But where is the harm in my believing that a God or Gods, has protected me in the past.

If your belief has no consequence then there is no harm. But if the belief has no consequence then it does no good either.

I swear you are more long winded than me. But, let me throw a vote in your corner. Some fools imagine that they see reality, when in truth, we see reality through a lens of our knowledge and experience. It is no more arrogant to say, “Absolutely, there is a god”, than it is to say, “Absolutely, there is no god.” Neither is based in scientific proof. Both are presumptions based upon intuition.

While most who would presume divinity choose to adopt christianity, buddism, hinduism, islam, or even hybrids like voodoo, the revelations of scientific evidence make them all seem ridiculous.
But, the other side of the coin is that science cannot explain the nature of the “big bang” nor explain why they cannot find an epicenter to this event. Such an explosion should have sent the galaxies speeding away from that event in a predictable pattern. No such pattern exists. And an assumption is made that the further a galaxy is away from ours, that based upon the red shift, the faster it is moving away from us. Like we know what millions of light years of gas and dust clouds do to light wavelenghts, we assume the universe is involved in an excelerating expansion. More like kindergartners playing with dolls of unicorns. Pretending to understand.

You can reject the archaeic ideas of the god’s agenda without arriving at a presumptuous conclusion about the origin of the universe. And while you may feel like you are mentally liberated by atheism, even atheist icons like Richard Dawkins don’t call themselves 100 percent, or pure atheists, because they know that beyond quantifiable formula, the rest is intuitive conjecture.

NeoWolfe

Mr. Silverman could decrease his bias by EITHER being more critical of jews OR being less critical of muslims and christians OR by doing something that I have not yet considered.

You obviously have a reading comprehension issue: I re-stated your premise in different terms.

Stop making excuses for his behavior and side-tracking the argument.

I’m not making any excuses. Jews get less bad press because they’re better behaved. 20 to 1 ratio, got it? It’s higher, but I’m not obsessed enough to crunch the numbers. I’ll leave that to you.
I’m also not the 1 redefining words to suit myself.

The facts are what they are and they show that Mr. Silverman displays a clear pattern of bias. This is not appropriate behavior for an AA official.

I’ve already outlined how Dave’s non-treatment of jewish behavior (which is a minor blip in contrast to the other big 2) has nothing to do w/the mission statement of AA.

Stop making excuses for his behavior and side-tracking the argument. The facts are what they are and they show that Mr. Silverman displays a clear pattern of bias. This is not appropriate behavior for an AA official.

Mr. Silverman is an appropriately biased representative of AA.

I rest my case.

Mr. Silverman is an appropriately biased representative of AA.