Ever noticed how some people are full of shit?
First there was that Youtube clown posing as Thomas Paine fancifully pretending that Paine would have supported an integration of “god into public life” whatever that means. Or that Paine would have supported a universal draft.
It gets worse.
In the recent thread, some asshole wrote:
Do you think less God in our country means we are abandoning the ideas of the founding fathers, or that the founding fathers were following the popular belief system of the day and were able to get away with integrating the word God into every document they wrote?
I think it’s perfectly hilarious that members on this forum can babble at great length whilst eating this shit up. Time to intervene.
The word god did not appear in the constitution, and only twice appears in any of the 85 federalist papers, one of which referring to the god of the thebans. The word god is not to be found in the articles of confederation. The word God appears one time in the declaration of independence, but that’s the extent of it in the founding documents.
Oh, and I’m not singling out the religious folks on this forum. Here’s a gem our resident pretentious poser dhickey:
It’s funny when people (especially atheists) toss the word logic around without knowing what it means. Logic allows us to move from premises (axioms) to conclusions (theorems). Logic can only prove that if an axiom (or set of axioms) is true, than a theorem is true. Logic cannot be used to prove axioms - these are often (though not necessarily) taken to be self evident though unproven.
It does not make a system any less logical to build on axioms that not self evident or even false. A system only becomes illogical when logical errors are committed. Sometimes axioms that were assumed to be true without being intuitively obvious were later discovered to be theorems derived from simpler axioms. See for example the least upper bound (LUB) axiom and Zermelo?Fraenkel set theory. This does not mean logicians who assumed the LUB axiom to be true prior to the early 20th century were illogical, despite what the atheists on this forum will tell you.
There is nothing more “logical” about atheism than theism. Inasfar as all scientific endeavor is provincial and “scientific proof” is a phrase only to be found in reader’s digest or wherever dhickey found his education, we are forced to make assumptions where we do not have all the information.
To pretend that this is illogical is naive, but when it comes from someone who labels themselves as “ruled by logic and reason” it becomes pleasantly ironic.