Read an Interview with Matthew, the owner of CathInfo

Author Topic: Atheists: Report  (Read 1284 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Jitpring

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 536
  • Reputation: +247/-0
  • Gender: Male
Atheists: Report
« on: April 09, 2011, 05:14:31 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Greetings fellow warriors,

    Funnily enough, the survey I wrote below was the last straw for the good folks at Amazon. I've now been banned from all discussion boards there, and they're busy cleansing the boards of my presence. Moreover, it appears that they're also purging my book reviews (two so far have been deleted, one of which was against Pope Dawkins and his nonsense, the other against the assault upon the incarnational that the Kindle represents). Meanwhile, the likes of Anne Rice and her abysmal minions remain free to vandalize the Amazon discussion boards with every manner of anti-Catholic filth. Such is the world.

    At any rate, if you know of some good places for me to post this survey, kindly let me know. Thanks.

    --------

    Greetings atheist friends,
     
    Kindly copy the following questionnaire, paste it into the response box, honestly fill in your answers, and post them here. Feel free to recruit your atheist family, lovers, friends, acquaintances, associates, and co-workers to participate.
     
    Some of the questions may seem strange at first, but the relevance of every question will subsequently be made clear.
     
    I thank you in advance for your participation.
     
    1) Age:
     
    2) Race:
     
    3) Sex:
     
    4) National origin:
     
    5) Highest educational level completed:
     
    6) Parental religious background:
     
    7) Personal religious background:
     
    8) If your parents were married, you would characterize their marriage as [happy/unhappy]. Did your parents divorce? If so, how old were you at the time? Were your parents never married?
     
    9) I would describe my relationship with my father as [close/distant/frightening]. If it was/is not close, would you say that you now dislike or even hate your father or his memory?
     
    10) When did you first realize that you were an atheist? Was there a triggering event or did your consciousness of your atheism develop
    slowly?
     
    11) Extent of theological studies (list theologians, not secondary literature, studied in depth; also list their works studied):
     
    12) Extent of philosophical studies (list philosophers, not secondary literature, studied in depth; also list their works studied; note: the likes of Michel Foucault and Jacques Derrida do not herein qualify as philosophers):
     
    13) Have you read Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Daniel Dennett, and/or Sam Harris? Specify which and what. Do you believe that any or all of these men are possessed of profound theological and philosophical knowledge?
     
    14) If so, have you read any responses to Dawkins et al., such as those of David B. Hart, Edward Feser, or Thomas Crean, O.P.? Specify:
     
    15) I was [fill in] years old when I had my first sexual experience. I was [fill in] years old when I lost my virginity.
     
    16) I masturbate [fill in] times a week.
     
    17) I watch pornography [hours] a week.
     
    18) I've had homosexual sex [fill in] times.
     
    19) Regarding abortion, I am [pro/anti]-choice.
     
    20) I've encouraged, abetted, paid for, and/or committed [fill in] abortions.
     
    21) I [do/do not] play video games. If you do, how many hours per week?
     
    22) I watch [fill in] hours of television per week.
     
    23) I watch [hours] of movies per month. Violence is a [major/minor] factor in most of the movies I watch.
     
    24) The majority of the music I listen to [was/was not] written after 1913. Of that which was written after 1913, [most/a bit] of this was written after 1951.
     
    25) Silence is quite [tolerable/intolerable] to me. Those who know me would most likely [disagree/agree] with me about my capacity to endure silence.
    Age, thou art shamed.*
    O shame, where is thy blush?**

    -Shakespeare, Julius Caesar,* Hamlet**

    Offline Jehanne

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2561
    • Reputation: +458/-10
    • Gender: Male
    Atheists: Report
    « Reply #1 on: April 09, 2011, 07:35:26 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Matthew needs to take a look at some of the Google ads that are appearing on this one.

    Richard Dawkins has his own website and forum; you might try there.  Atheists can be very rude and very arrogant, so be forewarned.  Just keep reminding them that they are aggregations of molecules, nothing more, especially if they begin to object to the "personal" nature of some of your questions.


    Offline PartyIsOver221

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1238
    • Reputation: +640/-0
    • Gender: Male
    Atheists: Report
    « Reply #2 on: April 09, 2011, 07:37:23 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • That is intense, man. Maybe on the side of lacking charity, but wow its so true all the fill-ins you put. Pretty much defines the modern agnostic/atheist today.

    Offline gladius_veritatis

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6173
    • Reputation: +1234/-0
    • Gender: Male
    Atheists: Report
    « Reply #3 on: April 09, 2011, 07:52:53 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Jehanne
    Richard Dawkins has his own website and forum; you might try there.


    He is an irrational tool-bag.  He could not stand to have one of us there for more than five minutes.  His appearance in Ben Stein's film was embarrassing -- his willful blindness is staggering.
    + Vincit veritas +

    Offline Jehanne

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2561
    • Reputation: +458/-10
    • Gender: Male
    Atheists: Report
    « Reply #4 on: April 09, 2011, 07:58:49 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: gladius_veritatis
    Quote from: Jehanne
    Richard Dawkins has his own website and forum; you might try there.


    He is an irrational tool-bag.  He could not stand to have one of us there for more than five minutes.  His appearance in Ben Stein's film was embarrassing -- his willful blindness is staggering.


    What a fantastic movie!!  A little theatrics near the end, but very well done, nonetheless.  I love how Mr. Stein, a true Renaissance man, wears tennis shoes.


    Offline Jitpring

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 536
    • Reputation: +247/-0
    • Gender: Male
    Atheists: Report
    « Reply #5 on: April 09, 2011, 08:02:27 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: gladius_veritatis
    Quote from: Jehanne
    Richard Dawkins has his own website and forum; you might try there.


    He is an irrational tool-bag.  He could not stand to have one of us there for more than five minutes.  His appearance in Ben Stein's film was embarrassing -- his willful blindness is staggering.


    Exactly. That board is heavily moderated.

    I remember Stein calling Pope Dawkins "reptilian." Perfect.
    Age, thou art shamed.*
    O shame, where is thy blush?**

    -Shakespeare, Julius Caesar,* Hamlet**

    Offline Penitent

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 107
    • Reputation: +88/-0
    Atheists: Report
    « Reply #6 on: April 09, 2011, 10:40:32 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • About.atheism has a forum.

    Atheist Forum

    You might try there.

    Offline Jitpring

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 536
    • Reputation: +247/-0
    • Gender: Male
    Atheists: Report
    « Reply #7 on: April 10, 2011, 01:45:53 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Thank you.
    Age, thou art shamed.*
    O shame, where is thy blush?**

    -Shakespeare, Julius Caesar,* Hamlet**


    Offline stevusmagnus

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3728
    • Reputation: +824/-0
    • Gender: Male
      • h
    Atheists: Report
    « Reply #8 on: April 10, 2011, 02:25:58 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Atheism, like sedevacantism, assumes what it is trying to prove a priori then bases conclusions around that assumption. It is a system closed in on itself, explaining away or ignoring all evidence that would tend to eviscerate it's assumption, which is taken on faith.

    Offline Jehanne

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2561
    • Reputation: +458/-10
    • Gender: Male
    Atheists: Report
    « Reply #9 on: April 10, 2011, 03:21:46 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • What a cheap shot; you owe another apology for this one.

    Offline stevusmagnus

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3728
    • Reputation: +824/-0
    • Gender: Male
      • h
    Atheists: Report
    « Reply #10 on: April 10, 2011, 10:20:13 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Jehanne
    What a cheap shot; you owe another apology for this one.


    I attacked the position, not individuals.


    Offline Hobbledehoy

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3746
    • Reputation: +4804/-5
    • Gender: Male
    Atheists: Report
    « Reply #11 on: April 10, 2011, 11:36:51 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: stevusmagnus
    I attacked the position, not individuals.


    Sorry if this sounds harsh, but, uh, I am beginning to get a bit unnerved by this pathological obsession with sedevacantism that seems to orient most [if not all] your apologetical writings in this forum. Unfortunately, you do not seem to understand what the sedevacantists of good will really believe. The points you have argued have been answered by the sedevacantists here on the forum, yet you continue to provoke fruitless discussions that remind of me of threads already existing. Not that their responses have to satisfy you or convince you, but you keep bring up the same things again and again.

    You once complained that this Forum was being overrun by sedevacantists, but you are the one that seems to bring up the topic again and again, even in discussions like this one, that have nothing to do with sedevacantism.

    You should probably take a SV, a "sede-vacay," just like some people here on the forum don't discuss MJ with Roscoe anymore after many attempts to convince him to change his stance on it.
    Please ignore all that I have written regarding sedevacantism.

    Offline Hobbledehoy

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3746
    • Reputation: +4804/-5
    • Gender: Male
    Atheists: Report
    « Reply #12 on: April 10, 2011, 11:38:35 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Returning to the topic, atheism is inherently absurd, that defying reason and reality. Atheism is ultimately the most unscientific thing, the ultimate abomination; it is the grossest form of intellectual sodomy.
    Please ignore all that I have written regarding sedevacantism.

    Offline Jehanne

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2561
    • Reputation: +458/-10
    • Gender: Male
    Atheists: Report
    « Reply #13 on: April 11, 2011, 07:29:17 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: stevusmagnus
    Quote from: Jehanne
    What a cheap shot; you owe another apology for this one.


    I attacked the position, not individuals.


    Atheism and the sede position have nothing in common.  Atheism states, either as a presumption (negative atheism) or as a conclusion (positive atheism) that the Cosmos is composed entirely of matter and energy which interact and transform, one into another, according to physical law which can be described by modern mathematics.  The sede position is based upon revealed Truth, that is, the One and Triune God revealed Himself through the Person of His One and Only Son Jesus Christ and His Immaculate Mother, the Blessed Virgin Mary.  After His Accession into Paradise, Christ's Apostles, of which Saint Peter was the head of the Apostolic College, established His Church, which is His Mystical Body, the Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church, outside of which no one at all will be saved.  The sede position concerns itself entirely with the present canonical governance of this One True Church.

    Offline MyrnaM

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6000
    • Reputation: +3474/-323
    • Gender: Female
      • Myforever.blog/blog
    Atheists: Report
    « Reply #14 on: April 11, 2011, 10:08:01 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Hobbledehoy
    Quote from: stevusmagnus
    I attacked the position, not individuals.


    Sorry if this sounds harsh, but, uh, I am beginning to get a bit unnerved by this pathological obsession with sedevacantism that seems to orient most [if not all] your apologetical writings in this forum. Unfortunately, you do not seem to understand what the sedevacantists of good will really believe. The points you have argued have been answered by the sedevacantists here on the forum, yet you continue to provoke fruitless discussions that remind of me of threads already existing. Not that their responses have to satisfy you or convince you, but you keep bring up the same things again and again.

    You once complained that this Forum was being overrun by sedevacantists, but you are the one that seems to bring up the topic again and again, even in discussions like this one, that have nothing to do with sedevacantism.

    You should probably take a SV, a "sede-vacay," just like some people here on the forum don't discuss MJ with Roscoe anymore after many attempts to convince him to change his stance on it.


    Don't forget he is getting paid to do this.   :roll-laugh1:

     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16