|
lotto: the atheist's religion (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Zild |
There was a professor in my chem department who had to pay taxes every year on the earning he pulled in off of scratch offs. He had some sort of system down that worked because the last year I heard about it he pulled in over 30,000 from scratch offs and it was only about September so he had a few more months.
Personally I'd play the big lotto here, but I already pay taxes. Property taxes on the house alone are in excess of $8000 so em if they think they're getting anymore. |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
There are two choices. Believe in an intelligent creator, or not. |
What about an idiotic creator?
If we assume that humans are crafted in the image of God, then that seems the most likely option to me, given the popularity of the kind of "reasoning" you just displayed. |
|
|
| chimera66 |
instead of treating us to lunch or saying thank you or even giving $5 gift cards one vp in my department thought he would "compensate us" by giving me and two other people on his team lottery tickets twice a week...each time i got one i would get annoyed and hope to win so i can tell him to fvck off.
i don't play the lottery though unless its for like $400m+ dollars because the odds are not favorable and i don't find it entertaining. |
|
|
| Silky Johnson |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
bollocks. its an australian term so you should shut your slutty canadian mouth! |
Lol, you have hope.
*points* |
|
|
| Krypton |
| quote: | Originally posted by Sushipunk
Most atheists, I assume, would base their beliefs around science. Science at least makes a continuing attempt to understand the unknown elements of the physical world, rather than simply assigning any 'unknowns' to being a product of some invisible and intangible deity.
IMO |
Just b/c science has not detected something does not mean that "something" does not exist.
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
firstly, you obviously missed the point of this thread. secondly, youre wrong, ive shown you that youre wrong, lets not get into this yet AGAIN :p |
No I'm not wrong. Your belief in no god is in and of itself, a faith proposition. You can not prove there is no god. Something called a "negative proof fallacy".
As I said, both propositions rely on faith, PERIOD. Science does not prove or disprove the existence of god. Atheists who think science negates the existence of any god DEFINITIVELY are fooling themselves.
| quote: | Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles
What about an idiotic creator?
If we assume that humans are crafted in the image of God, then that seems the most likely option to me, given the popularity of the kind of "reasoning" you just displayed. |
Apparently, you skipped logic class...:rolleyes:
As I said, both propositions rely on faith, PERIOD. Science does not prove or disprove the existence of god. Atheists who think science negates the existence of any god DEFINITIVELY are fooling themselves. |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
I'm still pulling for my theory of an unintelligent creator.
I'll call it "dumb design." IMO it has plenty of evidence in favor of it. |
|
|
| Silky Johnson |
I like it.  |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
As I said, both propositions rely on faith, PERIOD. |
What "propositions" are those? |
|
|
| Silky Johnson |
| Bend over and I'll show you? |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
| quote: | Originally posted by jennypie
Bend over and I'll show you? |
:stongue: |
|
|
| cmay119 |
| quote: | Originally posted by T-Soma
FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT.
*insert Star Trek fight music*
dun dun daa daa daa daa daa daa dunn dee daa... |
Oh, I'm pumped now! Who want's some?!
*falls backwards over ottoman* |
|
|
| Lira |
I was pondering about it earlier this week, and asked myself why I've never spent any money on gambling of that sort.
Being an agnostic myself, if I were to pick "a religion" the way you picked lotto, I think I'd consider "action" as the religion I'm trying to convert to. Thus, gambling would be absurd: why would I want to win all that money overnight, if working for that same amount of money would certainly be more satisfying to me?
Certainly, it would be a nice way of making life easier to me (I'd be able to engage in whatever programs I wanted to, for example), but I wonder whether that would affect my inner self, as people tend to go back to their usual levels of "happiness" just a few years after winning the lottery. |
|
|
|
|
