Mission:
1) Bring people together & reduce hostility
2) Foster critical thinking
3) Argue/support atheism fairly
4) Critique and rebut bad/unfair arguments logically
5) Promote a safe space where all nonviolent views are welcome
I think that’s true for some and not true for others within Islam and within other religions as well. There are militants in every ideology.
I would agree that Islam seems to have the most right now, which is scary.
I have trouble with any sort of thought-policing, including within elected officials. I wouldn’t ever want to restrict based on personal beliefs - I’d leave that to the voters.
That being said, we need to hold those officials to their constitutional oath. If they start violating it, they should be immediately removed from office (with due process).
So any enforcement of religious ideology or giving up our sovereignty would be unconstitutional, and not allowed to happen.
I don’t usually say anything political but…
It’s interesting watching Christians suddenly very concerned about Muslims in elected positions legislating their own faith’s laws.
Yeah. I’m concerned too. I’m concerned about Muslims legislating based on their faith. Same as you.
Except.
I’m also concerned about Christians legislating based on their faith.
If your concern about faith-based legislation is that you don’t want legislation based on others’ faith but do want legislation based on your faith, then your position is personal preference and exactly the same as the people legislating those other faiths.
My position is ideological. I don’t want any faith-based legislation. It’s better for everyone if faith is private and not public.
When you’re in power, great. Just don’t bring your faith into it. When others are in power, great. They shouldn’t bring their faith into it.
Since Christians have spent decades (centuries?) legislating their own faith, they now have absolutely no ideological basis to say that Islam should not be legislated.
We need to take the First Amendment seriously and fully separate the religious from the state.
Now that you’re so concerned about faith-based legislation, I have only one thing to say to you.
Welcome to the club.
Yeah. I wanted to see what was in the article and what the best version of the argument was. Turns out it’s a little more nuanced, but not to the extent that you’re incorrect.
Also that nuance adds the addition assumption that there’s already sufficient evidence to believe, which is nonsense.
@grok@the_blind_guide@hookskat Is she wrong though? Can Pascal’s wager deliver salvation given Christianity’s true faith requirement rather than deeds, paired with an omniscient god?
Surely god would know that it’s not true faith, right?
@the_blind_guide@hookskat Hey @grok, does this linked article give a steel-man version of Pascal’s wager? If so, can you outline it below?
Also, please explain now @hookskat is misrepresenting the steel-man version, if she is.
@Erenfounder717@hookskat One doesn’t contradict the other as in “there were no astrologers,” or “there was no census,” but the details are so disparate and the timelines can’t be reconciled. And there’s details that can’t be simultaneously true. So it didn’t happen as written.
@Erenfounder717@hookskat Yes they independently produced different stories of getting Jesus, who was known to be from Nazareth, to be born in Bethlehem.
This is why I say it’s evidence he existed, but also evidence that the authors were making stuff up.
I remember failing my first logic class exam due to the necessary/sufficient section.
I answers neither necessary nor sufficient for nearly everything because I could think of cases where where it wasn’t either.
Ended up talking to the professor after getting my exam back and going over one by one where I explained each answer.
After about 5, he took my paper, crossed out the F, wrote an A, and handed it back.
Made me very happy.
@faithapologia Yes 90db clicks in one ear and 40db white noise in another, people can hear conversation though that.
There’s even conflicting reports that those sounds were occurring the entire time.
All in all, it’s weak.
What?! You’re audio engineer and you say there’s not much difference between 90db and 100db?!
Every 10db, the loudness is doubled. So 100db is twice as loud as 90db. And 60db is 4x as loud as 40db.
You’re assuming the loudest within the range - the best case for your position. What if it was the lowest?
We’d be talking about 90db clicks in one ear, about the loudness inside a bus. And 40db white noise in the other, about the loudness inside a bedroom.
She would easily be able to hear through that.
@faithapologia 90-100db clicks in one ear and 40-60db white noise in the other. Journal of Neurosurgery. 1988;68(6):868–879 (p. 869).
Remind us, what’s the difference between 90db and 100db?
What’s the difference between 40db and 60db?