@God_Questioner Most advocates of #abortion on demand say "my body, my choice".
How does that work? An unborn baby is 'gay' and their mother is heterosexual????
Whose body are we talking about?
@rushwithfour@SpeedWatkins Absent God, I find no enforcement or enforceability of "eternal and immutable" moral laws.
And you know what they call a law which isn't enforced or *cant* be enforced?
...an opinion.
@God_Questioner@johnehosier You saying the bible isn't true because you say it isn't true, is they very same circular reasoning you claim is a problem.
@ChanceSpif29990@RFupdates If God prevented people from freely choosing evil, that would be tantamount to *forcing* them to do good.
And that would make the distinction between good and evil meaningless because neither would be a choice.
Puppet on a string morality.
@AtheistOwner@GuehlBob If you're going to dismiss certain religious claims on the basis that they aren't in agreement, then the corollary is that you should accept the things they agree on.
What's the one thing all those religions unanimously agree on? ๐ค
...that #atheism is false.
@ThinkingAtheist You can't "hide" something which isn't there.
The *absence* of something necessary to make a syllogism valid or sound is what makes an argument illogical.
@UgoCannon A book with the word "selfish" in the title lead you to #atheism
You chose a book about natural selection, the law of the jungle, and favoured races, over one that says love your enemy, give to the poor.
You went for a brief history of time instead of eternal life.
@fawzydawah An adult parent isnt changing their nature if they play act - like a child - with their own children.
If God tried and failed, that would make Him fallible, but it's not fallibility if you're doing something on purpose.
"Whoever humbles himself will be exalted."
@Matthew56193629@Curi_Christian You have to stay upright to turn the *other* cheek. I've found that managing your attacker is necessary in order to do that.
Also, I think there's a strong argument for doing what's needed to help prevent a violent person from doing something they will regret.
@Robbservations2@evilsteveve@AgainstAtheismX You're missing the point.
Two Christians who disagree about [doctrinal claim] will BOTH agree that God is the ultimate objective authority who can decide the matter.
Two #atheists arguing over some [lifestyle choice] have no agreed, ultimate, objective umpire.
They be like...
@God_Questioner@PhysicistTx False equivalence fallacy.
If I paint graffiti on my own front fence that doesn't make it OK for everyone else to paint graffiti on my front fence.
I can't handcuff someone and lock them behind bars but a police officer can.
@Spiker_Yu You make a good point.
If I love eating bacon, or shellfish, or drinking alcohol, and someone says they think those are sins, why should I be offended?
Why would I expect a person should be sacked for having that belief? Especially if I'm completely confident they aren't sins.
@ScottRagan@Spiker_Yu In my workplace I wouldn't make an unsolicited, gratuitous statement about homosexuality being a sin because I'm on the clock and they're not paying me to share my religious views.
But if my boss asked me, I would definitely answer truthfully.
@DFPSAC@sanguineblood@ChristiansSTDT B remains unanswered (begged) because C doesnt answer B.
It's simply a restatement of A
...begging the question B all over again. (Circular)
@DFPSAC@sanguineblood@ChristiansSTDT Still cant answer what question is being begged?
'Circulus in probando' entails question begging because the attempted conclusion leads back to the starting premiss.
A. "You must obey the law"
B "Why must I obey the law?"
C "Because laws have to be obeyed"