budaatum:


If atheism is defined as a lack of belief in deities, then babies and orangutans qualify, I'd say. Technically, at least, since they lack belief in deities.

But atheism as a lack of belief, is a definition from the theist point of view, as atheists ought to know instead.

I understand that the word "lack" may be ambiguous. But I had to use that since these people decided to me mischievous.

Well, I don't know about animals but one thing I'm sure is that. Animals can never be atheists.
The first prerequisite for being an atheist is that such thing must be a person. A human being.

KnownUnknown:


After this long winded road to nowhere, I asked this baby if he is atheist or pantheist.

Go to the pediatric ward in a Nigerian hospital and ask if a baby is American.

triplechoice:

I was responding to your friend's nonsensical claim that babies who are just begining to form their minds are born atheist.

I don't see what should stop him from also declaring that everyone is born an American or British. Its the same kind of reasoning

Yes, Francistown was born lacking "Nigerianese" He's not a Nigerian. His default birth status is American.
Even though he was born in Nigeria he lacked "Nigerianese" at birth. Someone who lacks"Nigerianese" is an American

If was taken immediately to America as a baby, he would have grown up to become what he was born with, an American, speaking the language effortlessly and acting true to his default birth


Unfortunately for him, he grew up in Nigeria where he was "indoctrinated" to be a Nigerian.

It's even possible that every baby in the world was born an American, but grew up in places where they became something else, Chinese, Indians, Nigerians, and so on

Your argument is flawed and your point is dead on arrival.
I already responded to this, so lemme avoid redundancy.

FRANCISTOWN:

I understand that the word "lack" may be ambiguous. But I had to use that since these people decided to me mischievous.

Well, I don't know about animals but one thing I'm sure is that. Animals can never be atheists.
The first prerequisite of being an atheist is that such thing must be a person. A human being.

Doubt it's a prerequisite but more like a convention. We don't exactly endow animals with the ability to believe, though it has been argued they might.

FRANCISTOWN:

Go to the pediatric ward in a Nigerian hospital and ask if a baby is American.

Right after you ask the baby what gods and beliefs are.

budaatum:


Doubt it's a prerequisite but more like a convention. We don't exactly endow animals with the ability to believe, though it has been argued they might.

I understand that animals do have some sorta believes, if you noticed the way some dogs act around their owners.

But i don't know for sure what those believes are. I'm not sure whether anyone really knows what those believes are. That's the reason I'm silent about it.

But what I'm saying is. I don't know whether animals practice atheism or not, but judging from the definition of an atheist.

An atheist is a person... And since animals are not persons. Animals can never be atheists. Maybe there's gotta be some other word for animals that practice atheism(if there's any)

FRANCISTOWN:


Your argument is flawed and your point is dead on arrival.
I already responded to this, so lemme avoid redundancy.

It's your own that's very flawed.
The premise upon which you based your argument is that anyone who lacks belief in deities is automatically an atheist. But that's simply not true.

We have those who don't believe in deities but are not atheist . Those ones practice other forms of spirituality. They believe in spirits, reincarnation and practice witchcraft, juju voodoo etc without acknowledging the existence of any deity. An atheist doesn't believe or practice any of those.

We also have deist who can't be regarded as theist or atheist . A deist has not accepted that religious gods exist .

So, you can see you're not making any sense with your explanations. Your atheism is founded on the two major abrahamic religion of Christianity and Islam. That's only thing you know and have been using it to arrive at conclusions that are not supported by any evidence.

There's no evidence that babies are born atheist. If that were true we would be seeing the evidence everywhere. Most people in the society would be atheist, but the reverse is the case.

In fact , the evidences that we have supports the idea that babies are born more spiritually aware than adults. By the time they start using language very well, they usually shock us with some of the things they claim to have seen or experienced. Some of them see ghosts and other disembodied entities regularly ,and also even inform us of how they have lived before in a previous life which some adults dismissed as baby talk. But not all can be dismissed as such

Some reincarnation reports given by children before the age of 6 have been confirmed to be true after investigation.

So going by the evidence ,if we're going to accept that babies are born as anything at all, we shouldn't not be looking at theist atheist , but something else, which is , they're born as spiritually aware beings.

If you insist otherwise, then please provide evidence like I just did, and not baseless explanations of, "if one is not a theist then must be atheist. Such talk is evidence of someone thinking in black and white only

FRANCISTOWN:

I understand that animals do have some sorta believes, if you noticed the way some dogs act around their owners.

But i don't know for sure what those believes are. I'm not sure whether anyone really knows what those believes are. That's the reason I'm silent about it.

But what I'm saying is. I don't know whether animals practice atheism or not, but judging from the definition of an atheist.

An atheist is a person... And since animals are not persons. Animals can never be atheists. Maybe there's gotta be some other word for animals that practice atheism(if there's any)

But you declared on this same thread that anyone or anything that lacks belief in deities is an atheist .

Now , you want to deny it . SMH

FRANCISTOWN:

Nwanne, everyone is born an atheist.
I already gave you an explanation and this should not even be debatable topic.

I don't know why we always need to break things down to our christian brothers especially.

Atheism is anyone that doesn't have the ability to believe, not just anyone who has the ability to disbelieve. Whether as a child or as an adult.

If I said p1 = Δp + p2 , you prolly do not understand that formula or If I spoke in a foreign tongue, you simply do not understand. Your brain cannot process what it doesn't understand.

There are adults in China that if you prolly talked anything about God to 'em, they'll prolly just look at you like you are sick.
Their brain just lack the ability to understand how such things can ever work.

And I've told you that. If babies were raised in environments where they've never heard about deities. By the time they are grown, if anyone asked them about deities. They'd just go blank, the same way you'll go blank if I presented a strange formula to you.

There are no such persons anywhere in the world without a knowledge of what a god is. Knowing about something is not the same as believing in it. They must have read books , listen to stories,or watch movies where deities are depicted.

You just brought up an impossible situation to defend you false claim . There are no such persons anywhere ,not even in China.

This is the problem with defending a lie. You have to use other lies to defend it and don't know when to stop.

It's a lie that babies are born atheist. There are parallels to such lies in religion and in the business world The purpose is the same; To get people acting without thinking so they embrace an idea or product as the only one worthy of embracing or buying.

Muslims. All babies are born Muslims.

Christians. All babies are born sinners.

Atheist. All Babies are born atheists.

. The same rhetoric all of them. None of them is telling the truth.

The same way Muslims and Christians can't see the lie in such claims about babies is the same way you can't see it.

triplechoice:


But you declared on this same thread that anyone or anything that lacks belief in deities is an atheist .

Now , you want to deny it . SMH

Modified:

Since that boy Triplechoice was going to kill himself over this comment.

Hereby: deleted.

Triplechoice said Hawkings was the first to use the phrase "Babies are born atheists".

Can anyone be more dumb?

FRANCISTOWN:

I guess it can't be helped, It's now very obvious that you are with the single digit IQ crew.

No wonder you can't understand simple things.
I'm sorry but I can no longer engage someone who doesn't understand something as simple as pronouns.

You are a complete waste of my time.

Just look at you. What of the "anything" you mentioned?

triplechoice:


Just look at you. What of the "anything" you mentioned?

I'm failing to remember where I said anything that doesn't believe in the existence of deities is an atheist.
Please refresh my memory.

FRANCISTOWN:




Babies can't be born indifferent and they can't be born neutral. Babies are born fully equipped with all the necessary senses of sight, hearing, smell, taste, and touch.

Since they are not born with any belief, they only make sense of their environment using their senses. And that's how they build their understanding right from small, a kind of believe.

When a child cries and you put a mother's nipple in the baby's mouth, at that time . The baby believes anything that comes into the mouth should quench the feeling of hunger.

To say babies are born neutral or indifferent is a total error. I might agree with "babies are born innocent".

I've told you. It's in your dictionary. I can't be sorry because you refuse to read it.


Anyone or anything that doesn't have even the littlest form of belief in the existence of deities is an atheist.

A baby is non-religious or Igtheist at best. Therefore, an atheist by proximity.

Lemme ask a question .

If you raised a child in an environment where no one mentions anything about deities. By that time the child is 20. When anyone tells him anything about God.

What will be the response of the child?


Now back to the point. If tzizi was a word and people who understand tzizi are called theists.
What will be called of people who don't understand the word "tzizi"?

•Atheists are people who do not believe in the existence of deities.
•Babies do not have the ability to believe in the existence of deities.
Therefore,
•Babies are atheists.

That is abductive reasoning in critical thinking.
It's a very intriguing topic in psychology and philosophy.

You talk to much without making sense

triplechoice:


You talk to much without making sense

Okay! I take responsibility for that. The word "anything" was an error.
The error is called a Wrong Word Error in English grammar.
At the end of the day, I was the one who caught my own error and rebutted it in an inalienable manner.

You saw it then and didn't say anything on it. You didn't know it was an error then. 😂 😂

That's called error control in programming.

So what do you have on me?

I'm

FRANCISTOWN:

I guess it can't be helped, It's now very obvious that you are with the single digit IQ crew.

No wonder you can't understand simple things.
I'm sorry but I can no longer engage someone who doesn't understand something as simple as pronouns.

You are a complete waste of my time.

And why did you edit my comment up there to reply me. What sort person are you are?

I said you said, "Anyone or anything" ,in my question to you.
It's clearly there and everyone can see it.But you edited it to remain "anyone". to reply me.

You just exposed your desperation to win an argument with anything SMH. You're not worth anybody's time.

triplechoice:
I'm
And why did you edit my comment up there to reply me. What sort person are you are?

I said you said, "Anyone or anything" ,in my question to you.
It's clearly there and everyone can see it.But you edited it to remain "anyone". to reply me.

You just exposed your desperation to win an argument with anything SMH. You're not worth anybody's time.

Better refresh. You are getting worked up over nothing, or better get a recommended eye glasses.

FRANCISTOWN:


Okay! I take responsibility for that. The word "anything" was an error.
The error is called a Wrong Word Error in English grammar.
At the end of the day, I was the one who caught my own error and rebutted it in an inalienable manner.

You saw it then and didn't say anything on it. You didn't know it was an error then. 😂 😂

That's called error control in programming.

So what do you have on me?

Shut up. It wasn't a mistake. The fact you stupidly edited my comment to reply me shows it wasn't.

Good day.

And continue with your baby talk with others.I can't be wasting my time discussing with someone who lacks integrity .

triplechoice:


Shut up. It wasn't a mistake. The fact you stupidly edited my comment to reply me shows it wasn't.

Good day.

Have a good afternoon.

FRANCISTOWN:

Better refresh. You are getting worked up over nothing, or better get a recommended eye glasses.

Yes, you have gone to bring it back.

But you left a trail. The reason you posted that screenshot was for what?

Was it not to mock me after you deliberately edited my comments to read only "anyone" .

You were certain I had no evidence. Now that
I provided evidence, you have gone on to edit your comment , but not without leaving a trail. I have screenshot your comments which includes that incase you want to remove it. It's late already.



I hope your friends and others following this thread are taking notes of your foolery .

Modified. You edited my comment at first to read only "anyone" If you didn't do that,then explain the reason for the screenshot explaining the meaning of that word alone. You quoted me already. So it's easy to edit it in your reply. Stop fooling yourself.

triplechoice:


Yes, you have gone to remove it .

But you left a trail. The reason you posted that screenshot was for what?

Was it not to mock me after you deliberately edited my comments to read only "anyone" .

You were certain I had no evidence. Now that
I provided evidence, you have gone on to edit your comment , but not without leaving a trail. I have screenshot your comments which includes that incase you want to remove it. It's late already.



I hope your friends and others following this thread are taking notes of your foolery.

Are you basically mad or stupid. Or you are just unfortunate?
Sholoriburuku ni e ni?
Who dey do foolery?

Instead of accusing me of altering your comments. Didn't your dumb head think it could have been an omission or something, and I don't even understand what you are talking about?

Since you are moving mad and you want to kill yourself basically on what I don't know what you are talking about.

Okay! Whatever you are talking about, I did it. Yes I hold my chest to it.

If you said I altered your comment, Yes I did. Now what do you want to do about it?

I'm not here to win an argument. It's not like I'm getting paid.

When you were going on about how Hawkings was the first to use the phrase "Babies are born Atheists". You were just very dumb and stupid in that act. Plainly stupid.

You can't hold me ransom intellectually.

The comment you are crazy about. I'll take it down. And I'll forever taunt you for saying Hawkings was the first to use "Babies are born Atheists".

Since you've decided to be petty. Two can play this game.

You dumb head mofo.

If you couldn't paste those screenshots. You are nothing but a piece of shit.

FRANCISTOWN:


Okay! I take responsibility for that. The word "anything" was an error.
The error is called a Wrong Word Error in English grammar.
At the end of the day, I was the one who caught my own error and rebutted it in an inalienable manner.

You saw it then and didn't say anything on it. You didn't know it was an error then. 😂 😂

That's called error control in programming.

So what do you have on me?

. You admitted here, the "anything" was an error.

So why editing it from my reply to insult and mock yourself with the screenshot defining "anyone" ?

Was the word ,"anyone" the only thing I mentioned? I said you said "anyone or anything.Be sincere without yourself. But you can't .

You're not as smart as you think . I already have a screenshot of our conversation. If you like go and remove the dictionary definition you brought in which has exposed you as a liar.

triplechoice:
. You admitted here, the "anything" was an error.

So why editing it from my reply to insult and mock yourself with the screenshot defining "anyone" ?

Was the word ,"anyone" the only thing I mentioned? I said you said "anyone or anything.Be sincere without yourself. But you can't .

You're not as smart as you think . I already have a screenshot of our conversation. If you like go and remove the dictionary definition you brought in which has exposed you as a liar.

I did everything, do you understand? I did everything. I did every single thing.
There is nothing you have on me.

I altered your comment, I deleted some, I added some, i highlighted some, i italicized some.
Intellectually, you've got nothing on me. I'm not the dumb mofo who said "Hawkings was the first to say "babies are born Atheists"".

Show me one intellectual flaw in my posts and we are good.

You don't have nothing on me bro. The weather is nice today.

FRANCISTOWN:


Are you basically mad or stupid. Or you are just unfortunate?
Sholoriburuku ni e ni?
Who dey do foolery?

Instead of accusing me of altering your comments. Didn't your dumb head think it could have been an omission or something, and I don't even understand what you are talking about?

Since you are moving mad and you want to kill yourself basically on what I don't know what you are talking about.

Okay! Whatever you are talking about, I did it. Yes I hold my chest to it.

If you said I altered your comment, Yes I did. Now what do you want to do about it?

I'm not here to win an argument. It's not like I'm getting paid.

When you were going on about how Hawkings was the first to use the phrase "Babies are born Atheists". You were just very dumb and stupid in that act. Plainly stupid.

You can't hold me ransom intellectually.

The comment you are crazy about. I'll take it down. And I'll forever taunt you for saying Hawkings was the first to use "Babies are born Atheists".

Since you've decided to be petty. Two can play this game.

You dumb head mofo.

If you couldn't paste those screenshots. You are nothing but a piece of shit.

No. It wasn't an ommision. If it was, you would have said so immediately I pointed it out to you.

You doing all of these to cover for your shame. You did that deliberately and posted a screenshot of the meaning of "anyone". to mock yourself, not me, that I don't know the meaning.
So , why denying it.?


Did you not post a screenshot defining " anyone"or you have memory problems. Go back to your comments and see it there.

It seems your head is not there at all .You posted something yourself and now denying it.
If you can't explain the reason for your insults in the image below,then you're stupid and of a very low IQ. There's nothing I said to show I don't know the meaning of the word, anyone, but you decided to display your insanity. You edited my comment to read only "anyone" initially. But here was when you replaced it. Anyone or anything are not the same indefinite pronouns
Go get cured .

triplechoice:


No. It wasn't an ommision. If it was, you would have said so immediately I pointed it out to you.

You doing all of these to cover for your shame. You did that deliberately and posted a screenshot of the meaning of "anyone". to mock yourself, not me, that I don't know the meaning.
So , why denying it.?


Did you not post a screenshot defining " anyone"or you have memory problems. Go back to your comments and see it there.

It seems your head is not there at all .You posted something yourself and now denying it.
If you can't explain the reason for your insults in the image below,then you're stupid and of a very low IQ. There's nothing I said to show I don't know the meaning of the word, anyone, but you decided to display your insanity. You edited my comment to read only "anyone" initially. But here was when you replaced it. Anyone or anything are not the same indefinite pronouns
Go get cured .

Nwanne! I don vex. Baba, I modified your comment. I replied to it and I modified the response. I did all that. I modified everybody's comments on this thread and on this forum
So what are you going to do about it?

I'm not the mentally disturbed one who didn't know the difference between Hawkings and Dawkins. A graduate of citadel of foolishness who said Hawkings was the first to use the phrase "Babies are born atheists".

Even if you were raised by bedbugs. This is 21st century. Get your facts right before you type, especially when there is no established connection between your brain and your fingers.

Yes yes yes. I intentionally omitted your comments. Now wetin your papa wan do?

Dumb mofo. The idiot didn't know the difference between Hawkings and Dawkins.

It would had been better if your parents invested your tuition fees into pig raising.

FRANCISTOWN:


I did everything, do you understand? I did everything. I did every single thing.
There is nothing you have on me.

I altered your comment, I deleted some, I added some, i highlighted some, i italicized some.
Intellectually, you've got nothing on me. I'm not the dumb mofo who said "Hawkings was the first to say "babies are born Atheists"".

. Show me one intellectual flaw in my posts and we are good..

You don't have nothing on me bro. The weather is nice today.

. I have shown the bolded already. Just go back and read it. The summary is that not everyone who is a non - theist is an atheist. So your claim is baby talk.

Concerning Dawkimgs, I'm not you. If I said so,I own up to the error.

Budda already spelt the name correctly ,Dawinkings. I thank him for that.

I'm not of fan of Dawkimgs. He was a very toxic person and fanatical atheist why alive . But this doesn't take away from his achievements in the sciences.

It doesn't matter whether he was the first that said so or not. What matters is thar he promoted the falsehood like you're doing here


You just brought this talk to deflect as you usually do. Face the business of proving the lie you have been brainwashed with . You have no evidence other than empty talk , insults and foolery.

triplechoice:
. I have shown the bolded already. Just go back and read it. The summary is that not everyone who is a non - theist is an atheist. So your claim is baby talk.

Concerning Dawkimgs, I'm not you. If I said so,I own up to the error.

Budda already spelt the name correctly ,Dawinkings. I thank him for that.

I'm not of fan of Dawkimgs. He was a very toxic person and fanatical atheist why alive . But this doesn't take away from his achievements in the sciences.

It doesn't matter whether he was the first that said so or not. What matters is thar he promoted the falsehood like you're doing here


You just brought this talk to deflect as you usually do. Face the business of proving the lie you have been brainwashed with . You have no evidence other than empty talk , insults and foolery.

You were not a fan of Dawkins but you brought him into our discussion?
Am I the only one who is seeing the greatest art of tomfoolery?

FRANCISTOWN:


Nwanne! I don vex. Baba, I modified your comment. I replied to it and I modified the response. I did all that. I modified everybody's comments on this thread and on this forum
So what are you going to do about it?

I'm not the mentally disturbed one who didn't know the difference between Hawkings and Dawkins. A graduate of citadel of foolishness who said Hawkings was the first to use the phrase "Babies are born atheists".

Even if you were raised by bedbugs. This is 21st century. Get your facts right before you type, especially when there is no established connection between your brain and your fingers.

Yes yes yes. I intentionally omitted your comments. Now wetin your papa wan do?

Dumb mofo. The idiot didn't know the difference between Hawkings and Dawkins.

It would had been better if your parents invested your tuition fees into pig raising.

. Then why were you mocking yourself on the meaning of the word ,"anyone" ?

This is the question you have refused to answer because it will expose you for who you're. .

Or you don't know the difference between anyone or anything In my original comment before you edited it and ran mad insulting yourself.

You want to lie it was an ommision on your part. Why "omit" it?

The trail ( the dictionary definition) you left behind is the evidence you edited my comment deliberately , if not, it's not supposed to be there at all.


. As for , Hawking's or Dawkins, not spelling someone"s name correctly is not something any intelligent adult should make an issue of, . I haven't committed any grammatical blunder .It's just spelling mistake or not being sure of the correct spelling., it's a typo . I'm sure you don't know what a typo is. Budda noticed it and corrected me graciously without making an issue out of it because really, there's nothing to it.

But because you're very pained ,petty minded and pendantic you choose to focus on that to escape your inability to provide evidence for your very outlandish claim about babies,and also to cover for your shameful display here.

You who don't know the difference between anyone and anything. You thought they were the same hence you brought a definition for "anyone"

I'm finally done with you. You can continue talking to yourself. .

Explain why you were mocking yourself for not knowing the meaning of the
word, ", anyone" or shut up and own up to your deception you mannerless kid without home training. Someone on this same thread said so about you .So you're well known crazy head on Nairaland. I blame myself for quoting you in the first place. It won't happen again except you change your behaviour.