Considering your religious level of faith in atheism ... that sounds like pure projection.

You made it up. That's what the evidence points towards.

Why? Because if you had an actual experience with some god, and wanted to pass on your revelation ... you would not be mocking religious faith as you are doing even now.

You would be humbled, rather than arrogantly accusing.

That you're not even smart enough to see how your lie falls apart is once again a demonstration of how foolish atheist thinking is. You do not understand faith, and so you belittle it, and then make utterly incompetent criticisms of it in ignorance.

Intelligence would be to criticize with knowledge and understanding, you idiot.

Idiot. You have no credbility because you're a liar (lied about being "nice"), you're a fool (doesn't understand distinction between religion/theology), and a self-described atheist (doesn't believe in god or the supernatural).

So when you claim you received a revelation, I don't have to believe you.

No I don't. For instance, I just rejected your claim of a revelation, "spoken by God".

Did you seriously not see that coming? Religious does not mean gullible, you ignorant fool.

Do you even have a girlfriend, let alone a wife who wants to make babies with you?

Mother Teresa's beliefs in the Bible are irrelevant to the points made in this discussion. Of course the topic is ignored.

And I do not accept your claim of fact, because you are irrational and cannot describe reality correctly.

So illiterate people cannot believe anything? Wrong, again.

Wrong question.

Evidence that we live in a moral universe: We care about morality.

How many times have you appealed to morality "defined by us" as a standard of behavior?

The absurdity is that "defined by us" morality is no morality at all.

You don't believe in self-defense, then. If a young girl is being attacked by a robber, a rapist, a murderer ... you would call her immoral for defending herself with a weapon and doing bad things to her attacker. She must submit to the robbery, the rape, to die ... or be called immoral by you.

Funny how you do nothing about the immoral robber, rapist, murderer. You help the immoral instead of the victim ... and you call this "morality"?

You confuse rebellion against a universal standard with an inability to find the universal standard.

Liar.

Liar yet again.

" Divorce represents one of the most stressful life events for both children and their parents."

Yes, there are an infinite number of wrong answers.

1+1 = 3 is wrong. 1+1 = 4 is wrong. 1+1 = 5 is wrong ....

That does not mean there is no right answer. That does not mean that it is impossible to find the right answer. People who argue what you just argued are beyond stupid, you are foolish.

The stupid can't help it; the foolish choose it. The upside is that you can choose to stop being foolish. Repent.

I didn't say mentally ill. You cannot help lying about what I actually said.

Your boy parts don't become girl parts just because you're willing to mutilate them. That level of delusion is what makes you a freak.

Now, why do you care what the irrational proclamations of the law and medical boards say about you? (irrational majority, remember?)

Replace "is" with "were to be". It was supposed to be a hypothetical, not an observation. I guess English is not your native language.

What has changed can change again. Why do you expect consistency from an irrational law set by an irrational majority?

History is not a person that can disagree with me.

I'll clarify, though. It's not that I think people will do what is right; it's that I think there is a universal standard of behavior people ought to live up to. We live in a moral universe; that's why we expect morality of people and do bad things to those who don't do so.

You are confusing "I" and "We". You are not "We". You are a freak who looks down on mankind as irrational beings.

I do not. And that's because morality is not a popularity contest amongst the irrational; one piece of evidence for that is that you would strenuously object to being burned at the stake for being a transsexual - even if that is the popular thing to do to freakish people.

I would object as well, as annoying as you may be on this online forum. You still have a dignity as a human being that should be respected. Destroy the belief in that moral standard at your own risk.

I have no interest in lying to you.

I don't believe people are irrational and wrong the way you do. That's why we ought to expect moral behavior from them; which you expect also, even as you believe in a universe where such expectations are irrational.

I explained my point, and it's not what you are saying here. Oh well.

In an amoral universe, "morals and ethics" do not matter. They are no better or worse over time. Since you don't think they have any factual basis, contradictory is no better or worse than consistency.

In an amoral universe with no facts to support morality, everything is an excuse. Why single out the Bible?

In an amoral universe, why does it matter if people act rationally or irrationally?

According to what? The morality you made up today, based on excuses?

What does independence and verification matter in an amoral universe where morality is based off of excuses?

The sentence doesn't take a position. It may very well be that the masses never believed in a flat earth at any time.

Logic is hard for the irrational.

Based on 0 facts. You only have excuses according to your own standards. Why do you use excuses instead of reasons? You've actually said why: "And I'm certainly not rational all the time"

You're being irrational right now ... and most of the time.

History doesn't do "proofs", you ignoramus. There's historical evidence, and there's lack of historical evidence. And then there's false histories fabricated to support ignorant prejudice, like the flat earth myth.

Rational people don't feel a need to lie about other people present and past in order to feel better about themselves, "Barbara".

You think WE is irrational.

If it's not based on facts, you say it's not a reason. Thus, no reason, just an excuse. Irrational.

Why are you asking me to use reason with definitions when society is irrational, morality is irrational, and all the rules are based off of excuses?

Foolish atheist. You can't even get the simplest of points.

I quoted the Bible to call you a fool. I don't even need to defend God against your intellectual diarrhea.

Now grow up and get a real philosophy. Even a house of cards has more durability than what you have right now.

Remember saying this?

If there's no fact making slavery/discrimination "illegal", then those aren't reasons, those are just excuses.

In an amoral universe, there is no morality. Nor does rationality matter. There's no such thing as a reason why a confused transsexual like yourself shouldn't be discriminated against.

Enjoy the harvest of what you sowed.

I didn't say it was your citation. My citation was in response to an unsupported claim from you; that you have still failed to support with any facts.

You're irrational. You managed to trip up on summarizing the discussion and who has the burden of proof on which claims.

My linking the article is not in dispute. I linked it in response to your unsupported claim.

The Wiki article does not state that the public at large believed in a flat earth.

You believe that a quotation that avoids taking a position either way is evidence for your position. You are dumb, and your accusations of dishonesty have no weight.