ozimoron

I think it's more a case that many people can't bring themselves to the conclusion that we are here once and only once and never coming back and that our fate is in our own hands. Religion is the alternative but to subscribe to most religions one has to accept the doctrine that comes with them. Having to provide some form of rationale only challenges that belief.

Anybody with critical thinking skills understands that criticizing a government is not criticizing a religion.

There would have been, it just would have been over by now.

The article explicitly supports the assertion that 99% of climate scientists agree that climate change is caused by humans. We conclude with high statistical confidence that the scientific consensus on human-caused contemporary climate change—expressed as a proportion of the total publications—exceeds 99% in the peer reviewed scientific literature.

Well that's true but it just sounds like it's sailing close to the argument that we can't have morality or discover our inner selves without religion. I know that's not your intention. The topic is "do you believe in God and why?". I'm looking for the why which precludes statements like "I have the right to believe in God but don't need to say why?" That's off topic.

Your position appears to be contradictory here. You decry those who won't support your right to believe whatever you want but don't appear to consider other religions. Your actual reply is also contradictory. You don't support the right to animistic beliefs which were forcibly taken away (like the Spanish Inquisition) but claim to respect them..

You're correct that people deserve the right to believe in whatever they like without having to provide any justification but if they wish to convince others of the veracity of their position then it won't fly.

Not so much supporters as facilitators.

Would you support the return of animism among native populations since it was largely repressed by mainstream religions?

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/where-americans-stand-on-abortion-in-5-charts/

But not in mass shootings where the target is normally fairly random and born of hate. Handgun murders are usually crimes involving drugs or money. The mission is to prevent the killing of dozens of kids in a school by a person so heavily armed that the police are essentially powerless in the short term.

By a correspondent for the NY Times. The chances that this is inaccurate are zero.

Can't the evidence speak for itself? Does the author have to provide a personal opinion? Which papers were studied. And you did not provide a web link to the article on either occasion when you posted the graphic.

Therein lies the difference. The world would be a better place if people didn't mistake reality for delusion.

rare as rocking horse poo. does not statistically come close to the actual number of mass shooting per 100,000 population in the US compared to any other developed nation.

I guess the words "attitude" and "belief" don't fit your definition of imagination? ok, Is God real? Does he/she/it really exist?

Religion is imagination, nothing more.

you showed that before. It is not a credible article, it give no information and no sources, You don't even provide a link. I said exactly this last time why do you persist in not following the rules of the forum?

Then the police should now remove the word "protect" from their mottos and signage.

How about the Cambridge Eglish definition of reality? Is it wrong or can we just invent our own English? You can't have philosophical debate without rules.

The Cambridge dictionary definition explicitly excludes imagine from reality. Can we at least agree on the dictionary definition of the word?

The language in this forum is English, how about we abide by the dictionary definitions when we discuss concepts instead of making up meanings for words which contradict the dictionary definition. Only then can we have meaningful debate. You obviously never studied philosophy.

reality: the state of things as they are, rather than as they are imagined to be: Cambridge English definition. Churches exist, religion does not.

Why would it change my mind on a second reading?

Yes, of course I have and if you're going to spread misinformation about based on the minority of peer reviewed papers at least give us some respect by linking your sources.