Re: The 'Bright' Movement

On Mon, 6 Oct 2003 15:20:59 -0700 (PDT), Charles & Mambo
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>> Yes, but if you want people to believe that Nori owes you ten mil,
>> you're going to have to come up with some kind of proof if you want
>> people to at all take you seriously.
>
>But...wtf... have you actually read what I've been saying all along? This is 
>precisely my point: I should *not* be taken seriously! You have every right 
>to treat me as a fool for claiming something for which I am unable to 
>provide evidence.
>Similarly: theists should be rightly called fools for believing something 
>that they have no evidence for (not to mention the overwhelming evidence 
>against).
>
>>>Don't you think this is a little twisted? Shouldn't I be rightly called a 
>>>fool for sticking to the claim that cannot be supported with facts?
>> 
>> Do you really want an answer to that question? Or is it meant to be
>> rhetorical?
>
>Damn right, I want an answer! And then I want the answer to apply to 
>theists, too. That's the whole point behind this increasingly futile exchange.

I get it. You've been arguing the other side. Apologies. But your
intent was not exactly clear.

Yes, by claiming that someone owes you $10M without anything to
substantiate the claim, you are being foolish. And yes, the same
answer applies to theists -- something I've always believed.