Atheists on marriage
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-08-2015, 06:10 PM
RE: Atheists on marriage
We've been married 44 years and neither of us gives a fuck about jesus. Still, good tax benefits.

Atheism is NOT a Religion. It's A Personal Relationship With Reality!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Minimalist's post
07-08-2015, 06:12 PM
RE: Atheists on marriage
(07-08-2015 06:09 PM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  
(07-08-2015 06:00 PM)π¶∆ Wrote:  There is nothing wrong in asking for a citation. It's how everyone ganged up on me. This user butts in out of nowhere and brings up an irrelevant point that i agreed with rocket out of "intuition". Forgive me if i got offended.

No problem. Then it may be prudent to provide said links or book references in your first post. That way, we have them immidiately and it doesn't look like you are pulling things out of your butt. It also will give us the context for which your comments are based. If you leave it up to the reader to find the info, they may find a different press release or different study analysis and then think that you are full of it. That is why it is so critical to provide references to claims. The sooner the better. Smile

It wasn't necessary because i was agreeing with him. Usually you bring up references when you disagree with someone...but whatever. I guess I should lower my expectations.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2015, 06:14 PM
RE: Atheists on marriage
(07-08-2015 06:12 PM)π¶∆ Wrote:  I guess I should lower my expectations.

I suggest you first save your own credibility by linking to the actual study cited in the newspaper article.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
07-08-2015, 06:35 PM
RE: Atheists on marriage
(07-08-2015 05:54 PM)π¶∆ Wrote:  
(07-08-2015 05:21 PM)julep Wrote:  Well, in your response, which I just looked up, back on page 3 or so, you said that citations would be lovely, and then you say in the following response that citations aren't needed after all because he "makes sense," and then you call me an idiot for remarking on the discrepancy. So fuck you very much. I haven't found anything you've said intellectually compelling or stimulating, so I'll write you off as someone who's not worth the aggravation.

Sorry, i missed this post. I mentioned that citations will be lovely and what he said makes sense IN THE SAME BLOODY POST. Not in different posts. Please at least be honest. In a forum. Where everyone can SEE who said what.

I shouldn't be doing this because it's not worth the effort, but I'll make this last attempt:

Your quote from page 3: Of course citations will be lovely. I do not like to discuss something without having something to back it up. But what you are stating does make sense because I came across a study that marriages are more likely to end around the 6-7 year mark which corresponds with the 4-5 year so-called "infatuation" period you have mentioned. And if they survive this period, then they enter into the third phase you mentioned.
Your quote from page 6, in response to RS's offering of more information:

No need really. As i mentioned in my previous post before your citation, that your statement made sense.

Emphasis added by me. Two quotes, two posts, all your own words. You said twice that his position made sense to you, the second time adding that you didn't feel a need for the citation that you had previously asked for and that he had taken the time to look into. I don't understand why you wouldn't look further into all evidence, including (and especially, if you want to be intellectually honest) that which supports a position that you feel is true. I also fail to see what is dishonest, stupid, or even much of an attack about my asking a question to clarify your approach.

Also I am far from a random person who's entered the post, as I was one of the first responders to your topic.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like julep's post
07-08-2015, 06:46 PM
RE: Atheists on marriage
(07-08-2015 06:12 PM)π¶∆ Wrote:  I guess I should lower my expectations.

FFS!!! Facepalm Have you even read a scientific journal? Ever? The hard and soft sciences always have references to back up claims in the initial publication. Always. You can't get published without them. It has nothing to do with the people who agree with you, it is for those who do not agree or are learning. It allows for them to examine where you are coming from and examine it accordingly. Jeez.

"If we are honest—and scientists have to be—we must admit that religion is a jumble of false assertions, with no basis in reality.
The very idea of God is a product of the human imagination."
- Paul Dirac
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like The Organic Chemist's post
07-08-2015, 06:48 PM
RE: Atheists on marriage
(07-08-2015 06:35 PM)julep Wrote:  
(07-08-2015 05:54 PM)π¶∆ Wrote:  Sorry, i missed this post. I mentioned that citations will be lovely and what he said makes sense IN THE SAME BLOODY POST. Not in different posts. Please at least be honest. In a forum. Where everyone can SEE who said what.

I shouldn't be doing this because it's not worth the effort, but I'll make this last attempt:

Your quote from page 3: Of course citations will be lovely. I do not like to discuss something without having something to back it up. But what you are stating does make sense because I came across a study that marriages are more likely to end around the 6-7 year mark which corresponds with the 4-5 year so-called "infatuation" period you have mentioned. And if they survive this period, then they enter into the third phase you mentioned.
Your quote from page 6, in response to RS's offering of more information:

No need really. As i mentioned in my previous post before your citation, that your statement made sense.

Emphasis added by me. Two quotes, two posts, all your own words. You said twice that his position made sense to you, the second time adding that you didn't feel a need for the citation that you had previously asked for and that he had taken the time to look into. I don't understand why you wouldn't look further into all evidence, including (and especially, if you want to be intellectually honest) that which supports a position that you feel is true. I also fail to see what is dishonest, stupid, or even much of an attack about my asking a question to clarify your approach.

Also I am far from a random person who's entered the post, as I was one of the first responders to your topic.

"No need really" was to rocket asking if I needed EVEN more citations. Not to his post with the citation. I asked for the citation, and admitted it made sense. Then he brought the citation, asked if I needed more, I responded that no need for more citations. I hope the time line is clear now.
Also I saw you say something that really bothered me, you said I was attacking you because you are a girl, which was so shallow of you. I don't attack women for being women, my mom is a woman for God's sake. In fact I try to protect women whenever I can. I know you mentioned you speculate it, but really what made you speculate it? That I am a Muslim? Muslims sure don't know how to treat women, right?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2015, 06:55 PM (This post was last modified: 07-08-2015 06:58 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Atheists on marriage
Okay. This is really starting to piss me off. I've exhausted my googling skills and still can't find the damn study. I'm gonna need earmuffs level 5 googling skills to help me out here.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2015, 06:59 PM
RE: Atheists on marriage
(07-08-2015 06:55 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Okay. This is really starting to piss me off. I've exhausted my googling skills and still can't find the damn study. I'm gonna need earmuffs level 5 googling skills to help me out here.

Earmuffs is the Google Master.

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2015, 08:37 PM (This post was last modified: 07-08-2015 08:44 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Atheists on marriage
(07-08-2015 05:46 PM)π¶∆ Wrote:  P.S, i can also find the actual study the article is referring to, if some peoples ass is still itching.

I don't think there is such a study. At best it was an unscientific poll conducted by a bunch of divorce lawyers at Slater & Gordon. No conflict of interest there. Excellent reference you came up with there Muslim. Very authoritative. Thumbsup

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2015, 08:58 PM (This post was last modified: 07-08-2015 09:02 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Atheists on marriage
Shit. Muslim's banned. Now I'll never get to see that marriage study.

(07-08-2015 05:16 PM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  With all due respect to those hostile to religious forum members, I have seen little in the way of objectionable postings from Pi, in my opinion.

It ain't the religion that's the problem RocketMan. You just ain't been here long enough to smell them out yet. You will. Smarmy unctuous posts are a dead give away.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: