Gregg R Thomas

Good Website here.

Simon – I moved your update here so it does not disappear down the list.

I have been studying morality for about 16 years, and now I feel I have it all figured out. I can give a full and comprehensive answer for what justifies our moral beliefs: the question that is on every moral philosopher’s lips, and is the reason for the mistaken belief in m…[Read more]

@Simon –

Simon, the problem with JD Vance isn’t that he “respects” his wife’s atheism — it’s that he doesn’t respect her Hinduism. He’s implying she’s an atheist simply because she isn’t a Christian, which is a rather offensive way to erase a faith practiced by hundreds of millions in India. It’s disingenuous. What he’s really doing is getting…[Read more]

Reg the Fronkey Farmer wrote:
People on social media are very vexed indeed.

JD Vance respects his wife’s atheism.  That’s good.  But they bring up their kids as Christians.  Surely the kids should be allowed to make their own minds up.

Thanks Reg!

Have a great week!

@Jake – your mention of Utopia touches a long-standing thought I have.  How do those Utopia Warriors behave, if they finally achieve Utopia on Earth?  What do they do?  They’re fighters, not bakers. What do the ‘Freedom Fighters’ imagine their role would be, in the Utopia they seem to be fighting for?

Reg the Fronkey Farmer wrote:
Simon, you are still redefining “faith” to make it appear intellectually respectable. You are using the religious version, which explicitly praises belief without evidence, and you are stretching it to also mean rational expectations grounded in observation.

Yet, any day of the week, faith has a dual meaning of rel…[Read more]

I’m afraid the situation is worse than most of you realize. Here’s a “what if” for you: Forget rigging the election by all the ways people are discussing. What if he declares a national emergency and simply refuses to leave office? He already ignores the law and is on the verge of defying court orders, and all the means of enforcement come under…[Read more]

Simon, you are still redefining “faith” to make it appear intellectually respectable. You are using the religious version, which explicitly praises belief without evidence, and you are stretching it to also mean rational expectations grounded in observation. That doesn’t create unity between religion and science. In a debate it confuses the point…[Read more]

Reg the Fronkey Farmer wrote:
Simon, I think you are trying to rescue the word “faith” by redefining it. You are taking a specifically religious term that means believing in something without sufficient evidence and trying to stretch it until it becomes a synonym for “hope” or “general trust in life.” It sounds warm but it is sleight of hand.

[Read more]

Thank you for your kind words Jake. I happen to be thinking in this line of thought all week…..from the piece I wrote for the previous week’s Sunday School post. We atheists should spend more of our time enjoying the fruits of freethinking.  Just Think Atheist and be in the Zone. 🙂

Simon, I think you are trying to rescue the word “faith” by redefining it. You are taking a specifically religious term that means believing in something without sufficient evidence and trying to stretch it until it becomes a synonym for “hope” or “general trust in life.” It sounds warm but it is sleight of hand. People can have high life satisf…[Read more]

Reg the Fronkey Farmer wrote:
The nonreligious might not be as spiritual as was assumed which helps counter the narrative that the non-religious need some form of spirituality (whatever that is). I know hundreds of atheists and not one has ever mentioned being ‘spiritual’.

If nearly half of the nonreligious report high life satisfaction, the bel…

[Read more]

Thanks, Reg 🙂

Have a great week!

If the “Pro-Palestine” demonstrations and outrage were really about humanitarian concerns, they would still be out on the streets for Sudan, Congo, Yemen, and a dozen other places where civilians are dying by the thousands but without the cameras rolling.

The “colonizer” label collapses under even basic historical scrutin…[Read more]

@Reg- Yes, the doctor and priest are dual symbols of institutional authority. It’s strong imagery, but it blurs historical and factual accuracy. Not every State or Nation uses both so it is not a “long-standing custom”. Your symbolism is compelling on the first read but you are rather weak on empirical accuracy.

The doctor’s presence might be leg…[Read more]