🎓 Doc Freemo 🇳🇱 @freemo@qoto.org

@Ponygirl

> I assure you, I'm not undecided about the existence of Thor et al.

If you are in no way undecided, presumably that you have determined therefore that Thor (and any god) does not exist, there is nothing wrong with that stance. It just happens to be a faith based position requiring the same amount of faith as any religion. That said, I'd agree you are, in fact, an atheist then.

> It is not my job to refute an assertion;

No one asked you to refute it.

> it's the job of the claimant to provide evidence,

Absolutely, that is not in question. The question is, when evidence is lacking to prove the lack of existence, or existence, of a thing (in this case god) do you take a faith based position and assume that means god does not exist, or do you take an evidence based approach and claim you do not have enough information to determine if god exists or not. Not being able to prove a thing exists is not proof it doesnt exist, thats the whole point.

> There is no credible evidence of deities;

Correct, that is my whole point, just as there is no credible evidence of the lack of deties. The whole point here is there is no evidence for either state.

> therefore, I live my life with No God/ess beliefs.

Also not what is in question. Both an agnostic atheist and a non-agnostic atheist will have this stance. The question is if you are an agnostic atheist (an evidence based approach that does not claim gods dont exist, nor do they claim they do, you simply dont have enough information to decide) or a non-agnostic atheist (a faith based position where despite a lack of evidence showing the non-existence of deities you take the faith based position that there are no deities).

> The literal definition of atheist.

As I said before the definition of the actual word is not the important part to me. There are two definitions of atheist, one that includes agnostics and one that doesnt. There is little doubt your one of these two types of atheist based on your answers, the question is simply if your an agnostic atheist (evidence based) or a non-agnostic atheist (faith based).

@ryan

@louis

Well technically metal is a type of rock so.....

@Gina Good to hear about the rants... I got worried there for a second, I can only take so much positivity! :)

@stux No need to single out fox. You can literally pick almost any major American news organization and this is true.

The vibe in the USA right now.

@Raccoon

It makes me happy to hear you say that on many levels... While Israel is an absolute disgrace and deserves to be shamed for what their doing, to equate that with Jews in general is deplorable and uncalled for!

@EubieDrew

To be honest I kinda like that... Shame doesnt work to change behavior it just masks it. Id rather assholes be assholes and nice people be nice people and we see people at face value. At least then it gives us the ability to have an open and honest conversation about how people act rather than just burying it out of shame.

@carnage4life @BlackAzizAnansi @Teri_Kanefield

@black6 @e3aefda887252a72cee3578d33b2dcd90e9fe53b8bed6347ef5e26f74211adbb

No but the fact that qualified immunity is codified into law **does** mean the right doesnt exist.

The definition of a right (that is being used here) is: legal entitlement to have or obtain something or to act in a certain way.

Ergo since the law does not give me the same right as cops to defend my life means the cop have a right (to qualified immunity) that I do not, and thus we do not have the same rights.

@tonyfromls As a fellow SCUBA diver I approve (full tek).

@Max_Imum

I totally expect violence from the left. But probably not prior to inauguration, they arent that calculating. It will likely build up over months or years of Trump being vile before it finally spills over into riots again.

@eriner

@e3aefda887252a72cee3578d33b2dcd90e9fe53b8bed6347ef5e26f74211adbb

Unfortunately you dont. A cop has qualified immunity which means if they shoot someone doing something illegal they can get away with a lot more than a private citizen might should they make a mistake. For example if I saw a cop choking someone to death and i pulled out my gun and shot him in the head, and the other cops then pulled out their guns and shot me dead, those other cops would likely get away with it on qualified immunity since they are reacting within the moment. Which means the consequence for me to shoot a cop is to be murdered on the scene with little or no consequence to those murdering me, a cop however could get away with the same act and should he be shot dead the person killing him would likely get in trouble.

Unpopular opinion: You should have the same right to shoot a cop as you do an ordinary citizen should they illegally threaten your life.

@Ponygirl @ryan

No I understand. You can dismiss the assertion that Thor is real by being undecided on the issue, which is the only nonfaith based conclusion. The lack of evidence is the whole point. You have exactly as much evidence of thors existence as you do his nonexistance. So if you assert he exists or not then that is faith, if you assert you don't have enough evidence to decide either way then that is science.

Since you claimed you have no reason to believe god doesn't exist, or exist, then you are undecided and thus by definition agnostic.

@freeschool

and FYI in addition tot he last update a week or so ago we should have another one this week, the fixes are alrteady in the repo for a few things.

I see now from your image you are asking about the search.. thats not "broken" just turned off.. I think we can probably turn it on next week with those fixes.

@freeschool

We have made multiple changes since then.. Have you joined the chat room and keep up to date? Do you need the info again? You can get all the details you want there, you can also follow the code repos directly or any of the other avenues we create updates.

@Ponygirl @ryan

Thinking Thor doesn't exist would require faith like any other god. The fact that you think Thor and and the christian god may exist would make you not atheist but again the word or definition isn't important. Since you say god or Thor may exist then you are not faith based, nor would I call you atheist.