to my own. Also, I feel that the origin of metaphysical thought emanated from man's connection and his experience his fellow man - and of the natural world.

Perhaps some degree of metaphysical thought is necessary for man to find peace amidst his ignorance and his knowledge.

Charles Darwin wrote in his autobiography:

"Up to the age of thirty, or beyond it, poetry of many kinds...gave me great pleasure, and even as a schoolboy I took intense delight in Shakespeare, especially in his historical plays. I have also said that formerly pictures gave me considerable, and music very great delight. But now for many years I cannot endure to read a line of poetry: I have tried lately to read Shakespeare and found it so intolerably dull that it nauseated me. I have also lost almost any taste for pictures or music...My mind seems to have become a kind of machine for grinding general laws out of large collections of fact, but why this should have caused the atrophy of that part of the brain alone, on which the higher tastes depend, I cannot conceive...the loss of these is a loss of happiness, and may possibly be injurious to the intellect, and more probably to the moral character, by enfeebling the emotional part of our nature."

There's nothing I can add to that to make it more meaningful.