It is not without irony that ‘David’ has come after my recent post, Rights, God and the Godless. As his reply wears on, he speaks of subjects that he clearly knows very little about.
Is there any point in responding? To ‘David’, details like facts, evidence and so forth, are irrelevant. The truth, as he calls it, is merely his interpretation of one belief system, as I mentioned to Aish in the comments of the Coalition post. ‘David’ can insist all he wants that God created this and God created that, and he can whine as much as he likes that a godless world is a moral-free one, but given the positions he upholds (he thinks child-victims of rape should risk their lives and well-being to have their abuser’s baby), he is not an authority on morality. There can be no rational discussion of morality with someone thinks like that.
2
0
20
Please stop speaking for me and trying to say what I do or do not know.. It just shows your ignorance.
‘David’, you do this to me and to Bruce, all the time. Check yourself and your hypocrisy before issuing requests.
Your irrational ‘response; has no evidence backing it up. No proof that I am wrong except your personal opinion. You make my point every time you write.
Oh the irony ‘David’. You have yet to provide any kind of argument, across any of our discussions, where you provided reasonable evidence.
Make sure you’re not holding onto a monkey’s paw when you demand evidence be offered against you …
This inspired the most recent post on my blog. My brother-in-law shared it on Facebook, but it makes sense. Atheists may be doing more for the world because they know there’s “no one else.”
I absolutely love your post, and might steal that image for another time 😀