Poll: is atheist organization politically oriented?
Yes - as organizations, atheists have a political agenda
No - as organizations, atheists are educators of truth
[Show Results]
Note: This is a public poll, other users will be able to see what you voted for.
Atheism is a political movement
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
08-06-2011, 02:05 PM (This post was last modified: 08-06-2011 02:21 PM by TrainWreck.)
RE: Atheism is a political movement
(08-06-2011 01:51 PM)lucradis Wrote:  I`ll just say this, Atheism is not by any means a political movement because it has no outright political agenda. There is one by proxy but it`s more of an after effect. Regardless of what it is, you sir couldn`t be named more aptly. The attitude you sport is ferocious and poorly aimed. If you are trying to get people to listen to you I hate to tell you this, but you are failing miserably. People tend to block out imbeciles shouting from mountain tops, especially when they are telling everyone else how great they are, and how much better they are at reasoning... Which by the way is extremely debatable. You sound like a theist explaining reason in the bible. It is because God says it is... so there. Instead of attempting to berate everyone into your point of view maybe take a step back and calm down.

Don't like my attitude? Quit your self righteous preaching and explain what atheist organization is?

I will treat atheists with the respect they deserve. My arguments are fully reasoned, and it is because atheists are so full of shit from past erroneous reasonings that they cannot understand good reasoning, and so a forceful attitude is what may be necessary. If you were not paying attention to me you then would not be responding - so go pound salt.

They are planning another Washington DC rally, remember the last one in November 2002? Well, if this one is as successful as the last, which is more successful than any of the national conventions they have held in the past decade, that would seem to indicate that the participants are politically motivated, and not motivated by any thing that would fulfill what you consider non-political - don't you think???

(08-06-2011 01:51 PM)lucradis Wrote:  I`ll just say this, Atheism is not by any means a political movement because it has no outright political agenda. There is one by proxy but it`s more of an after effect.
After effect of what?
Show your skills of reasoning - you think I was going to fill in the blanks?

"After effect," because all organizations have a political agenda - all organizations have the potential to be regulated, as they have the potential to solicit sanctions. It's that simple, case closed - it's time to move on to the mature level of developing a full fledged political agenda.

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-06-2011, 02:10 PM
RE: Atheism is a political movement
Can someone tell me how I vote for reputation please.

"I think of myself as an intelligent, sensitive human being with the soul of a clown which always forces me to blow it at the most important moments." -Jim Morrison
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-06-2011, 02:28 PM (This post was last modified: 08-06-2011 03:00 PM by TrainWreck.)
RE: Atheism is a political movement
The ribbon and star button.

You want to tell me, that I am not fully rendering reason, like a theist, and then you give me this, "after effect," with no further reasoning - please, I hope you will appreciate my reputation point for you.

Let's think about it - atheist organization has always been politically motivated, it's just that the membership has always been too dull to develop a full agenda. And because of their ignorance, and fears of being lynched, they promoted themselves as something other than political; and so it comes atheists like you perpetuate this false belief, that organization is something other than political, most probably because you are just as dull and have very little respect for those who would be the leadership - the creative genius types who understand the social political environment.

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TrainWreck's post
08-06-2011, 02:57 PM (This post was last modified: 08-06-2011 03:01 PM by lucradis.)
RE: Atheism is a political movement
(08-06-2011 02:05 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:  
(08-06-2011 01:51 PM)lucradis Wrote:  I`ll just say this, Atheism is not by any means a political movement because it has no outright political agenda. There is one by proxy but it`s more of an after effect. Regardless of what it is, you sir couldn`t be named more aptly. The attitude you sport is ferocious and poorly aimed. If you are trying to get people to listen to you I hate to tell you this, but you are failing miserably. People tend to block out imbeciles shouting from mountain tops, especially when they are telling everyone else how great they are, and how much better they are at reasoning... Which by the way is extremely debatable. You sound like a theist explaining reason in the bible. It is because God says it is... so there. Instead of attempting to berate everyone into your point of view maybe take a step back and calm down.

D?
on't like my attitude? Quit your self righteous preaching and explain what atheist organization is
I will treat atheists with the respect they deserve. My arguments are fully reasoned, and it is because atheists are so full of shit from past erroneous reasonings that they cannot understand good reasoning, and so a forceful attitude is what may be necessary. If you were not paying attention to me you then would not be responding - so go pound salt.

They are planning another Washington DC rally, remember the last one in November 2002? Well, if this one is as successful as the last, which is more successful than any of the national conventions they have held in the past decade, that would seem to indicate that the participants are politically motivated, and not motivated by any thing that would fulfill what you consider non-political - don't you think???

(08-06-2011 01:51 PM)lucradis Wrote:  I`ll just say this, Atheism is not by any means a political movement because it has no outright political agenda. There is one by proxy but it`s more of an after effect.
After effect of what?
Show your skills of reasoning - you think I was going to fill in the blanks?

"After effect," because all organizations have a political agenda - all organizations have the potential to be regulated, as they have the potential to solicit sanctions. It's that simple, case closed - it's time to move on to the mature level of developing a full fledged political agenda.

Well since you asked so nicely...
Listening and paying attention are two very different things, you should know that. I can stand around shouting in the streets till the cows come home, and people will pay me loads of attention, but they won't listen. They will either categorize me as a lunatic, or an asshole. Figure out which side of that fence you're currently falling on.
Oh wait you aren't that great at listening yourself even though you preach that very thing, so I'll just tell you. You come off as an asshole. And quite the big one.
As for your ideas, I have yet to hear any genuine articles. Lots of rhetoric, but nothing concrete. I mean have you ever stood outside with a sign.... sent a letter? Anything other than come onto a rather peaceful forum and spout negativity and impressive "political speak"? I doubt it. Insult people all you like for "not doing anything" but look in the mirror first.
And the effect of politics in the atheist manifesto, are secondary to the initial goal of awareness. If you would take the time to ask what we all wanted first and foremost I think that would be the answer. Yes after some time I would imagine we would all get around to saying that religion has no place in politics, but it's more of a side note to you know stopping religious oppression in it's other many forms, such as child abuse, sexism etc.
Yes I would expect you to fill in the blanks, as it was your question and you are the self appointed great grand master of reasoning. Shouldn't be too hard for you should it? Or are you just a fraud.


(08-06-2011 02:28 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:  The ribbon and star button.

You want to tell me, that I am not fully rendering reason, like a theist, and then you give me this, "after effect," with no further reasoning - please, I hope you will appreciate my reputation point for you.

Let's think about it - atheist organization has always been politically motivated, it's just that the membership has always been too dull to develop a full agenda. And because of their ignorance, and fears of being lynched, they promoted themselves as something other than political; and so it comes atheists like you perpetuate this false belief, most probably because you are just as dull and have very little respect for those who would be the leadership - the creative genius types who understand the social political environment.
Thanks for the negative point. You're a class act. I also liked the use of hypocrite as I've found those that use the word are often times the most often to exemplify the meaning. You are something else.

"I think of myself as an intelligent, sensitive human being with the soul of a clown which always forces me to blow it at the most important moments." -Jim Morrison
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-06-2011, 03:33 PM
RE: Atheism is a political movement
(08-06-2011 02:57 PM)lucradis Wrote:  Listening and paying attention are two very different things, you should know that. I can stand around shouting in the streets till the cows come home, and people will pay me loads of attention, but they won't listen. They will either categorize me as a lunatic, or an asshole.
Well said.
Quote:Figure out which side of that fence you're currently falling on.
Oh wait you aren't that great at listening yourself even though you preach that very thing, so I'll just tell you. You come off as an asshole. And quite the big one.
I have to disagree with you there. Trainwreck is most definitely straddling that fence, with foot firmly planted on either side.

So many cats, so few good recipes.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-06-2011, 04:05 PM (This post was last modified: 08-06-2011 04:22 PM by TrainWreck.)
RE: Atheism is a political movement
(08-06-2011 02:57 PM)lucradis Wrote:  As for your ideas, I have yet to hear any genuine articles. Lots of rhetoric, but nothing concrete.
The classification system is the first concrete application for library reform on the educational agenda. Other than that, I would suggest atheists begin rendering proportional election reform legislation, if they want to get some what caught up with my progress. Those would be the short and mid-range targets - meaning they have the most appeal for attention.

After that it gets into long-range agenda concerning complete constitution reforms, mostly concerning state and locals. These of which have to do with allowing atheists a state of their very own without theists in the government, and the same for Christians, and of course the devolving secular states, like what we endure today with everyone all fucked-up in chaos.

And of course the furthest-range agenda is calendar and time reforms - I don't plan on that coming about in my lifetime, but knowing I participate in the initial generation of reform is more than satisfying. It will be necessary for understanding things that we do not understand - complicated stuff. But it will probably be necessary for further Lunar and space exploration programs.

(08-06-2011 02:57 PM)lucradis Wrote:  I mean have you ever stood outside with a sign.... sent a letter?
I stood outside with the five NYCAtheists when the Supreme Court made a ruling - I forget what it was. Really, the atheists need to get with the program, organizations hire people now to do the protest marches.

(08-06-2011 02:57 PM)lucradis Wrote:  Anything other than come onto a rather peaceful forum and spout negativity and impressive "political speak"? I doubt it. Insult people all you like for "not doing anything" but look in the mirror first.
That is about all an individual person can do with such a mislead group of people.

(08-06-2011 02:57 PM)lucradis Wrote:  And the effect of politics in the atheist manifesto, are secondary to the initial goal of awareness. If you would take the time to ask what we all wanted first and foremost I think that would be the answer. Yes after some time I would imagine we would all get around to saying that religion has no place in politics . . .
The problem with that is that you need to understand that those who follow a religion want to enforce the morality in their political district. The best atheists should be hoping for is that they get the opportunity to enforce their grand illustrious political agenda on a particular district without theist resistance - and I am very confident that the Christians would be more than willing, if atheist would be so kind as to allow them their political district free of the atheists whining about being oppressed and crying about how bad it is to put the Ten Commandments in their courthouses and teaching Creationism in their schools. Do you think it is possible that atheist could ever be so considerate as to just leave the Christians to themselves?

I assure you, after the initial shock of atheists realizing that they have to teach Creationism (the controversy) in their schools; after a couple of decades atheists will get their act together, stop bitching about the Christians, and realize that their fellow atheists are some fucked-up people and need to be hauled in for psychiatric evaluations. If atheists are to ever put together a perpetuating community, they are going to have to put together their politics, and that means they are going to have to evaluate each others thinking and figure out how they are going to decide how to run their government and society. This bullshit claim that "we only have one thing in common," does not work in politics - if it does work in politics, when are atheists going to prove how it works? I'm pretty sure the Christians would just love to give you the opportunity to prove that shit, because they know you are going to fall flat, and they can just shove that down your throats as proof that you were fucking up their social system with your bizarre thinking.

(08-06-2011 02:57 PM)lucradis Wrote:  but it's more of a side note to you know stopping religious oppression in it's other many forms, such as child abuse, sexism etc.
You need to be able to prove that atheists are above such problems before you can go in and impose your altruistic enforcement, and as it is atheists only live under the compassion of Christian guardianship - otherwise they would have killed us. If atheists want to prove that their altruistic political agenda exists - they need to prove it.

It is a side note. There are a whole lot of things I would like to correct, but for me to worry about sexism and child abuse due to a religious morality system is beyond my immediate capabilities. Those crimes do not happen as often as street murders and rapes, which require my immediate attention, and the solution lies in stricter ideologies of local communities.

(08-06-2011 02:57 PM)lucradis Wrote:  Yes I would expect you to fill in the blanks, as it was your question and you are the self appointed great grand master of reasoning. Shouldn't be too hard for you should it? Or are you just a fraud.
No - I went about and filled in the fucking blanks, if you didn't notice, and I provided reasoned responses - so get your shit together!

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-06-2011, 09:06 PM
 
RE: Atheism is a political movement
(08-06-2011 12:56 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:  Every organization has the potential to being regulated by the political governing system of the district, and every organization has an interest in soliciting the political governing system for sanctions.

As I said, you can classify any organization as political if you want to. Calling it political has absolutely no meaning once you begin to do that. My example is not political because there are no political motivations, not because I've judged it as benign. If your criteria for something being political is its potential to be considered a "threat" by some numbskull, then as I've already said you've defined just about everything as political.

Where do we disagree here? That classifying everything as political renders the word political meaningless, or that you're classifying everything as political.

I hope it's the second statement, because then we at least agree on something. If you aren't classifying everything arbitrarily as political to fit your claim, then please give an example or two of political versus nonpolitical.

(08-06-2011 12:56 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:  If atheists were to recognize that their organizational motives were political then they would improve the consistency in their agenda - the American Atheist list of principles is an example of their inconsistency and foolishness.

The Christians would have much more respect for the atheists if they recognized that they were a political movement, and not what ever it is atheists do thing atheist organizations are - what do you thing atheists organizations are?

Why do atheists need an agenda? Why should atheists care about what Christians think of them? Groups of atheists who are involved in politics might want an agenda, and in that case they can worry about their agenda being consistent, but there is no reason atheists as a whole need any sort of agenda.

I haven't encountered you on this forum before, so I'm not sure what all the nonsense about your classification system is, but it sounds relatively useless and self-indulgent. I've no idea what it is or what purpose it's meant to serve, so maybe I'm wrong. Have you explained it somewhere else?

And could you please try to be more concise(probably could have used a better word)? You'd be able to get your point across better in less fragmented posts. It would be easier to understand what you're trying to say, and less of a pain in the ass to read. I'm attempting to be helpful here, not insulting, because I'm still trying and failing to grasp what it is you want to communicate. I don't know if you're just spouting nonsense in an attempt to be annoying, if you have an interesting point, or if I'm just too stupid to understand you, but I'd like to find out which it is.
Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Zach's post
08-06-2011, 10:33 PM
RE: Atheism is a political movement
depends on what you mean by politics Big Grin
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-06-2011, 07:45 AM
RE: Atheism is a political movement
(08-06-2011 02:28 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:  No, I am not a bug. I am a homeless man

I did not know this. This explains a lot.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes BnW's post
09-06-2011, 08:57 AM (This post was last modified: 09-06-2011 12:01 PM by TrainWreck.)
RE: Atheism is a political movement
(08-06-2011 09:06 PM)Zach Wrote:  As I said, you can classify any organization as political if you want to. Calling it political has absolutely no meaning once you begin to do that.
No it doesn't. You just have to declare what the organization is besides being politically responsible. Your example of a student self-help group remains a self-help group with the added responsibility of participating in the political progression of the district it resides. That is the idea behind the First Amendment right to assemble and petition the federal government - every organization has to be able to do that.

So, then the question comes to you, what organizations are forbidden from petitioning the government because of their ideological classification?

If you claim religious organizations, then you are forbidding atheist organizations, as well, because they are of the same government classification 501© as religious organizations - so what are atheist organizations?
Quote:501©(1) — Corporations Organized Under Act of Congress (including Federal Credit Unions)
501©(2) — Title Holding Corporation for Exempt Organization
501©(3) — Religious, Educational, Charitable, Scientific, Literary, Testing for Public Safety, to Foster National or International Amateur Sports Competition, or Prevention of Cruelty to Children or Animals Organizations
501©(4) — Civic Leagues, Social Welfare Organizations, and Local Associations of Employees
501©(5) — Labor, Agricultural, and Horticultural Organizations
501©(6) — Business Leagues, Chambers of Commerce, Real Estate Boards, etc.
501©(7) — Social and Recreational Clubs
501©(8) — Fraternal Beneficiary Societies and Associations
501©(9) — Voluntary Employees Beneficiary Associations
501©(10) — Domestic Fraternal Societies and Associations
501©(11) — Teachers' Retirement Fund Associations
501©(12) — Benevolent Life Insurance Associations, Mutual Ditch or Irrigation Companies, Mutual or Cooperative Telephone Companies, etc.
501©(13) — Cemetery Companies
501©(14) — State-Chartered Credit Unions, Mutual Reserve Funds
501©(15) — Mutual Insurance Companies or Associations
501©(16) — Cooperative Organizations to Finance Crop Operations
501©(17) — Supplemental Unemployment Benefit Trusts
501©(18) — Employee Funded Pension Trust (created before June 25, 1959)
501©(19) — Post or Organization of Past or Present Members of the Armed Forces
501©(21) — Black lung Benefit Trusts
501©(22) — Withdrawal Liability Payment Fund
501©(23) — Veterans Organization (created before 1880)
501©(25) — Title Holding Corporations or Trusts with Multiple Parents
501©(26) — State-Sponsored Organization Providing Health Coverage for High-Risk Individuals
501©(27) — State-Sponsored Workers' Compensation Reinsurance Organization
501©(28) — National Railroad Retirement Investment Trust


(08-06-2011 09:06 PM)Zach Wrote:  Where do we disagree here? That classifying everything as political renders the word political meaningless, or that you're classifying everything as political.

I hope it's the second statement, because then we at least agree on something. If you aren't classifying everything arbitrarily as political to fit your claim, then please give an example or two of political versus nonpolitical.
I am pretty sure we agree - I am classifying every organization as political, but that does not mean that organizations cannot be further defined, which you seem to claim cannot be done. Why can't organizations be further defined?

I am wondering, if atheist organizations are not political, then what are they??? if you are going to claim that they are educational then wouldn't you expect them to devise a curriculum? Do you really believe they provide educational qualities? Do you think anybody seeks atheist organizations as providers of education, or are you going to smarten-up and realize that atheist organizations essentially provide a pseudo-educational cover for political motives?

But I am rendering the religious organizations as political interests and disqualifying the political exemptions they are granted and allowing them to be subject to political scrutiny - that should be appealing to atheists.

(08-06-2011 09:06 PM)Zach Wrote:  
(08-06-2011 12:56 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:  If atheists were to recognize that their organizational motives were political then they would improve the consistency in their agenda - the American Atheist list of principles is an example of their inconsistency and foolishness.

The Christians would have much more respect for the atheists if they recognized that they were a political movement, and not what ever it is atheists do thing atheist organizations are - what do you thing atheists organizations are?

Why do atheists need an agenda? Why should atheists care about what Christians think of them? Groups of atheists who are involved in politics might want an agenda, and in that case they can worry about their agenda being consistent, but there is no reason atheists as a whole need any sort of agenda.
Sure, atheists in general do not need an agenda, but the organizations do need a consistent agenda, because politics is their primary concern, although they deny it without legitimate reason, as I have critiqued the silliness of the American Atheists principles.

The reason atheists should care about what the Christians think of them is that atheists, like all organizations, are trying to persuade others to join in and participate in progressing a social philosophy that is decidedly better for society.

(08-06-2011 09:06 PM)Zach Wrote:  I haven't encountered you on this forum before, so I'm not sure what all the nonsense about your classification system is, but it sounds relatively useless and self-indulgent. I've no idea what it is or what purpose it's meant to serve, so maybe I'm wrong. Have you explained it somewhere else?
There is a website I am building to explain it.
https://sites.google.com/site/slicintro/

The higher purpose of the system's development is to provide a classification system that can be used as a reference for the purposes very similar to how a dictionary is used as a reference. You, like most, do not recognize the potential of what a classification system offers to that of understanding knowledge, because the antiquated systems of Dewey and the Library of Congress have not been used as references of understanding knowledge because they are inaccurate to representing a scientific ordering by design. It is apparent to me that Dewey and Putnam were under some amount of pressure to avoid a scientific rendering because such would be detrimental to the authority of Christianity.

The only reason it sounds useless to you is because you are indulgent of a mob mentality of atheists who have been unwittingly unaware of the utility of classification systems, something that they could somewhat blame on Christianity, until now. Now the blame for not providing accurate classification systems rest on atheists, as I have delivered the latest, if not first, generation of scientific classification of all of knowledge to the atheists attention. Although, you use the term, "classification," in your argument above, you certainly do not have a list of the possible classifications of organizations, otherwise you would have provided it in your argument. Consider Unbeliever's predicament over in the Philosophy thread, I explained to him that philosophy is the study of abstract systems, he is of the belief that that is not true, but when confronted with the evidence he has no defense, and whimpers away with out so much as acknowledgement of being wrong. If he had a better classification system by which he could reference he would have realized that philosophy is the only field by which we study abstract systems that we humans devise. But he has some other understanding of philosophy that he cannot even describe. he sure would have benefited from a good scientific rendering of classification, but he did not have one.

(08-06-2011 09:06 PM)Zach Wrote:  And could you please try to be more concise(probably could have used a better word)? You'd be able to get your point across better in less fragmented posts. It would be easier to understand what you're trying to say, and less of a pain in the ass to read. I'm attempting to be helpful here, not insulting, because I'm still trying and failing to grasp what it is you want to communicate. I don't know if you're just spouting nonsense in an attempt to be annoying, if you have an interesting point, or if I'm just too stupid to understand you, but I'd like to find out which it is.
I try my best. I am not trying to be annoying, I am frustrated in that atheists are self indulgent and are not concerned about making this a better world.

(09-06-2011 07:45 AM)BnW Wrote:  
(08-06-2011 02:28 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:  No, I am not a bug. I am a homeless man
I did not know this. This explains a lot.
That is right, I am more of a free-thinker than anyone. I am not burdened by a spouse, whose ideas I have to respect; and I am not burdened by a job where there are ideas that have to be respected.

You have no idea how difficult it is to be a free-thinker - to be able to recognize the erroneous ideas that permeate through society as being correct. This is an aspect that constructs the legends of religious leaders who separated themselves from their communities, eventually returning with a new perspective for social organization. The complex problem with the perspective that they returned with was that they were erroneous with respect to a supernatural - I have the advantage of understanding scientific reasoning - if there were a god it would have revealed itself to me, and helped me render the more ontologically accurate classification system. But no, I had to do it the hard way - thinking and deliberating and thinking and deliberating for three years.

What is it that you do for a living - what kind of a house do you live in? Have you answered the question, as to what you are doing to make this a better world, or do you just want me to answer the question first with no obligation on your part to own up to decency?
Don't be afraid to answer, be proud - your family is proud of you. This is how it went. . .

(07-06-2011 06:21 PM)BnW Wrote:  
(07-06-2011 11:52 AM)TrainWreck Wrote:  Things are fucked-up, what are you doing to solve them - bitching and moaning that the Christians are responsible for solving the problems??? If only they would stop the foolishness of believing in gods things would be so much better - wouldn't it? That's as far as you can think - isn't it?

Really - you are the one who needs to get a life.

Ok, I'll play.

What exactly are you doing to solve these problems? What impact has all your classifying and pontificating had on anything or anyone? What difference have you made in the world at all? I see you chirping about your accomplishments but does anyone care? Near as I can tell, the answer to that is a resounding "no".

You are a gnat in this world, a nothing. You matter not one whit in the world and for all your blustering and posturing that is not going to change. Oh wait, that's right; you're going to win the Nobel Prize for your classification system. Let us all know when that happens. Let us all know when someone, anyone, other than you gives two seconds of time to you or any of your ideas.

You're less than a gnat, you're gnat that has been smashed into a windshield.
Now own up, answer the question, shit head - what are you doing to make this a better world?

I answered your questions, and responded to your bullshit ad hominum - what more can I do for you? You think I am undeserving of your brilliant powers of reasoning??? I'm going to rub your nose in your worthlessness.

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: