Takerial wrote...
I'm not confusing anything. Not all religion is theism kid.
Yes...I know that...that's actually the point I made in my post.
If you were honestly content with just "not needing to know" you wouldn't be posting still.
I never said I was content with not needing to know. I said I'm content with not knowing, that doesn't mean I don't want to know more still.
We're not going to accept your baseless biased ideology because we can see it for it's real form.
Yet you can't point to where I said anything you're accusing me of saying, including that science is absolute in any way, or that all religion is bad. The problem is, you all aren't taking the time to read and understand what I'm saying. You're simply judging who I am, and deciding my arguments mean something other than what I've said. It's rather unfair.
If you want us to take you seriously, go learn how to think for yourself and not make thing personal.
Can you explain what I've said that's demonstrated how I don't think for myself? One of the books I have in my library is "The Demon Haunted World: Science is a Candle in the Dark" by Carl Sagan, which has an entire chapter on how to critically think caled "The Dragon in my garage"and I've read it cover to cover. I believe I am well informed on how to think properly, and clearly.
Honestly, all of you are basically telling me, "We can't point to you saying any of the things we're saying you said, but we know you mean them anyway."
Can anyone explain to me how that's in any way fair?