I don't know why some people always confuse simple disagreement & correction with an attack. It usually escalates into an argument of insults because someone thinks they've been attacked even though they likely haven't.
I never have understood this, since we all have different opinions, I think we should be able to say what we feel without getting blasted just because we don't agree with someone else's views. People, it's real simple, if you don't like what some else has said, move on, personally I like hearing everyone's different views, as long as they are not in attack mode.
Very true, strongly agree. Think about it. We live in a blind world. Many oppose the truth and so they go against religion or anything God related. If they knew the truth, they wouldn't speak against it. Only shows where they stand
From what I have observed, most of the arguments and fights are due to misplaced answers to questions, not actual disagreements. If someone asks, 'Does God exist?', then vastly differing opinions are acceptable and disagreements are understandable, and all would be well as long as people could be civil and agree to disagree. However, if someone asks, 'Why does God exist?', this is a different type of question that is obviously posed only towards other believers, and if non-believers decide to answer the question with such responses as 'God doesn't exist; belief in God is a fallacy', then that is just trolling, rude, and - surprise ! - cause for a fight. Disclaimer: Believers can impose themselves on non-believer-intended questions as well.
because everyone has different opinions. if people would stop thinking that there is a person in the sky floating magically in a paradise land in the clouds maybe the world would be better. the only true god, is a power in the universe that made all the fine adjustments for us to live. honestly its pretty simple if ppl cant float in real life what makes u think that fat asses can?
It becomes an issue of disagreement when the religious make false claims concerning science or known historic events. When the religious folk ask about or make statements about their religious beliefs without dragging scientific or historic "proof" into it there's unlikely to be an argument.
Some who've answered here already have made good points.
Something that has not been addressed is that MANY (not all) religious Qs asked are not really a Q that the poster wants answered; but just a way to get their foot in the door to proselytize. When someone calls them on it, the poster says the person who answered is being rude.