I believe that atheists are not bad people.

Thanks, Yumnuk.

I don't really call myself an atheist, I just don't believe or concern myself with a belief in anything higher than the immediate. I don't mean immediate as in I don't think about the future, rather I'm more concerned with what pertains to my mortal life only.

If you you need the fear of some sort of divine punishment in order to follow the rules of morality than you are NOT A MORAL PERSON.

I totally understand where you're coming from.

By the way, I am not afraid of atheists.... But I am afraid of religious fanatics.

Atheists killed 160 MILLION in the past 100 years! That is a fact!

Morality is abstract. Morality isn't set in stone....it's basically a general consensus of what a particular society or community deems as acceptable or non-acceptable.

Truer words have never been spoken.

Agreed. Varies from eras to cultures to societies etc.

Stats prove otherwise. To bad for you. Atheists have remained steady at around 5% for the past 100 years.

Now that DNA proves beyond a doubt Intelligent Design more atheists are giving up the foolish denial, even famous Atheists!



Dr Anthony Flew now believes in God. I'm not sure how to express what a big deal this is. I believe it may represent one of the seven seals of the apocalypse. Soon dogs and cats will begin sleeping with each other and Michael Moore will be publicly repeating the Pledge of Allegiance.

Any halfwit can jump up and down denouncing God, but for a half-century professor Anthony Flew has been considered probably the number one living intellectual proponent of religious skepticism and atheism. If Madalyn Murray O'Hair had ever actually engaged in logical debate about atheism, it would have most likely been Anthony Flew's books she'd have read to bone up.

Now at age 81, Flew says he believes in some kind of God. Basically, over some period of time he's come to accept the "design" argument that says that there's simply too much complexity in DNA for life to have developed without some kind of intelligent guidance.

He would describe himself as a "deist," the same religious generalization prefered by Thomas Jefferson.

I'm not going so far as express positive belief in something that I don't understand like this, but I'm sympathetic to the underlying point. That is, fumbling Darwinian evolution really doesn't seem like a realistic explanation of the complexities of a human DNA.