User Profile: SkepticsAmongUs

SkepticsAmongUs

Member Since: March 26, 2013

Comments

123 To page: Go
  • [1] January 22, 2015 at 10:30am

    This poll only polled men on the issue and threw out a whole set of survey data that presumably did not fit the agenda. This poll is crap.

  • January 22, 2015 at 10:13am

    So, for anyone who is interested, here is the link to the actual poll and data. I was certainly skeptical when I saw the report was completed by Marist (a Catholic College) and funded by the Knights of Columbus. When you first start reading the report, it seems like it was completed legitimately, but slowly dissolves as you continue. Some of the questions are leading, some of the questions group too many factors together; but in general, the questions are poorly developed.

    Its also important to look at the sample, and verify that it was reflective of the population you are trying to study. The poll did a good job in looking at different regions of the country. But then I read this…” Respondents in the household were selected by asking for the youngest male. To increase coverage, this landline sample was supplemented by respondents reached through random dialing of cell phone numbers from Survey Sampling International. The two samples were then combined and balanced to reflect the 2010 Census results for age, gender, income, race, and region. Results are statistically significant within ±2.1 percentage points. Some questions on the issue of abortion were asked of half the sample. Survey respondents were randomly selected to complete one of two survey forms. For this report, questions from survey form A are reported”

    In other words, the poll hardly accounted for the opinion of women, and then chose the results that benefited them most. This poll = garbage.

    Responses (1) +
  • [11] January 2, 2015 at 11:36am

    Catalyst
    For most people who don’t want to get married in a church, a justice of the peace or getting married at the county courthouse provides that option for them. This reaction by the counties took that option away for many people. Thankfully, I live in Pennsylvania, where we can have secular weddings under the use of the self-uniting license thanks to the historical marriage traditions of the quakers. When I was married, we had a beautiful wedding uniting our two families as one, and not once was god invoked.

    Just because marriage is a vow before god for you, doesn’t mean it is for everyone. These Florida counties did the equivalent of taking their ball and running. They didn’t like the rules of the game, so they quit. Its a sophomoric reaction.

    And sadly a handshake contract isn’t good enough for me these days. There are too many people who are inherently bad and dishonest. I wish I could trust others like that, but I have been wronged to often.

  • [14] January 2, 2015 at 11:09am

    And for those of us who don’t go to church, or don’t want to get married in a church? Let’s remember, marriage pre-dates the christian religion. Marriage is a social and institutional contract that is far better handled by the government than by the church. Getting married in a church has no actual meaning until you sign the paperwork and return it to the courthouse.

    Responses (5) +
  • December 12, 2014 at 10:05am

    You should think a little more critically before you post something like this. I could just as easily quote other medical diagnoses that are almost exclusive to heterosexual intercourse. For instance, HPV is most commonly spread during vag inal or anal sex. 90% of cervical cancer cases are caused by the HPV virus. More than 10,000 women in the United States get cervical cancer each year. This means straight people having sex causes 10,000 women to obtain cervical cancer.
    Now that’s healthy…Seems normal to me… Dope.

    Responses (1) +
  • [2] December 12, 2014 at 9:56am

    Most important to this conversation is that this organization is completely dishonest. The man in the poster, Kyle Roux, is not a twin. He is also an openly gay man, and thinks the billboard is discriminatory. Well done….well done.

    http://www.nbc12.com/story/27608187/openly-gay-model-in-nobody-is-born-gay-billboard-reacts?clienttype=generic&mobilecgbypass

  • [1] September 2, 2014 at 10:30am

    @ Disabledcovetern
    I assume you are speaking of the photograph by Andres Serrano at the 1987 Awards in Visual Arts competition? That’s a very vague reference, but Ill bite.

    I am unequivocally against governmental funding for religious imagery, and against religious imagery being displayed on public grounds. That means I would be squarely against the governmental funding of pisschrist, or the display of this cross in Indiana. I assume that most Atheists would be consistent in this stance.

    On a more interesting note, I believe Andres Serrano’s work really displayed the intolerance of the many christians. Serrano received death threats and hate mail for his work. When the photo was moved to the National Gallery of Victoria, the gallery officials received death threats and the art was vandalized. I must have missed the place in this article where atheists were sending death threats to the artist vandalizing the sculpture…

  • [4] September 2, 2014 at 9:45am

    “Hey Atheists, if you want to attack religon…GO TO A DAMN MOSQUE AND TRY THAT!”

    Your rant is ridiculous. Atheists respect your right to practice your religion within your home, religious building, and almost anywhere at all. We would never “Go to a damn mosque” and ask them to remove religious imagery. If there was Muslim religious imagery in the public square, as is the case with this cross, I would be right there calling for its removal. But, I’m sure the christian right would beat the atheists to the punch, and cry about how muslim imagery shouldn’t be in the public square before any atheist even had a chance to speak up.

    Responses (5) +
  • [2] August 21, 2014 at 10:23am

    It’s nice to see the original pledge of allegiance again, before it was bastardized during the red scare.

    Responses (1) +
  • [-1] May 20, 2014 at 9:43am

    CLAP CLAP CLAP. This is the post I was looking for. Conservatives cry about how liberals over-react and attack people for their opinion on race or gay marriage, but are just as quick to attack and destroy anyone who falls out of line.

  • [-3] May 16, 2014 at 10:20am

    Bwahahaha. Please go bankrupt Glenn. That would be amazing.

  • [-2] May 8, 2014 at 11:02am

    Sorry, but you dont know the end result (I assume you are speaking of the rapture). All generations of believers before you thought the rapture would come during their lifetime, and they were all incorrect.

    “”Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.”
    ~Luke 21:32

  • [-4] May 8, 2014 at 10:58am

    May be I am one of the few “liberals” who is consistent, but I believe that these CEO’s, NBA owners, HGTV show hosts, etc.. should NOT be fired from their jobs. I think they should be free to say what they believe, even though I dont agree with them.

    Then, as a consumer, if I disagree with something I will not use or buy their product. I dont go to chick-fil-a anymore, I dont go to Hobby Lobby, I wouldn’t buy Clippers gear if I were a Clippers fan, and I wouldn’t watch these shows if they were on HGTV.

    I believe in personal liberties no matter what the circumstance. Sadly, like I said before, tea party people and the christian right are mostly hypocrites when it comes to personal liberties. Small government and personal liberties are a huge talking point until gay marriage or abortion come up. Then, these hypocrites cant wait to pry in to peoples personal lives.

    Responses (1) +
  • [-9] May 8, 2014 at 9:48am

    The hypocrisy of the christian right and tea party. They want smaller government and for government to stay out of their personal lives…unless their personal lives include an abortion or a gay wedding. Hypocrites.

    Responses (4) +
  • May 7, 2014 at 9:20am

    The institution of Sharia Law in Brunei further highlights the need for separation of church and state within all countries. If there is no separation, and religious zealots are in control, their religious intolerance shines through.

    “The Southeast Asian nation has been in the headlines of late over the phasing in of new Islamic laws that will enact harsh punishments for homosexuality, abortions and adultery.”
    If given the opportunity, many fundamentalist christians in the US would like harsh punishments for the above as well.

  • [1] May 1, 2014 at 9:17am

    Impossible, the earth is only 6000 years old!
    ~Ken Hamm

  • April 21, 2014 at 11:21am

    @Bad_Ashe
    “We can also quite accurately say that it was the overwhelmingly Christian culture of the United States that directed and navigated American ascendancy.”
    This is a blind assertion that blindly gives Christianity the credit for the drive and determination of the american people. As such, that which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

    “Your non-belief in the existence of hell has nothing to do with its actual existence, therefore the threat isn’t empty.”
    I choose to believe in things based on demonstrable, repeatable evidence. If you believe in hell, then your requirement for evidence is lacking. This does not come as a surprise, because your statement above would hold true for any mythical creature. “Your non-belief in the existence of unicorns has nothing to do with its actual existence”. Sure it does. Without evidence for it (unicorns or hell), the likelihood for its existence are infinitely small. As such, the threat of hell remains an empty one.

    “it would be disingenuous and intellectually dishonest to completely separate the two. Of course, I expect intellectual dishonestly from atheist trolls, so no surprise there.”
    I never said the two were completely separate. He asserted that “this IS a christian nation”, and I said that this simply is not true (and you agreed). If you weren’t so eager to take a shot at me, you may have noticed. Sounds like you are the intellectually dishonest one.

  • April 21, 2014 at 10:30am

    Atheism is not a religion. There is no dogma, no holy book, no higher power, and especially no faith. It is a single position on a single postulate from the believer, to which the atheist remains skeptical and takes the null position.

    Atheists are finally standing up to prevent government entities from showing preference of one religion over another. Or by showing preference to one religion over non-religion. If you don’t understand how the establishment clause has been interpreted, I suggest you educate yourself on the Everson v Board of Education case and its application of the 14th Amendment.

  • April 21, 2014 at 10:19am

    Simply not true. Your history teachers must have failed you.

    As an aside…atheists dont believe in a hell, so your threat is an empty one.

    Responses (6) +
  • April 2, 2014 at 10:06am

    @fortherecord
    Honestly, I have no idea what you are talking about. Let me first make this clear. The idea of being an atheist is a singular position on a singular topic posited by the believer. Beyond this one position on this one topic, Atheists will likely differ on any other topic.

    For instance, I am generally against the death penalty. So, I wouldn’t call for the death of anyone. I agree that animals should be respected, but I understand that humans are omnivores, and therefore have an innate desire to eat meat.

    So sure, in no uncertain terms, I am against the “slow torturing to death” of people that abuse or have been accused of abusing animals. Happy?

123 To page: Go