It was decent reply, well written and answered quite a few things. Though he failed to show a causal or statistical relationship between inappropriate content and negative outcomes thus it is just anecdotal opinion - though I don't deny there may be some negatives for some people (but I would also guess that it is 'dose dependant' to borrow a term from my epidemeology tutes)Fantastic reply!
I don't follow... What is this meant to mean (I could assume a few things, like its a dismissive insult to me, but I'll give you benefit of the doubt.)That is the way to reply to an atheist.
I come for the debate forums but occassionally I often stray to areas like 'Regional - AU/NZ', 'Professions - Medical' 'Society - News & Current Events', 'Society - Physical & Life Sciences' etc. etc. Why not? I'm already on the site and I'm almost guaranteed to meet people that have different views (nothing is more boring than a debate where everyone agrees)Btw, what's an atheist doing on here anyway
lol! Don't blame me, it was there before I joined. Not sure if it was designed by atheists on the board or it was meant to represent our emphasis on science, rationality, logic without actually thinking of what it implied of everyone else. Either way I'm not complaining!and who had the dumb idea to give him the 'brain' (implying that Christians are dumb, blind followers of faith but atheists are intelligent & enlightened)?
Upvote
0