alt.education

On Oct 2, 11:19 am, Dave Oldridge
wrote:
> JessHC wrote innews: @ :
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Dave Oldridge wrote:
> >> Martin Phipps wrote in
> >>news: @ :
> >> > On Sep 28, 2:24 pm, Dave Oldridge
> >> > wrote:
> >> >> I believe that people who insist that I'm insane without a shred
> >> >> of real evidence other than the fact that I believe in God are
> >> >> insane.
>
> >> > The fact that you believe in God IS evidence that you are insane if
> >> > by "insane" we simply mean "not sane". At the very least you are
> >> > delusional, believing inthings which do not exist for no other
> >> > reason than because it pleases you to believe such things.
>
> >> See, there it is again. That fundy intolerance of any differing
> >> viewpoint.
>
> > No, it's that fundy intolerance of accepting someone's unsupported
> > delusions over reality. Which of course is the very definition of
> > fundamentalism: strict adherence to reality.
>
> >> The fact that you do NOT believe in God is not why I think you are
> >> insane. I think you are insane because you think that anyone who
> >> DOES believe in God is.
>
> > So in your professional opinion, people who believe in supernatural
> > beings for which there is no objective, verifiable evidence fit your
> > definition of 'sane.' And atheists, who reject those delusions based
> > on the complete lack of objective, verifiable evidence, are the insane
> > fundamentalists.
>
> Atheists who reject all the evidence for such "delusions"

There IS no eveidence for your delusions. You've been asked
repeatively to put up your evidence or shut up but you still talk
about your delusions as if they were real.

Martin