I hesitate to dignify this trivial, vacuous charge, but since it's considered a good enough argument by some detractors of atheists, I'll deign to address it.

"Atheism is the new goth."

That is the argument in toto, and devastating though it is, some might call it glib, even puerile. It's a category mistake, given that it equates a general philosophical label to a fashion trend -- how can it be such when it can be derived independent of particular culture, precedes the implied time period, and has nothing whatsoever to do with fashion? Was megaphone crooning the heir to Platonism? I'll paraphrase, ironically, the villainous Nicole Wallace from "Law and Order: Criminal Intent," that it's pop-philosophical drivel that wouldn't butter your parsnips. No, I won't indulge the unqualified use of the phrase any further, for it depends entirely on the question that it begs:

Christians are FOOLS

Xainity is comfort. Holding hands in fear of the DARK. Spewing blind faith and hating those that presume a ritual will not suffice to having infinate life, as this. ???

No one wants to get old. No one wants to get sickly ugly and die. But you do and will. A buddha might say nothing dies, all is recycled, just as you are now of this process.

The fear of death is the root of the religious and scientific problem / question.

Xainity is not much more than a wishful fantasy. Ask a Buddhist's opinion, then go laughing all the way into eterninty .... in the mean time, enjoy this ride .... get everyone naked on a sea doo ..... yeah ....

Luke 19:27 That story and verse is a clumsy stumper for many. Jesus is saying, don't be afraid of me, I am not that kind of murderous king or leader, .... elsewhere he says we are his equals. "Ye are gods", etc etc

Keep in mind the edited bible was more of a goverment control book than an honest attempt to help anyone. The church turned atheistic Jesus philosophy into silly superstition and dogma.

Actaully the King in this story can also translated as a "nobleman" or "Rich man" etc. Jesus seems to be illustrating that they should not be afriad of him and to use their talents, as the three slaves in the story represent. The one slave was afraid. Jesus is saying don't be afraid.

Looks like we just got one step closer toward scientific truth. gives me a warm fuzzy feeling every time.

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/news/queensland/eellike-creatures-may-hold-key-to-human-eyes/2007/12/07/1196813023223.html

The theists posting faithfully to these forums are all hoping for just one ray of light, just one atheist to have a sudden revelation of truth and drop to his knees in total wonder at the awesome love that God has for him.

The elephant in the room however is that we are trying to use reason to explain an unreasonable thing.

God is not reasonable. You cannot figure God out. If you could, He wouldn't be God.

So the atheist argues that faith in God is not rational. Correct.

The principle is Seek and you will find and Those that come to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those that dilligently seek Him.

*Fewer than half of all high school seniors read at levels considered adequate to follow even moderately complex directions."

(CDF Reports 12, 1990): 10; Ann Rosewater, "Child and Family Trends: Beyond the Numbers," in Caring for America's Childern.

Translation: There are two elements to this. First, people who don't -- or can't -- read, don't bother to research for themselves. They trust the pastor, or the 10 oclock news, or their mother. Second, basic logic might be simple, but good critical thinking takes practice. The best practice comes from reading relatively complex arguments.

I just saw Good Morning America on CBS and they were running a story on First Baptist Church of Fort Lauderdale. This particular church had just spent over $1,000,000 for a freakin' Christmas pageant.

With Christianity's ( ergo, Jesus ) emphasis upon charity, good works and helping the poor isn't this setting a bad example by spending such a huge amount of mammon on what amounts to a Christmas play ?

Wouldn't it have been more consistent with their own religious standards to have shown a little humility, scaled back their production and then shared their financial bounty with some homeless shelters or something ?

Anyone see this? What's up w/ the cross as a symbol? Weird...and then upon further research, see below. I mean, just WTF?!?!?!?!?!

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/12/07/germany.scientology.ap/index.html

And then, from wiki (I know, but there are similar references elsewhere...)

Xenu (also Xemu), pronounced /ˈziːnuː/, according to Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard, was the dictator of the "Galactic Confederacy" who, 75 million years ago, brought billions^[1] of his people to Earth in DC-8-like spacecraft, stacked them around volcanoes and killed them using hydrogen bombs. Scientology holds that their essences remained, and that they form around people in modern times, causing them spiritual harm.^[2][3]

STOP REMOVING MY POSTS. I KNOW YOU PEOPLE CAN'T HANDLE THE *TRUTH*.....

MOD note: Your trash wasn't removed.

It was MOVED to troville. Go look

http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/miscellanous_forums/trollville/10993

I read this article today and the comments that followed.  One of the comments mentioned military chaplains wearing symbols of their own faith and yet they minister to all military personnel of all faiths.  I would love to hear some thoughts on this....should the military chaplains be forced to wear no symbols of their personal faith in order to project an image of not favoring on religion over another?  Does this infringe on their first amendment rights?  Is it even that big of a deal?  Here is the full article: