Ex-Hawaii official denounces 'ludicrous' birther claims.

[jem]

Quote from jem:

If I told you in the HI records dept was a bible and that in the bible it said the date of Jesus' birth and where he was born
would you believe me or would you ask to see it?

I have faith there is a God. You know I have never stated that it is a fact there is a God.

The difference between faith, fact... evidence is important.

1. I have faith in God.

2. The amazing fine tunings in the universe are evidence of design

3. There newspaper announcements are evidence Obama was born in HI... but far from conclusive when the best evidence is the original docs... why not wait for the originals?

4. Finally, it is a fact that the Supreme Court has not provided the definition of Natural Born Citizen. It is possible they could say it means born in America to two Americans.

and this is my response... note that stu even bothered to take it out of context.

richter is right he is a griefer.

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from jem:

stu is fricken liar...

Oh I figured as much. How did I know you ask? His fingers were typing on his keyboard.

 

[stu]

Quote from OPTIONAL777:

If you were actually holding no faith, you would be an agnostic. That's not the case. You are a fire and brimstone atheist, holding a belief that God does not exist, that people who speak about God are beneath you, etc.

It makes no difference what label you want to apply to holding no faith, whether it's agnostic or atheist or whatever , holding no faith does not require holding faith for another thing.
People who do not have faith in God do not have to have faith in what you call no God. Your assertion that they do is just absurd.
A recognition of the ridiculous is not about requiring faith, of any kind.

Quote from OPTIONAL777:

I've met atheists before, people who didn't have the kind of childhood wounding that you obviously suffer from when it comes to faith in God. If someone tells them they believe in God, they simply say, "I tried it, didn't work for me, but best of luck to you." No charge, no animosity, no intent to make them wrong, or disparage them.

They are not workout out some great disappointment or childhood wound, so they are very neutral on the topic of God. Whatever works for someone is cool in their mind, they don't mind at all what people think.

They we have personalities like you and others, who have a mission to attempt to smear and besmirch faith, have a need to show theists that theism is wrong.

It would be much more honest if you came forth and told the world why you are personally so anti God. The trauma is obvious, so why not share it? It might help you in your recovery and a path to acceptance of God working for some, but not for you.

You have no argument so you start to personalize. First sign you've lost your way.

Quote from OPTIONAL777:

Is is logically possible that you just don't get the concept of God, due to your own limitations and preconditions?

The concept is unreasonable, un-rationalized, un-explained, un-explainable according to you, so there is really nothing worth calling a concept at all.

Quote from OPTIONAL777:

Yes, you are that. +1 of course.

Clearly though, you have understood the concept of Gilbert.

 

[stu]

Quote from jem:

stu is fricken liar... this is the post from the atheist who brought God and faith into this thread.

The question was how did this thread morph.... not who brought God and faith into the thread.

Free Thinker gave a reasonable comparison of how you will blindly accept no proof for one thing then demand absolute proof for another.
Your post was a good example of how zany you get as a birther who emmediately in response, compares jesus to Obama. Utterly ironic from more than one aspect.

 

[stu]

Quote from Lucrum:

Oh I figured as much. How did I know you ask? His fingers were typing on his keyboard.

Now it's starting to get ...what's the word...ah yes...klannish. You three defenders of a faith should get a room.

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from stu:

Now it's starting to get ...what's the word...ah yes...klannish.

So now we're racists because we don't agree with you on a topic that has absolutely nothing to do with race?
AND you're calling Optional777 klannish? As many times as he made the accusation that's actually funny.

 

[stu]

Quote from Lucrum:

So now we're racists because we don't agree with you on a topic that has absolutely nothing to do with race?
AND you're calling Optional777 klannish? As many times as he made the accusation that's actually funny.

ah wrong labeling then , like what OptTrolzz does a lot of.... right so how about ... groupies.

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from stu:

so how about ... groupies.

Hmmmm, I was thinking more along the lines of something "anti unproven theory" or some such. "Non believers" maybe? Oh wait that's what they're calling you.
Uh "Anti evolutionists" maybe? It doesn't entirely apply to me of course but hey, when we're name calling is 100% accuracy really required?

 

[stu]

Quote from Lucrum:

Hmmmm, I was thinking more along the lines of something "anti unproven theory" or some such. "Non believers" maybe? Oh wait that's what they're calling you.
Uh "Anti evolutionists" maybe? It doesn't entirely apply to me of course but hey, when we're name calling is 100% accuracy really required?

Well if 100% accuracy in name calling isn't required what was so wrong with klannish, or maybe spelt clannish, as a general metaphorical description for you.

That's the thing. You have no real point to make but rather just blindly fall in with someone on a god slant, regardless of bothering with the unfounded accusations they make.

Preferring to make silly drive by remarks, or get your panties in a clench over a name, by default apparently you can only steer your thoughts one way, unthinkingly it seems, in the opposite direction to anyone who doesn't swallow but questions the nonsense written by a birther's and a trollzzz's religious nonsense.

Perhaps 'clenchers' as a collective noun would suit you guys.

 

[jem]

Quote from stu:

The question was how did this thread morph.... not who brought God and faith into the thread.

Free Thinker gave a reasonable comparison of how you will blindly accept no proof for one thing then demand absolute proof for another.
Your post was a good example of how zany you get as a birther who emmediately in response, compares jesus to Obama. Utterly ironic from more than one aspect.

so according to stu the guy who creates the first ad hom and changes the subject to God and faith doesn't morph the thread --- why? Oh I know its because he and stu are atheists.

stu always deceitful, sometimes entertaining.