Are atheists allowed to be spiritual?

[Punk Hazard]

Calling a baby an atheist, is as useless as calling an inanimate object or animal, an atheist. And I can't believe their point has been dragged on so long. It's obvious it was just an "asspull" made by the "self-entitlement boys".

No because atheists are people, and inanimate objects aren't people. Nice try though.

 

[Dreckerplayer]

No because atheists are people, and inanimate objects aren't people. Nice try though.

It's useless, for the simple fact that animals, babies, inanimate objects...cannot think. I've said it before, and it's manipulative and deceptive to consider them atheist.

Athiests are people, who are able to believe in something, and babies aren't among them.So cut the act.

You're making a distinction where there isn't one. Lacking belief is not having belief. Lacking belief in god is not having belief in god. Does a baby have belief in god? No, so it lacks belief in god. There is nothing more to it.

You're stupid, as well.

A baby lacks a belief in god, for the simple fact that they cannot have any form of belief, in general. Therefore, it's manipulative to take that, and consider them atheists, it's too deceptive.

That's really taking advantage of someone's incapability. And you know what that's a trait of...

If anything, their issue is beyond atheism, it's something else. A simple case of "unable to do so"

And the definition of athiest doesn't include "unable to believe in a god".So it isn't as specific, as you guys think it is.Therefore, do not include newborns, animals, etc.

 

[Punk Hazard]

It's useless, for the simple fact that animals, babies, inanimate objects...cannot think. I've said it before, and it's manipulative and deceptive to consider them atheist.

Athiests are people, who are able to believe in something, and babies aren't among them.So cut the act.

Still wrong

 

[Lightbringer]

It's useless, for the simple fact that animals, babies, inanimate objects...cannot think. I've said it before, and it's manipulative and deceptive to consider them atheist.

Athiests are people, who are able to believe in something, and babies aren't among them.So cut the act.

You do know that babies and animals can think right?

Your "simple fact" is wrong.

Babies are just not born with a premeditated belief in a God or gods, which make them atheist.

 

[Multiply]

Depends on how you define spiritual.

 

[Dreckerplayer]

Still wrong

I'm actually correct, and you know it.

Nice try, though.

Don't get all losery like the rest of em, sensei. This ain't the role-playing forum, where you can pretend to be right when you aren't.

In terms of integrity, I will never trust someone who participates in the role-playing threads, it's such a self-explanatory thing.No one's going to you for answers if they're looking for the truth, that's for sure.

Now, run along.

 

[Punk Hazard]

I'm actually correct, and you know it.

Nice try, though.

Don't get all losery like the rest of em, sensei. This ain't the role-playing forum, where you can pretend to be right when you aren't.

In terms of integrity, I will never trust someone who participates in the role-playing threads, it's such a self-explanatory thing.No one's going to you for answers if they're looking for the truth, that's for sure.

Now, run along.

Ignoring all that ad hominem that has nothing to do with this: An atheist is someone who lacks belief in God. A baby who can't form beliefs lacks belief in God. Therefore, a baby is an atheist. It's that simple. Thanks for playing

 

[Lightbringer]

Ignoring all that ad hominem that has nothing to do with this: An atheist is someone who lacks belief in God. A baby who can't form beliefs lacks belief in God. Therefore, a baby is an atheist. It's that simple. Thanks for playing

I think he's missing a few light-bulbs upstairs because he can't grasp simple definitions.

 

[Kakooli]

non believance iz teh mark of a weak person!!!!!!! atheist cannot grasp concepts strong believers can...

 

[Dreckerplayer]

Ignoring all that ad hominem that has nothing to do with this: An atheist is someone who lacks belief in God. A baby who can't form beliefs lacks belief in God. Therefore, a baby is an atheist. It's that simple. Thanks for playing

Correction,

A baby is conveniently atheist as a counter-argument. That's exactly what the problem was.

No one, unless you're conceited and love to hear yourself talk, calls a baby an atheist,cause it's just weird to do so...outside of the obvious reason of being unable to even think. It's ridiculous.

I guess we can agree to disagree, since you're just biased.

You must not know what "ignoring" means, cause you obviously acknowledged that I made a direct statement about you when it comes to "credibility". You have none, you simply ride the coat-tail of another member, as long as it contradicts the person whom you're trying to thwart.You agree to things, when it's only convenient for you, even if it's faulty logic.

Ad hominem, is just a word used for ego protection purposes by arrogant people, who think they're special.Like I said, this isn't the role playing thread, where you can pretend you're someone you're not.

 

[Lightbringer]

Correction,

A baby is conveniently atheist as a counter-argument. That's exactly what the problem was.

No one, unless you're conceited and love to hear yourself talk, calls a baby an atheist,cause it's just weird to do so...outside of the obvious reason of being unable to even think. It's ridiculous.

I guess we can agree to disagree, since you're just biased.

You must not know what "ignoring" means, cause you obviously acknowledged that I made a direct statement about you when it comes to "credibility". You have none, you simply ride the coat-tail of another member, as long as it contradicts the person whom you're trying to thwart.You agree to things, when it's only convenient for you, even if it's faulty logic.

Ad hominem, is just a word used for ego protection purposes by arrogant people, who think they're special.Like I said, this isn't the role playing thread, where you can pretend you're someone you're not.

Babies can think you moron.

 

[Punk Hazard]

Correction,

A baby is conveniently atheist as a counter-argument. That's exactly what the problem was.

No one, unless you're conceited and love to hear yourself talk, calls a baby an atheist,cause it's just weird to do so...outside of the obvious reason of being unable to even think. It's ridiculous.

Unconventional doesn't mean it's not technically true. Go through the day, you won't hear the average person call people "homo sapiens." We still are homo sapiens though.

 

[Multiply]

Correction,

A baby is conveniently atheist as a counter-argument. That's exactly what the problem was.

No one, unless you're conceited and love to hear yourself talk, calls a baby an atheist,cause it's just weird to do so...outside of the obvious reason of being unable to even think. It's ridiculous.

I guess we can agree to disagree, since you're just biased.

You must not know what "ignoring" means, cause you obviously acknowledged that I made a direct statement about you when it comes to "credibility". You have none, you simply ride the coat-tail of another member, as long as it contradicts the person whom you're trying to thwart.You agree to things, when it's only convenient for you, even if it's faulty logic.

Ad hominem, is just a word used for ego protection purposes by arrogant people, who think they're special.Like I said, this isn't the role playing thread, where you can pretend you're someone you're not.

You must be registered for see images

 

[Dreckerplayer]

Unconventional doesn't mean it's not technically true. Go through the day, you won't hear the average person call people "homo sapiens." We still are homo sapiens though.

Self-entitled genius alert. I told you, this isn't the role-playing thread. I don't wanna keep saying this.

Just like your friend with the comment at the very top, you're using propaganda, to your defense. "Homo-sapien" isn't a term used for people who disbelieve or have a lack of belief in a god. It's a classification for all humans, at default, no matter what. Lmao, it's a bad example.

No more bad examples, please.

 

[Uzumaki Macho]

Self-entitled genius alert. I told you, this isn't the role-playing thread. I don't wanna keep saying this.

Just like your friend with the comment at the very top, you're using propaganda, to your defense. "Homo-sapien" isn't a term used for people who disbelieve or have a lack of belief in a god. It's a classification for all humans, at default, no matter what. Lmao, it's a bad example.

No more bad examples, please.

Says the guy who loves to act like a psychoanalyst.

 

[Punk Hazard]

Self-entitled genius alert. I told you, this isn't the role-playing thread. I don't wanna keep saying this.

Just like your friend with the comment at the very top, you're using propaganda, to your defense. "Homo-sapien" isn't a term used for people who disbelieve or have a lack of belief in a god. It's a classification for all humans, at default, no matter what. Lmao, it's a bad example.

No more bad examples, please.

I like how you keep bringing up role-playing like that has any impact on my argument.

Also, lmao, what? That's the point: A term applying to something isn't determined by how often that term is used for it. Just because no one calls babies atheist doesn't change that they technically are.

 

[Dreckerplayer]

Says the guy who loves to act like a psychoanalyst.

You know how that comment makes you look, right?You know what I'm gonna say, right?

I notice things, in an instant. Takes little to no effort, and I address the issue if I find it a hindrance to the discussion. It's called being correctional.And you guys are full of dysfunction and egotistical ideals, but expect people to take you seriously in an argument.The information falls into my hands, no one's giving you "special attention", you're exposing yourselves...it's natural for me to notice it, and address it...cause it bugs the **** out of me.

You gotta get it right, to move forward. Cannot stand hindrances and those with deceptive intent.

"Psychoanalyst" is a word you'd use on someone who is among you or of your caliber, not me. That word is "small", restrictive, and pretty much a misrepresentation of my character.So I'm surely not trying to be or act like one, I'm my own person. No one's paying extra special attention to any of you...it's like drinking water for me. You'll notice the difference between an actual psychoanalyst and me...that the psychoanalyst typically shares an inferiority complex, like you, fragile ego, like you, and misuses information, just like you, and plays psychoanalyst for the personal benefit. A lesser trying to treat you like a lesser, cause he somehow thinks he's better than you. A "psychoanalyst" is amongst the lesser beings, because you know what to expect from them, they're just like you, fragile. They're the most insecure, out of the bunch, and they just have to prove themselves, otherwise...as a disguise. They share so much in common with you and the rest of the "self-entitlement crew".

 

[Dreckerplayer]

I like how you keep bringing up role-playing like that has any impact on my argument.

Also, lmao, what? That's the point: A term applying to something isn't determined by how often that term is used for it. Just because no one calls babies atheist doesn't change that they technically are.

You've lost, throw in the towel.

 

[Lightbringer]

You know how that comment makes you look, right?You know what I'm gonna say, right?

I notice things, in an instant. Takes little to no effort, and I address the issue if I find it a hindrance to the discussion. It's called being correctional.And you guys are full of dysfunction and egotistical ideals, but expect people to take you seriously in an argument.The information falls into my hands, no one's giving you "special attention", you're exposing yourselves...it's natural for me to notice it, and address it...cause it bugs the **** out of me.

You gotta get it right, to move forward. Cannot stand hindrances and those with deceptive intent.

"Psychoanalyst" is a word you'd use on someone who is among you or of your caliber, not me. That word is "small", restrictive, and pretty much a misrepresentation of my character.So I'm surely not trying to be or act like one, I'm my own person. No one's paying extra special attention to any of you...it's like drinking water for me. You'll notice the difference between an actual psychoanalyst and me...that the psychoanalyst typically shares an inferiority complex, like you, fragile ego, like you, and misuses information, just like you, and plays psychoanalyst for the personal benefit. A lesser trying to treat you like a lesser, cause he somehow thinks he's better than you. A "psychoanalyst" is amongst the lesser beings, because you know what to expect from them, they're just like you, fragile. They're the most insecure, out of the bunch, and they just have to prove themselves, otherwise...as a disguise. They share so much in common with you and the rest of the "self-entitlement crew".

^^^

You must be registered for see images

 

[Uzumaki Macho]

You know how that comment makes you look, right?You know what I'm gonna say, right?

I notice things, in an instant. Takes little to no effort, and I address the issue if I find it a hindrance to the discussion. It's called being correctional.And you guys are full of dysfunction and egotistical ideals, but expect people to take you seriously in an argument.The information falls into my hands, no one's giving you "special attention", you're exposing yourselves...it's natural for me to notice it, and address it...cause it bugs the **** out of me.

You gotta get it right, to move forward. Cannot stand hindrances and those with deceptive intent.

"Psychoanalyst" is a word you'd use on someone who is among you or of your caliber, not me. That word is "small", restrictive, and pretty much a misrepresentation of my character.So I'm surely not trying to be or act like one, I'm my own person. No one's paying extra special attention to any of you...it's like drinking water for me. You'll notice the difference between an actual psychoanalyst and me...that the psychoanalyst typically shares an inferiority complex, like you, fragile ego, like you, and misuses information, just like you, and plays psychoanalyst for the personal benefit. A lesser trying to treat you like a lesser, cause he somehow thinks he's better than you. A "psychoanalyst" is amongst the lesser beings, because you know what to expect from them, they're just like you, fragile. They're the most insecure, out of the bunch, and they just have to prove themselves, otherwise...as a disguise. They share so much in common with you and the rest of the "self-entitlement crew".

All I got from this was that this post of mine shown below was accurate.

Spoiler

Therapist: I've heard that you've been having some problems with your family lately. What do you think is the source of these problems?

Dreckerplayer: So deceitful and manipulative. Inserting a bunch of fabrications about me having "problems". I have never been wrong and my life is perfect. You, no, EVERYONE is trying to get a social climb off of me because they're jealous losers. You're just a self-important narcissist who loves to instigate and thinks that he can "fix" people.

Therapist: ...