The Logical Flaw of Religious Practicing

[IIIIITHE1IIIII]

PDF said:

1.   You know exaclty what your doing when you create threads like this.  There is nothing wrong handeling this with a little class.  You are not writing a dissertation.  You are tring to have an open discussion with people of very different beleifs.   If someon ask me which soda is better and I know one works at Coke and works very hard to get the taste right.  If i want to be honest, I will say Pepsi taste better to me.  It's just nicer, better manners.   IMO this is one of the few times that it just makes sense.  I hate it when people do the IMO opening when they try to argue for or against most things, but its so sensitive that you have to be carful.  You can get people riled up - points to me.

2.  Thats exactly it!!!  You made a silly claim and your argument was no one proved me wrong, so I must be right.  i was just showing you how silly that is.

3.  If you are going to write in absolute, then you should't be suprised I challenged it, stating the obvious truth that is a conclusion drawn on the fact that God doesn't exist.  You didn't counter the point with, no this is how that statement is still true if God does exist.  If you don't want to talk about another subject manner in this thread, don't include it in your concluding argument.

4.  I don't want to derail your thread, since we are not on subject matter, i will not respond to your next post.  (maybe in PM if I really feel the need)

1. This is a thread on the internet. If you are looking for class I guess you are looking in the wrong place.

2. I don't think you understand the purpose of this thread at all. The point is not for me to be proven wrong, but for others to seriously question their beliefs (and if it didn't make them do that, then good for them I guess).

3. What if it was a conclusion drawn from the fact that the Flying Spaghetti Monster doesn't exist? Would the sole possibility that it may exist actually question may theory?

4. Well, then.