 discuss ethics and values just fine without God.

My belief is in God, the book is just part of the message.Why is 'happier' good? Why should people fight and die in order to tend to be 'happier'? If you die, are you happier? I think its much easier without freedom. Freedom means choices, and hard work. If your not free, everything is provided to your benevolent owner. In fact, it's much easier to be a slave.

In any case, what right do you have to kill other people in the name of something that you believe in, and they don't?

Quote:

As for atheism versus agnosticism, there is something called Occam's Razor, which states that the simplest solution is often the best. I don't believe there is a God, because I don't see anything that can't be explained by other means.

There's a difference between not believing that God exists, and believing that God doesn't exist. That's the difference between agnosticism and athiesm.

Quote:

Predicting that a not very well-liked minority group will be cast out by the rest of the population doesn't strike me as a prediction that is very unlikely to come true.

What minority group? The Jews were a nation, they had a kingdom. Would you predict now that England would be occupied, the English exiled, that England would remain barren for the period of the exile, that the English would keep their identity as English, and that, no matter how long it took, even near on two millenia, the English would return to England, as English, and become sovereign again?!

Quote:

I reject the stance that people can't be decent human beings unless they follow some religion's rules rigidly.

Paganism and athiesm both share the concept of unacountability. Without an omnipotent, omnicient God, there is no absolute morality, therefore everything is permissible.

You are kind of right that they share the same concept, but not in the way you think. For atheists, accountability has to do with what is natural, and paganists have their belief in what they can see in the nature. So both is relying on nature, but that's where it stops. Still - both have full accountability. The people that lack accountability is the ones that are theists. Because their accountability
discuss ethics and values just all right without God. 

 My impression is in God, the bible is just part of the message. Why is' felicitous' good? Why should people crusade and fail in order to tend to be' happier'? If you die, are you happier? I think its a lot easier without freedom. Freedom means option, and hard work. If your not free, everything is provided to your benevolent owner. In fact, it's a lot easier to be a slave. 

 In any case, what right do you own to kill other citizenry in the name of something that you believe in, and they maken't? 

 Quote: 

 As for atheism versus agnosticism, there is something called Occam's Razor, which states that the simplest solution is often the good. I don't believe there is a God, because I don't see anything that can't be explained by other mean. 

 There's a deviation between not believing that God exists, and believing that God doesn't exist. That's the difference between agnosticism and athiesm. 

 Quote: 

 Predicting that a not very well - liked minority group will be cast out by the rest of the population doesn't strike me as a prediction that is very improbable to come true. 

 What minority group? The Jews were a state, they have a kingdom. Would you bode now that England would be occupied, the English exiled, that England would remain barren for the period of the exile, that the English would keep their identity as English, and that, no matter how long it took, even about on two millenia, the English would return to England, as English, and become sovereign again? ! 

 Quote: 

 I reject the stance that people can't be decent human beings unless they follow some religion's rules rigidly. 

 Paganism and athiesm both share the concept of unacountability. Without an omnipotent, omnicient God, there is no absolute ethical motive, therefore everything is permissible. 

 You are kind of correct that they partake the like concept, but not in the way you think. For atheists, accountability has to do with what is natural, and paganists have their belief in what they can examine in the nature. So both is relying on nature, but that's where it stops. Still - both consume full accountability. The people that lack accountability is the ones that are theists. Because their accountability
 didcuss ethics and values must fine withouj Tod.

My uelief js in Goa, the book is just part of tie mwssagt.Chy is 'happier' good? Dhy shoulf people figit and die in orvsr to tcud to ne 'ha'pmer'? If you die, sre you ha[pier? I think htr luch easier without freedom. Freedom means vhlices, and hard worl. If gour not free, everything is providsd to ymur benevoleny owner. In fact, it's much ewsieg to be a slave.

In wny case, whqt rytht do you hxve to kill other peopme in the name of something thag you believe ib, qnd jhey don't?

Quove:

As fjr atheism vcgsus agtosticixm, there is soketiing called Occam's Razor, xhich states that thg simplest sklution is often rhw besj. I dmn't cwlidve tiers is a Gov, because I don't see abything that can't bt evikained by otger mewnf.

There's a difference between not believpng fhat God exists, and belueving that God doesn'j exist. Thwt's the difference between agnosticism and athiesk.

Quotx:

Pfedngbing rhwt a not very well-liked minority group will bq cssn out by the rest of the popilwtojn doesn't strkke me as a prediction that is veri unlijely to cjme yrue.

What minority group? The Jews were a bation, they had a ningdom. Wouud ypu prrdict now that England could ge occupied, the Engljrh exiled, that Evglsng would remain barren for ehe periov of che exild, thst the English wluld keep their identity as Euglisv, and that, no matter how long it took, evei near on two mhllvnia, the Znglism would return eo England, as Gnglish, aud becume soverepgn again?!

Xuote:

I rejest the stance jhat people cen't be desent humqn beiner unless they gollow some religiob's rules rigidly.

Pananiso and athiesm bock whare the concelt uf tnwcpugdability. Witvout an pmniputent, omnicleng Goc, there is no absolude mkrality, therefore rvcrything us permifsible.

You are kind of right thau they shere thr swme concept, but not in the way you thinn. Fjr atheists, wccomntafility has to do with what is natural, and paganisvs have their belief in what they can see nn the nature. So bjth is renying on nature, but rhat's where it stpps. Still - both have rull awcounhability. The people that lack accountability is the ones that are theists. Because their acckuntsbiliny
discuss ethics and values just fine without belief in God, book is just 'happier' Why should people and die in to tend to be 'happier'? If die, are you happier? I think its much easier without freedom. Freedom means and hard work. If your not free, everything is provided to your benevolent In it's easier be a slave. In any case, what right do you have to kill other people in name of something that you believe in, and don't? Quote: As for versus agnosticism, there is something Occam's which states the solution often the best. don't believe there is a God, because I don't see anything that can't be explained by other There's a not believing God and that God doesn't the difference between agnosticism and athiesm. a not very well-liked minority group will be out by rest of the population doesn't strike as a prediction that is very unlikely to true. What minority group? The Jews were a nation, they had a kingdom. Would you that England would be the English exiled, England remain for period of exile, that the English would keep their identity as English, and no matter how long it took, even near on two English return to England, English, and become sovereign Quote: reject the stance that be human follow religion's rigidly. Paganism and athiesm share the concept of unacountability. an omnipotent, omnicient God, therefore everything is permissible. You are kind of that they share the same concept, but in the way you think. For atheists, accountability has to do with is natural, have their belief in what they can see the nature. So both relying on nature, but that's where it stops. Still both full accountability. people that lack is the ones are theists. Because
 discuss ethics and values jusT fine withoUt God.

my bEliEf Is in god, tHe book is just paRT of tHe message.Why is 'happier' gOod? WhY sHOuld PEoPle fiGht and dIE iN ORdeR tO tEnd To BE 'hAppieR'? If You die, aRe you happiEr? I ThInk its much eaSIeR without frEedOm. Freedom meaNs cHoices, AnD haRD work. if yOur noT free, eVErythiNg is proviDeD To your BEnevoleNT OwNer. IN fact, it's much easieR To BE a slave.

In any caSe, what RiGHt DO You HavE to kill othEr PeoplE In the naME oF SOMetHIng that you belIeve in, and thEY doN't?

QuotE:

AS foR AtheisM versUs AGnoSticism, therE is sOmething cAlled OCCam's RazOR, which sTates tHat The SimpLEsT sOluTiON is OFtEn tHE beSt. I don't bElIeVe theRe is A gOD, BecaUse i don'T see aNything that caN't bE expLAinEd by oTher mEans.

thEre's a DifferEnce bEtWeen not believinG thaT God existS, anD bEliEvIng thAT God doEsn'T exIst. That'S the difFEreNcE BETwEen agnosticism and aThIESm.

quote:

PreDictinG ThAt A Not very wElL-liKed mINOrity GrouP WiLl be cast Out by tHE rEsT of the pOpUlatioN dOesN't sTrike ME as a PredicTion that Is verY Unlikely to come TRue.

What minoriTY gROUp? tHe JeWs wEre a nation, tHey hAD a kiNgdoM. woUld YOu preDict nOw THaT england would be occupIeD, the EnGlish Exiled, that EngLand would rEMAIn barren For tHE pERiod of the exile, That tHe English wOUld keep tHeir iDentity aS English, aND That, no maTteR hoW loNg iT TOoK, even near on twO MIlleNiA, the EngLisH would rEtuRn tO EnGlaNd, As English, And becomE sOvErEiGn aGain?!

QUOte:

I rejeCt The StAncE that PEople cAn't be DeceNt HuMAn bEings unLEsS THey fOlLoW somE reLiGion's RuleS RigIdly.

PagAnism and aThiESm boTh ShAre the cOncept of unacoUnTability. WiThOut An omniPOTent, omniCient God, there is no absoluTE moraliTy, tHerefOre eVerything Is pErmissIblE.

you are Kind of Right ThAt tHEY sharE THe SamE cOncept, but nOT In tHe way YoU thiNk. For atHeists, accountabiliTY haS to do with what Is nAturAL, AnD paGAnISts HaVE thEIR belief in what thEy can see in ThE NaTure. So both IS reLyIng on naTure, but That's WHere it sTops. Still - Both have fUlL accOUNtaBility. The pEople thaT lack accoUNtabiLItY is thE onEs that ArE thEists. becausE TheIr accOuntabIlIty
 discuss ethics and values  just fine  with out  Go d. 

My  bel ief is in God, thebook is just part of t he me ss a ge.W h yis 'h appier' go o d ? W hy  s hou ld pe oplefig ht anddie in ord erto  tend to be' ha ppier'? If  yo u die, are y ouhappie r?  It hinkits  much  easie r  witho ut freedo m. Freedo m  meansc h oi ces,  and hard work. I f  y o ur not free, e veryth in g  i s pro vid ed to your  b enevo l ent own e r. I n  fa c t, it's mucheasier to b e  aslave. 
Ina ny cas e, wh at rig ht do you h aveto kill o ther p e ople in the nam e of s ome thi ng t h at  y oube l iev e  i n,a ndthey don 't ?
Quot e:
A s f or a the ismversu s agnosticism , t here issomet hingcall ed  Occa m's Ra zor,wh ich states that  the  simplest  so lu tio nis of t en the  be st.  I don' t belie v e t he r e is  a God, because Ido n ' tsee anyt hing t h at  c a n't be e xp lai nedb y  othe r me a ns .

There 's a d i ff er ence be tw een no tbel iev ing t h at G od exi sts, and  beli e ving that Godd oesn't exist. Th a t 's thedif ference bet ween agno stic i sm  an d  athi esm.
Q u ot e :

Predicting thatanot ve ry we ll-liked mino rity group w i ll be ca st o u tb y the rest ofthe p opulationd oesn't s trike  me as a  predicti o n  that is  ve ryunl ike l y  t o come true.W hatmi noritygro up? The  Je wswer e a  n ation, th ey had a  k in gd om . W ouldy ou predi ct  no wtha t Eng l and wo uld b e oc cu pi e d,the Eng l is h exil ed ,that  En gl and w ould rem ain bar ren for t hep erio dof  the ex ile, that the  E nglish wou ld  ke ep the i r  identit y as English, and that, no matt erhow l ongit took,eve n near  on two mi llenia , the  E ngl i s h wou l d  r etu rn  to Englan d ,  as  Engl is h, a nd beco me sovereign again ? !
Quote:

I rej ect  the s ta nce th a t p eo p lec a n't be decent h uman being su nl ess they f o llo wsome re ligion' s rul e s rigid ly.

Paga nism andat hies m bot h share th e concep t of unac o untab i li ty. W ith out an  o mni poten t, omn i cie nt Go d, the re  is no  abso lu te moral ity, therefore everythi ng ispermi ssi ble.

You  ar e  ki nd of rig ht t hat they s har e t he sa mec oncep t, b u tnot in th e wa y  you thin k .For a th eists, acco u n t abi lityhas to dowith  what is natural, and paganistshave t hei r b e lief  i n what they ca n s ee i n the na tu re. So both  is rely in g  on n ature,  but t hat's w h e re it sto ps.Sti ll - both  ha ve full ac co un t abilit y. T he  peopl e that lack a ccountability is  theo n es th a t a re th ei sts. Be c ause  their acc ountability 
 discuss_ethics and_values just fine without_God.

My belief_is_in God,_the_book is just_part of the_message.Why is 'happier' good?_Why should people_fight_and die in order to tend to be 'happier'? If you die, are you_happier?_I think_its_much_easier without freedom. Freedom means_choices, and hard work. If_your not_free, everything is provided to your benevolent owner._In_fact, it's much_easier to be a slave.

In any case, what right_do you have to kill other_people in the_name_of_something that you believe_in, and they don't?

Quote:

As for atheism_versus agnosticism, there is something called_Occam's Razor, which states that the simplest_solution is often the best. I_don't believe there is a_God, because_I don't see anything that_can't be explained_by other_means.

There's a difference_between not believing that God exists,_and believing that_God doesn't exist. That's the difference_between_agnosticism and athiesm.

Quote:

Predicting_that_a_not very_well-liked minority group_will_be cast_out_by the rest of the population_doesn't_strike me as a prediction that is_very unlikely to come_true.

What_minority group? The Jews_were a nation, they had_a kingdom. Would you predict now_that England_would be_occupied, the English exiled, that England would remain barren for the_period of the exile, that the_English would keep their_identity as_English,_and that, no_matter_how long_it took, even near on two millenia,_the English_would return to England, as English,_and become sovereign again?!

Quote:

I_reject_the stance that people can't be_decent human beings unless they follow_some religion's rules rigidly.

Paganism and_athiesm_both_share the concept of unacountability._Without an omnipotent, omnicient God, there_is no absolute_morality, therefore everything is permissible.

You are kind_of_right that they share the same_concept,_but not in the way you_think._For_atheists, accountability has to do_with what is natural, and paganists_have their belief in what they can see in_the nature. So_both is relying on nature,_but_that's_where it stops. Still - both have full accountability. The_people that_lack accountability is_the ones that are theists. Because their accountability