Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Religion
In reply to the discussion: Anti-atheism billboards in Times Square and San Francisco [View all]Common Sense Party
(14,139 posts)46. Do you believe that ALL dogma is inherently dangerous?
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
84 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
It's childish tit-for-tat. It's in response to billboards like these:
Common Sense Party
Oct 2013
#6
Uh, yes. It's simply designed to needle those who believe in "mythology", etc.
Common Sense Party
Oct 2013
#14
Ken Ham's messages are purposely personal, directed at atheists as people...
Humanist_Activist
Oct 2013
#48
Good one. Calling them "friends" is one of the things that makes this offensive.
cbayer
Oct 2013
#20
I would counter with. You better hope Athiests are right, if not you're probably going to hell
notadmblnd
Oct 2013
#27
Except of course, some are trying to legislate based on various theistic beliefs, which cannot be
AtheistCrusader
Oct 2013
#55
How does one legislate religious-inspired morality that is inclusive and permissible under the 1st
AtheistCrusader
Oct 2013
#63
A free society implies that ideas all have the same chance of approval or disapproval
Leontius
Oct 2013
#68
I'm not talking about the exact wording of a law. I'm talking about the motivation of the
Leontius
Oct 2013
#73
There is usually significant overlap between the motivation, and the material fact of the proposed
AtheistCrusader
Oct 2013
#75
Your own example is one. If I were to be opposed to abortion based on your example of defending a
Leontius
Oct 2013
#76
How would you meet the secular demand of invoking 'rights' for a multi-celled blastocyst that hasn't
AtheistCrusader
Oct 2013
#77
Pre-implantation equals no current pregnancy hence no potential for a medical abortion.
Leontius
Oct 2013
#78
Your statement on a unimplanted but fertilized ovum is at odds with that of the religious right.
AtheistCrusader
Oct 2013
#79
The problem is some people look so hard to be insulted, provoked, excluded, attacked and persecuted
Leontius
Oct 2013
#62
I have unfortunately described a far to large group of people in this country.
Leontius
Oct 2013
#69
What group is that? Why are they "too large" and how do you propose shrinking thier numbers? n/t
Humanist_Activist
Oct 2013
#82
Wow, you perfectly summed up the majority of Christians in this country. n/t
Humanist_Activist
Oct 2013
#81