JAK wrote:Inconceivable Fri Aug 17, 2007 12:04 am
Inconceivable stated:
I get it, Marj. You're glad you didn't have stupid misguided Mormon parents or any other combo of religeous (religious) zealot. High fives for showing up as a random coincedence (coincidence) in a well balanced, non religious family.
You appear to be consistently engaged in the straw man attack. You paraphrase inaccurately and falsely what someone said, then you attack your own words of misrepresentation.
marg (not Marj) did not state as you phrase.
Your rejoinder to marg is disingenuous.
Why not quote her accurately and respond to what she said in fact, not what you misrepresent her statement to be?
Thanks JAK, I didn't catch Inconceivable's post to me, so I went back and found it.
He also in that post said "Marj, I don't know you well enough to understand why you are here at MD. If you think there is value in an explanation, I would be somewhat intrigued. But please, why don't you start your own thread."
Well I don't claim value in an explanation for why I'm here. He brought this question up of why I'm here with this line "You and JAK might get together and start your very own thread entitled "What am I doing here??" because I certainly am in the dark." and I commented to it "You ask why I am here. I guess that means you think I shouldn't be. So I ask you why do you think that?"
I'm not interested in starting a thread explaining why I'm here to someone who says they are "somewhat intrigued". They should explain why they are intrigued at the very least first.
Anyhow with regards to what you brought to my attention JAK I see he took it wrong.
First of all Inconceivable, I'm not gloating about having better parents. I'm not unique I'm a function of my environment. The main reason you were Mormon is because of your upbringing and the main reason you think fortunate experiences indicate a God is as well a function of your religious upbringing. If I had a Mormon upbringing I'd likely think as you do.
If we use your logic and attribute fortunate experiences as indicative of a God then my being unencumbered by all the time, money, energy and tribulations of religious organization involvement should indicate to you that either God helps atheists too, or fortunate experiences are not necessarily indicative of a God.
In addition there is this perception taught by religious organizations that one can not or will not lead a moral life without God belief. That one will not be able to control vices and will end up as irresponsible individuals. Interestingly you think I'm just a random coincidence. Could it possibly be Inconceivable that what makes people moral or not, responsible or not is not due to a religious affiliation and/or God belief?