Webb Simpson - does he have a mind of his own?

[Malvern]

Not having been around very long, I haven't got the religion/non religion ennui. I do understand having endured more "how far can you hit a driver" threads on other forums than I care to remember

The overtly religious comments don't actually bother me, more so they bore me. However equally, so does the psycho babble stuff, have just seen an interview with Roger Tambellini where he was so desperate to trot out, "Ï need to get out of my own way" that he actually got in his own way trying to say it twice in a sentence.

Makes an easy point of reference to spew out the same stuff everytime, don't ever say what you actually think. Rory knows never to do that again even though when asked about Tiger he made a measured, thoughtful statement and was then attaked.

Potrayals of Americans in the European and certainly my press would often have you believe that you guys are all living in some type of "Footloose" town. There is a BBC guy called  Louis Theroux who specialises in running around America finding these types of people.Guess when you see the Webbs, Badds (infected by his time in the US :)), Bubba et al, it reinforces the stereotype

[laxbballgolf]

Originally Posted by mck

Now given you atheism, how can you make a statement that rape victims having acid thrown on their face is bad?  What basis do you have for these ethical statements?  Aren't we all just random chemicals churning away.  How would throwing acid in someones face be any different  than say coughing?  Just chemicals doing their thing right?

This is kind of fun!

The chemicals are not random, they are the product of many years of evolution.

I try to frame my moral reasoning (and all other types of reasoning I do) around science and evidence as much as I can.

Count me in the non-religious camp.

[mck]

Originally Posted by Shorty

FFS.

Is compassion the prerogative of those who believe in God?

If you don't, dows that mean that you can't have any ethical or moral standpoints?

Not according to you, apparently.

Notice how it's actually the "Christians" who become aggressive and surly?  Funny that.

To your first question my answer would be absolutey not--I never said that

I'm not saying you can't have ethical standpoints--I'm asking how are those consistent with your worldview.  You started the thread I thought maybe you had some positive statement about what you believe and why.

It was just a question-, not meant to be "aggressive and surly"  ---in the future I'll try to be more careful and follow your example of posting etiquette

[sacm3bill]

Originally Posted by mck

It was just a question-, not meant to be "aggressive and surly"  ---in the future I'll try to be more careful and follow your example of posting etiquette

No kidding - Shorty, this conversation got aggressive and surly the minute your first post showed up.  And btw, I see you've responded to others but conveniently ignored my post pointing out the logical fallacy of your arguments.

[mck]

Originally Posted by laxbballgolf

This is kind of fun!

The chemicals are not random, they are the product of many years of evolution.

I try to frame my moral reasoning (and all other types of reasoning I do) around science and evidence as much as I can.

Count me in the non-religious camp.

could you give an example of a moral belief based on science?  I'm not sure I get what you mean

[Dave H]

Originally Posted by The_Pharaoh

I responded to one part of the thread, not the whole thread. I suggest you go back and read the thread to understand why I have posted. You have gone off on a tangent which has nothing to do with why I posted here. I appreciate you not putting words in my mouth as you seem to have mistaken me with the OP. For what it is worth, I couldn't give a frog's fat arse what Simpson thinks.

You also have a very strange definition of ramming beliefs down people's throats. All I said was I am not religious and left it there. If you want me to ram my beliefs down your throat, I'll be more than happy to send you a 100,000 word PM.

Wow, a bit touchy, eh? I didn't confuse you with the OP at all. I put you in the same camp as you clearly stated what you think of religious people. Perhaps I misunderstood the point of your post, but it didn't seem to be saying anything other than religious people are deluded and insane (your previous post, not the one I directly quoted). I took that to mean you agreed with Shorty, that people who thank God for their success in a public manner are ramming their beliefs down your throat. Sorry, I guess I'm guilty of generalizing all non-religious people, oops.

[Dave H]

Originally Posted by Shorty

OK - here's another direction.......

Why Does Webb Simpson have "Titus 3:3-7" embroidered on the back of his cap. It is not for him to see. It's not on a little card he keeps in his pocket and looks at to draw inspiration.

For whose benefit is it?  Surely it's the people who see it.

Now......I wouldn't call that "ramming it down someone's throat" (perhaps a variation on that)  but he really does seem to have a need for everyone else to think something about "who he is".

And what pretentious crap it is...

Titus 3:3-7

New International Version (NIV)

3 At one time we too were foolish, disobedient, deceived and enslaved by all kinds of passions and pleasures. We lived in malice and envy, being hated and hating one another. 4 But when the kindness and love of God our Savior appeared, 5he saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, 6 whom he poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior, 7 so that, having been justified by his grace, we might become heirs having the hope of eternal life.

<<

<

==

>

>>

How is it any different than having anything on a shirt or hat, or bag or whatever? Why do people put bumper stickers on their cars?

[laxbballgolf]

Originally Posted by mck

could you give an example of a moral belief based on science?  I'm not sure I get what you mean

Well, I'm not a believer in any one neatly packaged world view, but in pretty vague terms one could think a) humans are made of the same stuff as the rest of the universe b) there is some sort of force of physics or evolution that pushes onward and can be thought of as "progress" perhaps and c) living a life that fits in with a and b rather than disrupting them seems to make sense and be natural.

So, for example, senseless violence and things like that would seem to disrupt "b" as I described it.

I'll add a quick pragmatic perspective to my view, too.  From experience and observation, being good and decent seems to make people happier and more successful than being evil, so it makes sense in that way, too.  Plus it feels natural and is just the way I am.  I don't know how other non-religious people think about morals and ethics, but that's how I think about it.

[Harmonious]

Originally Posted by The_Pharaoh

You are wasting your time Shorty. I hear this sort of BS ("we are not here as just some random, cosmic happenstance in a crap-shoot of an universe") from every religious person I speak to when they try to "show me the treasure". It's spoon-fed to them every Sunday morning at church where they go to have the Bible explained to them. Most of the services are centered around how to convince atheists there is a God, so it is no wonder my second favourite ("random chemicals") has followed quickly on the heels of my favourite.

Seems odd that, as an atheist, you would spend time in church on Sundays.  Else, why would you know what "most of the services are centered around"? And why would you assume that spiritual people go to church? I think your prejudices may be showing a bit.

[inthehole]

Iacas - this thread is going in the wrong direction - it's time to end it.     I have all I can do to not totally go off on this clown.      His complete certainty that religion is nonsense is disturbing - and offensive to me personally .    Thanks

Originally Posted by Shorty

Of course people who beieve in God should be ridiculed, because they are proving themselves to be ignorant.

[Harmonious]

Originally Posted by laxbballgolf

Well, I'm not a believer in any one neatly packaged world view, but in pretty vague terms one could think a) humans are made of the same stuff as the rest of the universe b) there is some sort of force of physics or evolution that pushes onward and can be thought of as "progress" perhaps and c) living a life that fits in with a and b rather than disrupting them seems to make sense and be natural.

So, for example, senseless violence and things like that would seem to disrupt "b" as I described it.

Interesting ideas.  They seem similar to other beliefs:

"some sort of force of physics"  is not too far from "some sort of supernatural force/supreme being".

"living a life that fits in with a and b rather than disrupting them seems to make sense and be natural" is not too far from "do unto others as you would have others do unto you".

Whether you worship at the altar of "science" or the altar of "religion", there are forces outside yourself that you (or anyone else) can never know. And living a good and righteous life is not the sole province of the believer, nor of the non-believer.

As people here keep looking for ways to divide us, it might be good to step back and look for things that are similar in all of us, regardless of beliefs.

[JetFan1983]

Quote:

Originally Posted by laxbballgolf

b) there is some sort of force of physics or evolution that pushes onward and can be thought of as "progress" perhaps

I understand what you're saying, but this is a common misconception of evolution.

Quote:

One important mechanism of evolution, natural selection, does result in the evolution of improved abilities to survive and reproduce; however, this does not mean that evolution is progressive — for several reasons. First, as described in a misconception below (link to "Natural selection produces organisms perfectly suited to their environments"), natural selection does not produce organisms perfectly suited to their environments. It often allows the survival of individuals with a range of traits — individuals that are "good enough" to survive. Hence, evolutionary change is not always necessary for species to persist. Many taxa (like some mosses, fungi, sharks, opossums, and crayfish) have changed little physically over great expanses of time. Second, there are other mechanisms of evolution that don't cause adaptive change. Mutation, migration , and genetic drift may cause populations to evolve in ways that are actually harmful overall or make them less suitable for their environments. For example, the Afrikaner population of South Africa has an unusually high frequency of the gene responsible for Huntington's disease because the gene version drifted to high frequency as the population grew from a small starting population. Finally, the whole idea of "progress" doesn't make sense when it comes to evolution. Climates change, rivers shift course, new competitors invade — and an organism with traits that are beneficial in one situation may be poorly equipped for survival when the environment changes. And even if we focus on a single environment and habitat, the idea of how to measure "progress" is skewed by the perspective of the observer. From a plant's perspective, the best measure of progress might be photosynthetic ability; from a spider's it might be the efficiency of a venom delivery system; from a human's, cognitive ability. It is tempting to see evolution as a grand progressive ladder with Homo sapiens emerging at the top. But evolution produces a tree, not a ladder — and we are just one of many twigs on the tree.

Copied and pasted from this website .

Also, many organisms devolve over time as well i.e. become more simple, or less complex, and not necessarily better off as a result.

[laxbballgolf]

Originally Posted by JetFan1983

I understand what you're saying, but this is a common misconception of evolution.

Copied and pasted from this website.

Also, many organisms devolve over time as well i.e. become more simple, or less complex, and not necessarily better off as a result.

Good point and I think you're right, but it doesn't shift my personal view.  Maybe I overstated my position; maybe I should have used the word "nature" instead of "progress", and you can think of my point "c" as figuring I might as well do what is natural and go along with nature - that way it takes the qualitative judgment and connotation out of it.

Originally Posted by Harmonious

Interesting ideas.  They seem similar to other beliefs:

"some sort of force of physics"  is not too far from "some sort of supernatural force/supreme being".

"living a life that fits in with a and b rather than disrupting them seems to make sense and be natural" is not too far from "do unto others as you would have others do unto you".

Whether you worship at the altar of "science" or the altar of "religion", there are forces outside yourself that you (or anyone else) can never know. And living a good and righteous life is not the sole province of the believer, nor of the non-believer.

As people here keep looking for ways to divide us, it might be good to step back and look for things that are similar in all of us, regardless of beliefs.

I agree.  I don't hate religious people at all, I'm just putting my thoughts out there.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by inthehole

His complete certainty that religion is nonsense is disturbing - and offensive to me personally.

And why couldn't it be true that someone else's (perhaps yours) complete certainty in Christianity, the existence of a God or gods, etc. is disturbing and personally offensive to someone else?

I'm not planning on taking any sides. When I see the language getting beyond a certain point, I'll close the thread. But it's already been moved to the Grill Room and everyone is free to choose not to participate if they don't want to.

If I'm going to err on one side or another, it's going to be to err on the side of letting a discussion go on a bit longer, in trusting in all of you guys to behave responsibly and maturely, and to let you guys speak rather than close down threads. We close or lock very, very few threads, just as we ban very, very few people and only for the most absolutely egregious and continued assaults on decency.

Again, if you don't want to participate in this thread, by all means, please don't.

If you do, and you behave properly, good.

If you do, and you behave poorly, there could be consequences.

I'm hoping that everyone chooses A or B and not C.

[JetFan1983]

Originally Posted by Harmonious

What are you even talking about?  Platitudinous claptrap?!?  Just slowly step away from your thesaurus.

OK this made me laugh my ass off

Originally Posted by inthehole

Iacas - this thread is going in the wrong direction - it's time to end it.     I have all I can do to not totally go off on this clown.      His complete certainty that religion is nonsense is disturbing - and offensive to me personally .    Thanks

I hear you, man.

Originally Posted by laxbballgolf

Good point and I think you're right, but it doesn't shift my personal view.  Maybe I overstated my position; maybe I should have used the word "nature" instead of "progress"

Ahh, I understand.

Originally Posted by gwlee7

You're starting to worry about the over/under aren't you?

I should've taken the over. Good thing I didn't bet any rep points

***

OK, now I'm being a hypocrite by continuing to post! Back to reading golf threads....

[inthehole]

The point is he's obviously trying to be inflammatory in his choice of words.  How could what I quoted above be considered anything other than offensive (I don't take lightly being called ignorant).     Anyways, I respect your stance, I'm out...

Originally Posted by iacas

And why couldn't it be true that someone else's (perhaps yours) complete certainty in Christianity, the existence of a God or gods, etc. is disturbing and personally offensive to someone else?

[Shorty]

Originally Posted by inthehole

Iacas - this thread is going in the wrong direction - it's time to end it.     I have all I can do to not totally go off on this clown.      His complete certainty that religion is nonsense is disturbing - and offensive to me personally .    Thanks

With respect (and I know that that will come off as sounding funny, ) how can it be "personally offensive" to you that a person states as a belief that there is obviously no God?

I can understand you being disturbed - because it is obviously discomforting to be put in a position where one can't defend an irrational position.

Why not boldly explain to me why I am wrong? I respect difference, opinion and individuality, by I certainly do not respect "beliefs" which are not really beliefs at all, but a recycled bunch of ideas which have been spoon fed since early childhood and never questioned?

And---it's not enough to say that you have questioned them and found that they stand up to scrutiny.

I am not saying that religion per se is nonsense, I am saying that religions where people in modern society place a belief in ideas that have never ever been supported by any form of evidence.

For example - miracles, people rising from the dead, etc. I challenge anyone on this forum to actually come out and say they belive in the resurection and that God exists.
How can one possibly take seriously the idea that an adult in this century would believe these things.  If you were to admit that you believed these things rather than shying away and putting your beliefs in the "personal" box, again that's a convenient way of avoiding the issue. In the absence of any evidence, I will continue to question faith based on rumours and imagination which are perpetuated and swallowed whole down the centuries.

I am not expecting to convert believers to atheism - I'm not that naive - but I would love to read something that could actually make a sane atheist (most of us probably are sane, perhaps not all ) reconsider his/her position. Please direct me to something - ANYTHING that might stand up to some sort of evidence based scrutiny. And please spare me the "intelligent design"nonsense about jet planes suddenly manufacturing themselves randomly.

On the other hand, why wouldn't a sane Christian be questioning his/her belief on an hourly basis - oh that's right, I must look at a flower to know that God exists.

On the other hand, given that my position is that there is no evidence at all to suggest the existence of a deity, why is it that "believers" are so thin skinned and easily offended?

If it was easy to ridicule an atheist, people would do it, but they can't - all they can do is go on about them having wretched, meaningless lives and being a sad mass of chemicals.

[inthehole]

Originally Posted by Shorty

. I challenge anyone on this forum to actually come out and say they belive in the resurection and that God exists.

I'll directly answer your challenge and state I believe in Jesus Christ, the resurrection and that God exists.    I've never mentioned my personal beliefs on an online guitar, guns, fishing or golf forum until this very moment - and for the record, I'm not promoting Christianity, I'm simply responding to your challenge.    Faith is what it is - you either have it or you don't ... it isn't based on scientific or empirical data as you wish it would be.    I am Roman Catholic, and won't be bullied by you into feeling ashamed about it ...