Ok so he doesnt believe there is a God, roger wilco! Ok so he doesnt believe there isnt a God, roger wilco! Lets see, doesnt believe there is and doesnt believe there isnt? Shhhzammmm sahjent cahta, CONGRATULATIONS! You solved the deep secret mystery of the rahleology religion, by definition hes AGNOSTIC. There is a key distinction. An atheist doesn't believe in a god or divine being. ... However, an agnostic neither believes nor disbelieves in a god or religious doctrine. Agnostics assert that it's impossible for human beings to know anything about how the universe was created and if divine beings exist. What's The Difference Between Atheism And Agnosticism
You seem to have (arguably knowingly) misinterpreted. You seem to have mixed up what is true for any particular atheist (or rahl in particular) with what atheism as a concept is. If you're willing to discuss it, I'm happy to. I would suggest doing it in the same thread as before, where an unanswered post from me still waits for you, instead of starting at the beginning again. We could do it here, but it doesn't seem to be the point of the thread.
ha! there is nothing to discuss, you 'perfectly', to the letter described an agnostic, by definition rahl is agnostic, just like water is wet, nothing to discuss sorry.
actually it has. Once they describe the elements (talking points) of their decision, much like dictionary reference descriptions they have in fact laid the floor of a hard definition. The only reason they say it in that manner is to prevent and hopefully fool people like myself who are fully aware they made a religious decision, in violation of the constitution charter. They have no authority what so ever to adjudicate rulings with regard to our reserved rights. although I have to admit they got this one right which really surprised me.
What? We're not all cut from the same pattern, or cookie cutter, we're all individuals with our own minds. You just can't bunch together an entire religion under one flag or ideology. I'm a non-practicing Catholic and the reason I'm not practicing came years ago when the news of the Pope's cover-up of pedophile priests came to light. I do support gay marriage, why not? I don't agree with any woman who chooses to have an abortion. But the option of abortion for herself is there, it's her body and it's legal. That's on her, not me. And I realize it's a gut-wrenching choice for any women to make alone.
This simplistic concept is beyond the ability for the resident sophists to understand. three choices and only three choices 1) I believe its true 2) I believe its not true 3) I believe more information or proof is needed. (I believe neither)
no you didn't. The definition is in crystal clear english. By definition, atheism is not a belief or a religion.
you people are too funny! Its not my position that has changed, its your ability to understand my position is finally coming to light. Good start! hint; a directly applicable 3way switch is still binary.
adjective adjective: spiritual 1. relating to or affecting the human spirit or soul as opposed to material or physical things. (of a person) not concerned with material values or pursuits.
Hmm I guess I over estimated you. Make that you wont be able to go 1 round with me before the big KO. The binary logic associated with DPDT switch is as follows: 000 001 100 How about that its binary! I am convinced neoatheists are addicted to wearing red faces of embarrassment since they insist on goading everyone to prove how wrong they are time and time after time again.
Nope, a standard for a definition has not been defined. If you think the criteria used in justifying a SCOTUS decision on the 1A constitutes a definition setting a standard, then why hasn’t all the cases cited the so called ‘definitions’ from the high number of earlier cases? If you think their objective is to fool people, so they can violate the 1A somehow... then I guess you just see through all the justices that have participated in related rulings over the years that somehow are inferior to constitutional law than you. Lol So, considering my thinking on the topic is mine, subject to the opinion of no one else, having no written scripture, no rituals, and absent me trying to convince others to accept my thinking, have I established a religion consisting of a single member, me? My thinking fits your criteria in #3 above. BTW, if I make the assertion that I believe I am God, how would you prove I am wrong?
If by 'standard' you are looking for a rubber stamp religion is "_______" fill in the blank that is outlandishly unreasonble, by the time you finished filling in the blank with every conceivable nuance of what religion encompasses you would fill the library of congress. What you see happening today is people see a cherry cake and claim its not a cake because the definition of cake has an example of vanilla. They can not think for themselves, they need a dictionary to tell them every detail, at least the sophists perspective. Like making a cake, you have the fundamental ingredients to mix for a cake, after that its unpredictable, same with religion. Why do you demand the unreasonable? Their objective first and foremost is to retain their standing and power, and they do whatever it takes to achieve that end. Even britain had the exchequer for monetary and civil and pastoral courts to handle the religious disputes. We claim secularism and put religious matter under our commercial courts and we can see how well that has worked out in our lower courts at least. Sure, any decision made has one side making it, the gubmint. The gubmint as litigant and the gubmint as judge. Do you know what a reserved right is, as it would translate to 'we the people'? Do you believe murder rape and stealing is wrong?
Living by the Spirit of God. If you do not understand being born again you can not understand being Spiritual https://biblehub.com/1_corinthians/2-14.htm
