Thursday, October 11, 2007

BEING AN ATHEIST CAN BE DOWNRIGHT FRUSTRATING

If you believe in God you have been endowed by your creator with certain unalienable rights.

If you do not believe in God, you cannot have those rights because by denying God exists you can not receive rights from an entity you claim does not exist.

Therefore, while I have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, by definition unbelievers do not. Sometimes it can be a downright frustrating to be an atheist. And don’t give me the argument because I believe that, that somehow entitles you to have those rights. By your logic, those rights cannot be endowed.

NG

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

They have the right to follow Castro or Chevez,their true God.
tos

NewGnome said...

Castro is looking a little weak right now...so their "God" isn't doing too well. NG

Jeff W. said...

If you do not believe in God, you cannot have those rights because by denying God exists you can not receive rights from an entity you claim does not exist.

The clearest example of pure dumb logic that I have ever encountered.

Unalienable rights are not granted only to those who believe in a creator. The statement in the Declaration of Independence essentially says that there are certain "natural" rights that all people are born with. Their "Creator" could be their mother...and even atheists believe in mothers.

NewGnome said...

JW Obviously you haven’t read the constitution. So your mother endowed you with unalienable rights, now that is a hoot. Totally illogical, but a hoot non-the-less. You cannot generalize from the specific as you did with
Their "Creator" could be their mother...and even atheists believe in mothers.”
That’s a twisted presentation of Post hoc ergo propter hoc. Or does that mean dad’s sperm didn’t have anything to do with the “creation.” So now you are suggesting that there are two “creators” or are you proposing a “virgin birth.” Or is this a proposal of the concept multiple Gods?
Obviously, you are much better at dumb logic than I am. Congratulations!

Jeff W. said...

JW Obviously you haven’t read the constitution.

"Endowed by their creator" is in the Declaration of Independence. NOT the United States Constitution. I've read both. Have you?

So your mother endowed you with unalienable rights, now that is a hoot. Totally illogical, but a hoot non-the-less.

No, I was BORN with unalienable rights. You're taking issue with the definition of "Creator".

You cannot generalize from the specific as you did with
Their "Creator" could be their mother...and even atheists believe in mothers.”
That’s a twisted presentation of Post hoc ergo propter hoc. Or does that mean dad’s sperm didn’t have anything to do with the “creation.” So now you are suggesting that there are two “creators” or are you proposing a “virgin birth.” Or is this a proposal of the concept multiple Gods?
Obviously, you are much better at dumb logic than I am. Congratulations!


I have NO IDEA what you are talking about. You're putting words into my mouth. Talk about logical fallacies...how about the strawman argument?

I'm simply pointing out the logical fallacy of your arguments. You say that Atheists don't believe in a Creator, so they can't have unalienable rights if there was nobody to grant those rights to them.

You want to talk about "Post hoc ergo propter hoc"? Your argument is that "A granted B, so if you don't believe in A, then B doesn't exist." This is as silly as saying that in a place where unalienable rights don't exist, neither does a creator. (Which would actually make sense if you think about the Communist policy on religion.)

Unalienable rights EXIST. We are BORN with them. Or we are CREATED with them. Whatever you wish. CREATOR does have multiple meanings (check a dictionary), but what I'm concerned with is what Thomas Jefferson implied when he picked the word "Creator"...and given some of Jefferson's views on religion, you might want to revisit your argument.

NewGnome said...

Now who’s re-defining words. You claim that unalienable rights exist independently...Jefferson says they are endowed. You’re the one rewriting the dictionary. Jefferson was a proclaimed deist so I know what he meant by the term creator, apparently you want to redefine that.

“.....but what I'm concerned with is what Thomas Jefferson implied when he picked the word "Creator,” which means you want to re-define his words. That’s a two-way street. You apparently wish Jefferson had said “We the people accept the principle that we have natural self-defined rights......” but he didn’t. He specifically used a religious term. And as careful a writer as he was, he certainly new exactly what he meant, even if you don’t want to accept that.

This is the problem with you socialists. You only allow your interpretation of any given issue, and any other interpretations are not valid by definition. Using your logic, all definitions are only correct if defined by you, or your bias view. You also want to interpret the era in which Jefferson lived with the values and depravity of today’s world, and by doing so twist his meaning. Not going to happen, as hard as you may try.

Jefferson’s letter in which he made his “separation of Church and state” statement, is used and quoted by those of your ilk, as though it requires government to eliminate religion, when in fact it refers to a state-establishment of religion only, not the determined destruction thereof by religious bigots. It was not and is not in the constitution....period! As much as you’d like it to be. It is no more important that many other statements in the papers and essays of other framers of the time.

Although is for another argument, which questions the intestinal fortitude of “unbelievers.” Are you so weak that you can’t see a Menorah or Nativity Scene on government property, without being forced to convert to one religion or another. I see the effort to enforce Islamic beliefs and values in schools by study of the Koran and forcing students to “be a Muslim day” where they are forced to dress, act and be” a Muslim. That’s in a public school. You would approved of that? Perhaps you’d prefer to change “creator” to Allah.