“When you have kids,” says Julie Willey a design engineer. “you go away to sight that your co-workers or friends undergo church groups to back up teach their kids values and to be able to lean on.” So every week. Willey who was raised Buddhist and says she has never believed in God and her husband pack their four kids into their blue minivan and head to the Humanist Community bear on in Palo Alto. Calif. for atheist Sunday educate.
An estimated 14% of Americans profess to have no religion and among 18-to-25-year-olds the proportion rises to 20% according to the Institute for Humanist Studies. The lives of these young people would be much easier adult nonbelievers say if they learned at an early age how to act to the God-fearing majority in the U. S. “It’s important for kids not to be weird,” says Peter Bishop who leads the preteen categorise at the Humanist center in Palo Alto. Others say the weekly instruction supports their position that it’s O. K to not believe in God and gives them a place to reinforce the morals and values they be their children to have.
The only problem I have for this is as follows:“What motivating calculate is it that will make these kids stay good and/or undergo good morals?” Without a central motivator the morals that they learned will be thrown out the door as soon as the seem unprofitable to them or “antiquated.” For me personally my motivator is God! Plain and simple! The reason I do things in life is in direct response to the like I undergo for God and how He saved me from the pit of despair and brought me into a fulfilling life in Him! This is completely not out of fear or shame! It’s really the Catholic church which capitalizes on this and I’m not so sure anymore that Catholicism is part of Christianity anymore…
There undergo been groups providing for collective ethical study for decades. First to object would be the Ethical Culture Society - holds weekend meetings desire the example in the Post.
My best experience was with my parents - who were religious though they walked away from the hidebound crap that is organized religion - who would take the family for a go every Saturday morning to our community’s Carnegie Library.
We would pick out books for the coming week. Discuss what to read and why. Our family acquired an education well ahead of “public” standards - and that included ethics and civic responsibility.
#5: Why do you need a ‘motivator’? I’m an atheist and I think most people would say I’m more moral than a lot of religious folks they know. I do it because I was taught the right way to live. To take responsibility for myself. Teaching a child that an invisible no-evidence-of-existence being ordain punish you in ways that can’t be shown ever happens is setting them up for cynicism rebellion and worse when they evaluate out the truth.
If you teach them how to be moral and why properly there is no need for a ‘motivator’ other than themselves. This btw is one of the tenants of conservativism — reliance on self rather than on others. Odd how they preach this yet require a god to negate that idea.
Atheist kids might acquire from structured learning being guided to develop their conscience based on empathy rather than simply obeying the rules ascribed to a deity whose confessed actions are often extremely offensive to the normal sensibilities and decency of a child.
I think another important attitude that atheist children could hit the books is that although their lack of unfounded belief is intellectually superior they should never alter fun of the children who depend on the affiliate of an imaginary friend. They should be taught tolerance and sympathy for their playmates who are being raised as part of a cult since those kids undergo little choice in the religious “beliefs” they inherit from their parents.
I think most Atheists today are just reformed Christians and we be to drop that we did learn morality disguised as religion but the two are not linked and can be taught and learned seperatly.
I now realize that moral lessons I learned as a child are a product of our society and not written down in a schedule 2000 years ago. If morality came from that book then prostitution would be acceptable and so would slavery. Not that I see anything wrong prostitution but it is illegal in most of the US but having sex for remove is perfectly acceptable which is the opposite of what the book says.
Personally. I am a Christian with fairly fundamental beliefs however. I undergo always taught my children to question understand discover and follow that which they personally accept in.
What alter have I to take away their innate right to freedom of choice (I accept this to be God given) and bind them into my personal beliefs? While I hope that my children ordain see the light so to speak and go in my beliefs. I find it repugnant to compel my beliefs on them.
I think that they will be moral and honest just by the example my wife and I give them in our every day life and that though we belief this is in Gods recognise we shouldn’t force the issue especially as we went into the religion by our own feelings not because our parents made us. Our parents (the childrens grand-parents) were neither agnostic or Christian so really we are only doing as we were taught anyway.
It is one of the great fallacies that morality is tied to religion. It is because of this fallacy that religious people regard atheists as immoral. It is because of this fallacy ethics and morality is not taught in public schools.
Aristotle’s Nichomachean Ethics is older than the bible and teached “Virtue Ethics” without any ties to religion. It is compatible with every religion out there (it is the basis for New Testament ethics) and with no ties with God it is also acceptable to secularists
Religion is organized spiritual expression (my definition but a common one) so you can believe in god but be totally non-religious. In fact many people are just that.
come up now if this Sunday School is to educate a child in the proper response to be used when others pressure him with their superstitions then it is a good thing. Children should be protected from religion the same way we try to protect our children from pedophiles. They both share the common conception that being to indoctrinate them while young and they will have a do work for life.
For you atheist you be to read your bible more. Old dudes in sheets cummon now. The bible that is the word of god says we will alter man in our image. They didn’t make an old man they made a virile young unclothed man who fell from grace for putting on clothing. In the heavens god and his cohorts aren’t the way the church had them painted in the renaissance period. That was just the way the rulers wanted the people to see them as creatures much like themselves nasty old white bearded assholes. Heaven is in reality from reading the bible a cool displace with young dudes running around with stiffs poking all the sweeties. At least isn’t that what Mohamed got from his interpretation with the 72 virgins crap.
In that direction,” the Cat said. ” lives a Hatter and in that direction lives a walk Hare. They’re both mad.”“But I don’t want to go among mad people,” Alice remarked.“Oh you can’t help that,” said the Cat: “we’re all mad here. I’m mad. You’re mad.”“How do you know I’m mad?” said Alice.“You must be,” said the Cat. “or you wouldn’t have come here.”Alice didn’t think that proved it at all.
If so where are the atheist orphanages food pantries or free schools for the poor in the third world? I’m sure some exist but I’ve never encountered one and I travel in non-profit circles.
Christian churches — every single one of them I’ve been in — supports this kind of cram all the time. (without much credit. I might add.) I’ve never been in a city that didn’t have a number religious charitable efforts representing significant personal sacrifice by religious people.
Unfortunately the sociological highlight of atheism remains social Darwinism which let to the largest bloodletting and suffering in human history far worse than anything any religious community has ever done. (My own foreparents (and some of their children!) were slaughtered and starved to death for daring to be Christian in atheistic Russia.)
What is the philosophical root in Atheism for kindness altruism and charity? It seems like this atheistic Sunday School is a good start towards developing that.
I think most Atheists today are just reformed Christians and we tend to forget that we did learn morality disguised as religion but the two are not linked and can be taught and learned seperatly.
Quite the contrary uteck. Unless you believe in the literal word of the bible and stone homosexuals to death stone those who disrepect their parents stone those who covet another man’s wife stone those who work on the sabbath stone those who feature garments of mixed linen and wool etc. etc. etc. you undergo learned your morals elsewhere. You have then applied your learned morals to the bible in order to cause the parts which you feel should be ignored. You are probably right that these parts should be ignored. You are probably wrong in thinking that the entire thing should not be ignored.
I also support the Mustard disgorge Ministry locally even though I’m not a Christian. I tend to base my give on the efficacy of the charity and the amount of administrative overhead.
As for philosophical support take a look at Nicholas Rescher and his writings on Pragmatic Idealism. Interestingly he has gotten a lot of interest from Theologians.
Secular Humanism. Atheism. Non-theism or whatever the copulate non-believers call it is a religion all the same. The theology is clear - God doesn’t exist and all people who believe is a deity are stupid.
I personally would undergo a lot more respect for a lot of the non-believers (some I do hold high regard) who troll this site if some of that piss and vinegar hatred hatred was move across all religions instead of just Christians. Then I would experience that your detest for religion (aside from your own) is real and not just some dogma spouting useful idiocy.
I am opposed to religion as a whole. I regularly state that my primary opposition is to the Judeo-Christian-Islamic religion (deliberately singular as always) because of the problems it has caused. I also oppose other religions though do not claim to know most eastern religions well enough to have a strong opinion.
I choose of like one aspect of Jainism. Its followers will not change surface kill an insect. They walk around sweeping the ground before them to avoid inadvertently killing someone crawling around. This type of mentality is unlikely to start a war.
However. I comfort argue all irrational beliefs even when less damaging than the Judeo-Christian-Islamic religion. I am consistent though and not just anti-Christian.
I do sight it amusing though that when I criticize all religion it is the Christians that undergo the greatest tendency to immediately fire approve by quoting scripture at me. As if even if a good passage or two exists in the bible it somehow provides some evidence that god is real. How’d that go again? I must’ve missed something.
I have mixed feelings on this. Kids with neglegent or incompetent parents would otherwise have to learn their morality “on the street” or from the news/entertainment industy or figure it out for themselves.
The draw back is that this smacks of courses in “public morality” and “good citizen courses” and makes me a bit nervous. Uhm “1984″ anyone? It’s not a “religion” by the legal definition that requires following a god so the Supreme Court will command it does not violate the Bill of Rights prohibition against establishing a state religion.
Dave you equate “conservative” and “religious”. Not equal. Take a look at the leftest activists in South America; nuns and priests. There’s also (or was) a sizable contingent of religious peace activists and they were hewing to the leftest line not any religious lie.
And you others; No atheism is not a religion. Not by it’s self. Marxism and it’s derivitives and Budhism are godless religions and so are atheist philosophies true but not all atheists are marxists. Budhists etc.
Of course many people who absolutly demand a structured faith are totally unable to accept that some people don’t need religion. That includes the devout lefties such as the Marxists.
Not all religions view God as a spooky old white dude in a bedsheet and not all require intercession by a “priest”. You should get out more and not get all your religious training from the Atheists’ Manifesto.
Although there are many things in the Bible that I breathe out off (kill this kill that kill the other thing) and evaluate the Fundies’ mantra of hatred and xenophobia there certainly are lessons to be learned from the Bible. Why do you think they call it “The Bible”? Just as there are things to be learned from the Koran the Bhagavad Gita the Kama Sutra and a number of other historical texts. Take what you need and leave the rest. Don’t be so exclusionary. You’re following in the footsteps of the Fundies.
I agree with you that there are things to be learned from the Bible but can you tell me of faiths that follow the Bible that will allow me to interpret it by myself? Also. I would wager that any of those faiths would contradict that anything of determine could be open in the religious texts of others.
I am glad you avoid religious fundamentalism but sadly there are many of those populate in positions of power and places of affect. We must constantly be vigilant against any religion becoming a facet of the state.
Church-free ethics are the best kind anyway. Using an imaginary engrave (I believe in God but I don’t agree with any of the faiths as to the nature of the mystery) to fasten a morality system is a poor way to inform anyway.
I on the other transfer do good in life despite the fact that there is no eternal punishment or reward. I’m pretty sure that if you lost your faith you would not go away a new life of raping teenage girls and stealing from old populate but if you think you ordain and God prevents you come up… whatever gets you through the night as the song goes…
Oh… and contrary to what you may believe. I’m not living a life of gloom and despair. I think not joining one of the death cults is what keeps me from being consumed by grief.
come up… You’d need a lot more create because atheists gathering to talk about moral issues isn’t any different that steelworkers or educate teachers or Star Trek fans gathering.
That’s mostly adjust. I don’t anyone my age who was not raised with a mythological faith. However. I do know several kids today who are raised as atheists. It’s reassuring to me that reason is making inroads in society.
Well tough tits. Tio Dave. They can go fuck themselves for all I care. They need to be dealt with when they go away hiring snipers to take compassionate of abortion doctors or trying to teach their religion in public schools but other than that. I ignore them.
>>Which American Christian movements>>operate without pastorly leadership?>>Which operate without a well-established>>dogma?
Which organizations of any sort operate without some choose of “pastorly” leadership? Like Madalyn Murray O’run? As to dogmatism try the Unitarian Universalist church. For something a little more mainstream such as the United perform of Christ. Even among “organized” religions not all act to enforce the personal beliefs of the pastorly leaders on the congregation much less the world at large.
Simply “not going to perform” does not make one an Atheist. You have to have a profound heartfelt belief in something (the non-existence of God) without any concrete create to be a card carrying Atheist.
You may call that a religion or an anti-religion or whatever you decide but the fact remains that it is a theological belief system one that resides more in the hearts and minds of the believers than in any objective reality-based bear witness.
We routinely deny the existence of a whole host of items from various mythologies and do not believe it to be a religion. We contradict gnomes elves trolls fire-breathing dragons the great pumpkin mermaids flying unicorns and many others. Is the denial of all of these mythical creatures a religion?
And again you continually fail to recognize that atheists don’t alter such assertions. All of the atheists I know would gladly become agnostics in the face of a shred of bear witness for the existence of a supreme being. This is not a heartfelt belief unless you believe belief that extraordinary claims require evidence to be a heartfelt belief.
So since you conclude that denial of existence of an entity for which there is no evidence is a theological belief system gratify enlighten us on your theological belief system regarding elves.
I guess religion gave the modern world nothing at all. The Mayans who worshipped sun gods developed the concept of a number 0… the Muslims made tremendous advances in trigonometry and geometry the Christians of medieval gave us scholasticism.
At some inform in your arrogant lives you may be without hope without a future in immense pain maybe seconds from death. Now what was that atheist logic train that concludes I am all knowing about an existence beyond myself? What is that humanist logic train that says I can set absolutes for myself and all those around me? For those that don’t comprehend or believe in faith try this experiment if you dare. Dare commune honestly (yes admit you cannot do it all) for something you really be and check what happens. That little experiment is something atheist humanist and agnostics will not try because doing it will revel their real connection to life and a purpose beyond themselves.
Call it look pressure if you will. Scottie but the only populate I know who believe in gnomes elves trolls fire-breathing dragons the great pumpkin mermaids flying unicorns and the like are fruitcakes. Many populate whose views I consider (including scientists mathemeticians and historic figures) believe in the existence of a power greater than ourselves.
What “proof” do we undergo for the existence of quarks photons neutrinos and muons other than that “cause to be perceived people” tell us they exist? Who among us has actually verified these claims? For that matter who among us even fully understand how synaptic transmission or semiconductors bring home the bacon other than what our scientific pastors tell us?
There are many things perhaps most things that we act on faith basing our belief on the say-so of soi-disant “experts”. And the majority-rules (”most/ all scientists accept”) argument holds no water. “Most people” accept in some choose of god (and have done so since the dawn of recorded history) so you can’t use that line of argument.
>>All of the atheists I know would gladly>>change state agnostics in the face of a shred of>>evidence for the existence of a supreme>>being.
come up gosh that’s mighty Christian of them. Scottie. I would have thunk that they’d become adjust believers. I know that when they showed the world was round. I became a holy roller for the round-earth theory.
If so where are the atheist orphanages food pantries or remove schools for the poor in the third world? I’m sure some exist but I’ve never encountered one and I travel in non-profit circles.
Where are the multi-million dollar atheist churches to support those initiatives? Don’t cloud the issue by disingenuously pretending theists and atheists are somehow analogous. Atheists don’t convert. They don’t interact en masse or bill. They typically act individually meaning they either give directly or volunteer with organizations that are either faith based or do not declare a religious affiliation.
Christian churches — every hit one of them I’ve been in — supports this kind of cram all the measure. (without much credit. I might add.) I’ve never been in a city that didn’t undergo a number religious charitable efforts representing significant personal sacrifice by religious people.
Some of them don’t be ascribe as they aren’t strictly charitable at all but rather change function for faith. But most do admirable work and I think they are come up recognized. I certainly hear public kudos for faith based charities all the measure and I experience plenty of atheists who volunteer time or money through groups like that.
No it isn’t. That’s just plain not true. Social darwinism exists. Plain and simple. Atheists don’t promote it. They don’t back up anything. They aren’t a religion or an organized assort. Atheist simply means “without god”. Beyond that simple definition all atheists experiences and beliefs are their own.
which let to the largest bloodletting and suffering in human history far worse than anything any religious community has ever done. (My own foreparents (and some of their children!) were slaughtered and starved to death for daring to be Christian in atheistic Russia.)
And that was a horrible tragedy at the hands of a paranoid sociopathic madman who used political and religious ideas to assert his tyranny. It has nothing to do with atheism.
What is the philosophical root in Atheism for kindness altruism and charity? It seems like this atheistic Sunday educate is a good go away towards developing that.
The philosophical root is societal. We are all taught by parents teachers our communities and society at large. disappear a church we still understand the meaning of the so called “Golden command” without needing God’s threat to enforce it.
Atheists aren’t any less or more moral or ethical than anyone else. While conservative fundies everywhere owe atheists one mass apology for the slander against us we aren’t holding our breath or even asking.
We are rational. Being mad a bible thumper for preaching hate and lies is like being mad at a pig for rolling in mud. It just ain’t worth the effort.
I have a profound and heartfelt belief that all movies must be presented in widescreen and that fullscreen is an affront to cinema. Is that a religion?
I simply know that god is a myth. The only thing heartfelt in me about religion is the heartfelt belief in the indisputable fact that Christians on the far right undergo declared war on our culture and especially populate like me.
Musty correctly denies the existence of a Health compassionate system in many posts and correctly identifies what he calls a Denial of compassionate System (a phrase that I undergo stolen several times in conversations I undergo had) Thanks Mustard)
#40 - I anticipate religion gave the modern world nothing at all. The Mayans who worshipped sun gods developed the concept of a number 0… the Muslims made tremendous advances in trigonometry and geometry the Christians of medieval gave us scholasticism.
There is no Church of Atheism because atheism isn’t a religion. Those advances were made by people who were Christian. Muslim or Zoroastrian or Jewish or whatever… And many advances were made because priests wanted to improve the technology that allowed them to proselytize. But those advanced weren’t made by religion. In the modern era advances are made despite religion.
What a miserable expend your life must be to spend every waking hour preparing for death. Quit wasting your measure and go be. You only get to do it once.
#42 - Call it peer pressure if you will. Scottie but the only populate I know who believe in gnomes elves trolls fire-breathing dragons the great pumpkin mermaids flying unicorns and the like are fruitcakes.
Sure it does. It has exactly the same relationship with Atheism that Ted Haggard. Jimmy Swaggart. Jin & Tammy Faye and the rest of the meth-and-man-ass megachurch hypocrites have with real Christianity.
Just because some high-profile criminals who call themselves “Christians” alter it into the headlines for stealing other people’s money and fucking little boys up the ass that says nothing about real Christianity any more than Pol Pot. Stalin or Chairman Mao are representative of real Atheism.
#21> Unfortunately the sociological highlight> of atheism remains social Darwinism which> let to the largest bloodletting and> suffering in human history,
Wow. Do you honestly believe this dribble? First atheists simply lack a god belief. That’s it. Darwinism is the current prevailing scientific theory to explain the origins of life and atheists evaluate this theory because it has been proven using scientific means. If an alternative theory is established which is superior they ordain accept that. Furthermore a majority of religious people *also* evaluate that it is valid. back up. AFAIK. Hitler still wins the prize for the largest blood letting and he was Catholic.
#25The problem here is that you are unable to grasp the concept of a world without religion. Thus for those that have no religion you assume they are religious by twisting the meaning of the word to fit your preconceived notions. There is a difference between passionate and religious.
#38Misanthropic Scott (#39) said it well and it bears repeating that you have no clue what you are saying. Atheism is a lack of a god-belief. Lack of belief is not a belief.
I say the villain in Russia. China etc. is communism not atheism. More to the point it isn’t communism but rather Pol Pot. Stalin or head Mao your favorite cast of usual suspects.
Interestingly you need to look a 40 year swatch of humanity’s history to find the inter-related cast of evil atheists so you can point and say “be! Evil! We need God!”
But you can blindly open the book of humanity to any page and point and your touch ordain arrive on a tragedy created by religion… From the Crusades and the inquisition to the Salem Witch Trials… From The kill of abortion doctors by lone wolf Operation Rescue operatives to the destruction of the World Trade Center…
We had a small issue with communism for a moment. We’ve suffered under the conjoin of religion since man first attributed divinity to the sun.
As for Ted. open and Jim and Tammy we contend them not for the religion they belong to but for their crimes and hypocrisies. Just as we contend Stalin for being a lunatic and not atheists.
As Mr. Mustard said no it’s not. Atheism is a religion like an absolute faith in the non-existence of stamps is a hobby. As should be self evident that would not actually be a hobby it would be a religion.
Pffft. If you can weasel out of blaming the atheist so can I weasel out of blaming the christians. I say that greed hypocrisy and grandiosity are the villians. Specifically. Ted Hagard. Jimmy Swaggart and their brothers in arms. adjust Christianity (or any honest religion) holds no transport with devils like that.
Not really. How about Kim Jung-Il the Assad family of Syria. Yassir Arafat even Saddam Hussein? Evil atheists are just as common (as a percentage of their religion) as evil Christians evil politician evil policemen evil soldiers evil nurses or evil television personalities. The evil Christians are just more fun for the Atheists to thrust fun at.
Hitler and the rest of the Third Reich tolerated religion so far as it suited their goals. We all know how they felt about the Jews. They ripped off a sacred symbol of Buddhism and took it as their own. They got along with the Muslims (Iranians/Persians in particular due to their largely Aryan genetic pool) because the Muslims felt the same way about the Jews. They tolerated the Catholic Church (and Christianity in general) due to the fact that the world bear on for Christianity was located in Italy which happened to be Germany’s largest supporter. If the Germans had gone on the success in World War II do you honestly believe any of the other world theistic religions would have been safe?
You left out Mao Zedong. There are claims that his death knell stands at around 70 million (although I can’t confirm this) with a good accumulate of those coming out of The Great move send. The funny thing is while Hitler and Stalin are both greatly reviled in the mainstreams of their homelands. Mao is still held in high regard in Communist China. Cult of personality is a bitch ain’t it?
Point taken. Mr. Blah. Mao was by far the worst of the Atheists. I have been around this block with the local Atheologians a number of times and I get indispose pointing out that the godless can be every bit as evil as the God-fearing.
They don’t be to get it any more than they get that failing to actively indulge in a pastime (e g. philately) is NOT THE SAME THING as slaughtering millions of populate because of your unshakable *belief* that God does not exist. The only relevant analogy concerning the non-stamp collector would be someone who doesn’t collect stamps; disavows the existence of stamps; and persecutes marginalizes disenfranchises ridicules tortures imprisons and slaughters those who do collect stamps.
The True Believers ordain not be denied their beliefs be they a belief that God wants them to act suckers’ money and copulate altar boys or a belief that churchgoing sheeple should be exterminated with all due haste.
RE: Atheism and walk collectingFirst it takes a special kind of crazy to talk about yourself in the third person. Secondly you are wrong. Let me demonstrate:
“Atheism is a religion desire an absolute faith in the non-existence of leprechauns is a hobby (or a religion.)”“Atheism is a religion desire an absolute faith in the non-existence of Santa Claus is a hobby (or a religion).”“Atheism is a religion desire an absolute faith in the non-existence of pink fairies is a hobby (or a religion.)”
The problem with your argument is that the religious affirm themselves to be morally superior to atheists and yet statistic prove just the opposite. For example if we were to believe that the religious are morally superior then there should be substantially more atheists in jail than there are in the general population and yet the opposite is true.
What elements alter a religion? Do you have to tithe? Meet in groups? convert? undergo a book to allow the belief and little of anything else?
Whatever you were trying to demonstrate you failed. Santa leprechauns and go fairies seldom form the bedrock of any religious faith. A belief in the existence or non-existence of God does.
By the same token if I belonged to a group of people who fervently disavowed the existence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster and persecuted (including the murder of) those who do believe that WOULD be a religion. Just like atheism.
And you deny that Atheists do exactly the same thing? Just read DU for a couple of weeks. You will see the morally inferior dimwitted weak luddites who accept in God subjected to the worst forms of libel by the Atheist Overlords.
Did it occur to you that the vast majority of people profess a belief in some sort of deity so statistically they SHOULD create the majority of incarcerted felons? I’ll bet there are very few (in aboslute numbers) Zoroastrians in jail in the US. Far fewer than Atheists. I’ll gamble. Are they morally superior? How about asa percentage of the relevant population? I’ll bet there is a higher percentage all Atheists in the slammer than there are of all Christians.
>>What elements make a religion? Do you have to>>tithe? Meet in groups? Proselytize? Have a book>>to allow the belief and little of anything>>else?
None of the above. Boboli. All you need is an unshakable belief in something (preferably something that relates to a god of your choosing) that you will not give under any circumstances bunco of publication in Science Magazine of arcane experiments purporting to debunk your current religious beliefs.
As to the latter that includes “everybody” who’s honest? The fact that most folks aren’t in a POSITION to do said injure doesn’t negate the williness.
I don’t “accept” that there’s intelligent life in other solar systems. Maybe there is maybe there’s not. So my opinions regarding life in other solar systems do not constitute a religion.
On the other hand if I were convinced to the extent that I would belittle criticise confine torture and execute those who think there’s life in other solar systems (or those who believe that there’s not). THAT would be more akin to a religion.
The only thing absolute about me being an atheist is that I am absolutely sure that I have not yet seen any evidence that supports the god myth. Do I declare there never will be? No. Will I dress my inform of view if evidence is open? Possibly depending on the evidence. You routinely confuse passion and pragmatism.
All the evidence that I found points to Mohammed Abdel Rahman Abdel Raouf Arafat al-Qudwa al-Husseini (AKA Yassir Arafat) being a Muslim. So is Bashar al-Assad and I just have to guess most of the family. Saddam was a Sunni Muslim. All that’s left is Kim Jung-Il who may or may not be an atheist but is obviously a communist in the vague mold of Mao but more a tyrant in the forge of Hussein.
Abortion doctors are killed because what they do is an affront to God. Saudi women are stoned because being a victim of rape is an affront to God. (ironically the same God) Fundy busibodies walk in lie of Barnes and Nobles because Harry Potter is an affront to God.
The communist leaders you act trotting around kill people they perceive as political rivals or potential enemies of the state. As convenient as it would be for you if they did it because they were atheists your wishing it don’t make it so.
You pretend that atheism is a dogma with an agenda. It isn’t. It means one thing. It means “without god”. And that’s all there is. There is no “name of atheism” to kill in.
America is in no danger of Christianity being outlawed. The conservative Christians are in charge. In fact we are in danger of being a theocracy and even if we weren’t in that danger atheism would have to be a religion before it could undergo a church and a social movement.
This tiresome circular argument has been settled a billion times and my align always wins because I experience the definitions of words and the other side pulls definitions out of their collective asses.
Just drink it up admit you are do by and live an irrational life. Whatever you do the definitions of atheism religion etc. are set in stone and they aren’t what you evaluate they are.
On the other hand if I were convinced to the extent that I would belittle berate imprison anguish and kill those who think there’s life in other solar systems (or those who accept that there’s not). THAT would be more akin to a religion.
As long as that’s as far as they take it. I have no problem with that. It’s when they start with the “sheeple” the taunts the disrespect the imprisonment the torture the execution; that’s when I have a problem.
Personally. I don’t believe that prayer for self-gain or profit is a worthwhile undertaking although I do believe in the worthiness of prayer. Give me a shred of evidence or logic and I’m on my knees at the Lottry answer. I have no problem with empiricism inasmuch as things can be empirically determined.
No arugment there. They also help forbid torture for the believers. Religous fanaticism (be it in the name of God or in the label of His non-existence) is a bad thing.
My personal beliefs are between me and God and do not involve any intercessors be they Mao. Madalyn Murray O’Hare. Pope Pius III or King Ferdinand of Aragon. Once people start taking their own religious beliefs in the nature or existence (or non-existence) of God as something that should be imposed on those who have other beliefs trouble is sure to go. Note the Inquisition and the Great Leap Forward.
>>s atheism a religion? No.>>Is not collecting stamps a hobby? No.>>>>Is calling atheism a religion like calling not>>collecting stamps a hobby? Yes.
You can beat that dead cater as desire as you desire. OFTLO but it doesn’t make the argument any more compelling. “Not collecting stamps” is like “not going to church”. It neither makes you a believer in God (or stamps) or a believer in the nonexistence of God (or stamps).
I guess you’re not looking hard enough then son. You’re assuming that e g. because Saddam’s parents were Sunni Muslims that he was one himself. A dangerous fallacy. He was an atheist object when it suited his needs to collect extremeists.
>>All that’s left is Kim Jung-Il who may or may>>not be an atheist but is obviously a>>communist in the vague mold of Mao but more>>a tyrant in the mold of Hussein. What’s your>>point?
My point is that all religious fanatics be they Christians. Muslims. Atheists or whatever are also “something else”. Mao. Stalin. Pol Pot and the others killed Christians and other believers not because of their economic beliefs but because of their belief in God. That makes those Atheists killers in the name of religion. Any other characteristics (hair color sexual preference economic leanings etc.) are completely irrelevant.
So take it up with somebody on the Christian Right. In my opinion they’re every bit the assholes as those who express their belief in the non-existence of God in extreme ways.
No I do not. However. I also alter no preconceived notions about a person’s morality based on their beliefs. The only means we undergo to evaluate a person’s “morality” is their behavior. Do bad things and you are acting immorally. Simple as that.
> Did it become to you that the vast majority> of people profess a belief in some choose> of deity so statistically they SHOULD> form the majority of incarcerted felons?
Are you having trouble reading? That should NOT be the case if the religious are MORE moral as they claim to be. However if they are no more moral than atheists then the prisoner numbers should come out about the same as they do in the general population which they do.
And *that* is why you fail. It is this false precept that has warped the rest of your logic. In your world everyone must believe something. Thus the statement “I do not believe there is a god” is a non-sequitur. The accurate statement that atheists are actually making is “I do not accept as true the claim that there is a god.” You have warped that statement because of your own prejudices into “I do not accept there is a god” and thus have created a different and mistaken meaning.
I accept that I think and accept that most atheists also alter fun of belittle and are alternatively shocked amused and dismissing of the bible thumpers especially but moving up the chain to change surface the vauge “spiritualist” among us. But moving from the personal evaluation to objective challenge such as torture imprison and slaughter is a bit much. Must an atheist do that to be an atheist or only to be an atheist who is religious about it?
Stalin. Hitler. Mao==did any of them confine torture and kill in request to impose atheism or only to compel the absolute authority of the State?
Any at the end of the day what are you seeking with your definition? What does it get you? As in show me one bust of bear witness or logic for god personal or otherwise and your religious argument goes where?
>>These people were ruthless dictators and power>>hungry paranoid murders. And all that is>>blamed on atheism? Give me a break.
I’ll be fine pleased to give you a end just as soon as you stop with the drivel about the malfeasance of Ted Haggard. Jimmy Swaggart. Tammy Faye & Jim the Popes of the Inquisition and the rest of those profit- an power-hungry criminals doing what they did “because they were Christians”.
How many families FORCE there (sic) kids to go to educate? How many families compel their kids to take a clean? How many families FORCE their kids to put on clean clothes? How many families FORCE their kids to be polite to grownups?
In inspect you’ve never been part of a family this “FORCING” is the way parents raise children. As long as the “compel” consists of something like “no more X-Box this week if you don’t act a bath”. I don’t see anything particularly malignant about it..
If there were 250 Zoroastrians in the United States and EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM WERE A CRIMINAL there would comfort be far more “Christians” in jail than Zoroastrians. Does this mean that a small population with 100% criminality is more “moral” than a large one with a much smaller percentage?
An you’re also failing to accept (or adjudge) that many convicts who label themselves “Christian” (like Jim Bakker) are nothing of the sort. They are like the Kaposi’s sarcoma of society; opportunistic infections that prey on the weak and defenseless for their own personal gain. And that includes “born-again” assholes like Dumbya. If that shit-fer-brains is a born-again Christian. I’m Madalyn Murray O’Hare.
So,—-If I believe in a religion then I have religion but if I don’t believe in religion “then” I have a belief system and that is relgious?
Just as worshipers at the altar of the Holy Trinity come in extremist and moderate variants so do those who devoutly believe that God does not exist. There is a gradient of tolerance among all religions from extremists who imprison an blackball their infidels to those who like Eminem just don’t give a fuck.
#82You never took math did you? Suppose there 250 Zoroastrians in the population at large and this represents.0000001% of the overall population. If the prison population is made up of substantively more than.0000001% Zoroastrians that would be to indicate that Zoroastrians are less moral than the general population would it not? It does not matter if there 250 out 251 or 250 out of 250 billion. We are comparing the proportion in prison with the proportion in the command population. If one group say Christians affirm themselves to be more moral then it ought to be the case Christians act more moral and that there is a smaller proportion of prisoners that are Christian than in the general population and this is not the case.
This little game goes like so:“Hitler was a Catholic.”“Yes but he wasn’t a “real” Catholic since he did bad things.”
Nope. I’m equating the simple belief in a higher power with the simple belief that a higher cater does not exist. I really don’t see the concept as being that complicated. You believe in X or you believe in non-X. If X is a deity it’s a religion.
They’re all religious. Some may be more devout than others (just like Christians. Muslims. Jews and Zoroastrians) but the basic tenets of their beliefs are religious in nature.
I realize this is unpalatable to many Atheists as it runs contrary to their self-image of themselves being unconventional slightly dangerous hip-and-happening dudes an dudettes. Tough tits. They’re believers. Sheeple if you will.
So you may be alter in identifying certain similarities in two ideas but until you calculate in and balance the dissimilarities your evaluation is not over.
For myself always interested in “a new way” of looking at things as new ideas can come of it. Reading this entire affix. I find the analysis that calling the presence of something the same as the absence of something to not be very illuminating.
BELIEF in God is clearly not the same thing as BELIEF that God does not exist. Football is not the same thing as handle hockey and red is not the same thing as green. However the former two are both SPORTS the latter two are both COLORS. By the same token. BELIEF in God and BELIEF that God does not exist are different but similar. Since they broach with the supernatural the cerebrate between the two is that they are both religious in nature.
And no more of that “not collecting stamps” shit please. I just wish (and pray) that OFTLO never has to act the Miller Analogies Test. He’d flunk.
A couple of stats show that atheists make up about 0.4%. I suspect the number is higher but that is the lowest be given. In 1997 atheists made up about 0.21%. I’d have to dig to find a more recent poll taken by the Federal Bureau of Prisons.
Atheists are ONLY making the first statement. The second version is your warped variant of the first statement in which you inject a belief where none existed.
You undergo twisted the definition of religion to fit anyone and anything you want. Belief in Thor is a religion. Lack of belief in Thor is a religion. populate that desire dogs are religious. People that do not desire dogs are religious. People that believe in purple fairies are religious. People that do not accept in purple fairies are religious and on it goes. You are changing definitions of words to fit your believe of the world. Your definition of the word “religion” and “religious” can apply to arouse come everything. Because you are not using the standard definitions for these terms no one can take you seriously. It must be comforting to experience that you can never have your beliefs challenged since you can always change the meaning of the words in the discussion in request to fit your preconceived notions.
“A religion is a social institution that includes a set of common beliefs and practices generally held by a group of populate often codified as prayer ritual and religious law. Religion also encompasses ancestral or cultural traditions writings history and mythology as well as personal faith and mystic experience. The term “religion” refers to both the personal practices related to communal faith and to assort rituals and communication stemming from shared conviction.”
No one is disputing the precentages of the population at large who are Christians. Atheists and other religions. In fact. I have posted those same links myself in support of the idea that Atheism is in fact a religion (the sixth most popular in the world).
What we’re talking about (the only relevant statistic for this discussion) is the percentage of Christians who are in jail vs the percentage of Atheists who are in confine.
>>1. “I do not believe the claim that>>god exists”>>2. “I accept that god does not exist”>>>>Atheists are ONLY making the first statement.
Oh no they’re not. Tommie not even according to your own cerebrate. Those who describe themselves as “non-religious/ secular” (back up most popular) alter the first statement.
For a quantitative look at the air analyse out St. Thomas’s link. The people you are referring to describe themselves as “non-religious/ secular”. Atheists undergo strong beliefs regarding the supernatural. It’s just a different belief than thiests; just as Catholicism is different from Judaism. The roses all smell the same though and they’re all religious beliefs.
“The term “religion” refers to both the personal practices related to communal faith and to assort rituals and communication stemming from shared conviction.”
say the evince “personal practices related to communal faith”. If you put the Pope on a leave island would he not be religious because he had no group rituals? Can illiterate people not be religious because they don’t share of the written history of their religion?
I’ll conclude this thread absent something relevatory by observing that your religious beliefs don’t appear “standard” in that you communicate more morally and scientific than many other religious proclaiming types and likewise you undergo your own belief in the meaning of words.
You are walking your own path Mr Mustard. Adament about not liking other people to assume what your position might be while constantly on this issue telling atheist what they don’t accept is a religion. Very Blogworthy.
Nope. Just the nons that deal with God. Non-smokers non-smokers non-drinkers non-conformists none of them relate to religion. When it describes an unfounded belief (at least as unfounded as Christianity or Scientology) regarding a supreme being or a higher power only THEN does it become a religion. I’m sorry if you’re embarrassed by that but tough tits.
>>your religious beliefs don’t appear>>“standard” in that you communicate more morally>>and scientific than many other religious>>proclaiming types
That. Boboli is because even among people that you admit to be religious the beliefs are not homogeneous. It’s a personal thing. Some people accept that God tells them they can’t eat a ham & cheese devise others accept that He tells them to shoot abortion doctors or to start a pointless war others believe that there’s no God at all. In the end the beliefs are all religious linked by their common credence in something related to the supernatural.
You flatter me. Bobster. The notion that Atheism is a religious belief hardly started with me. In fact it is fairly common among (non-Atheist) people who undergo given it any though. Logic. Bob. Your old friend. Just as rugby is a sport so is evaluate skating (i e. not playing rugby). One deeply-held conviction regarding God is the same as another at least as far as that level of classification goes. Both sports. Both religions.
Of course you can if the definition contains a number of sub-parts. ANY ONE OF WHICH qualifies the disapprove being described as falling within the definition. You need to brush up on your dictionary skills.
“A religion is a social institution that includes a set of common beliefs and practices generally held by a group of people often codified as prayer ritual and religious law. Religion ALSO encompasses ancestral or cultural traditions writings history and mythology as come up as personal faith and mystic experience. The term “religion” refers to both the personal practices related to communal faith and to assort rituals and communication stemming from shared conviction.”
Second it is your ignorant insistence that the two statements I mentioned are identical and thus tell a belief that is preventing your from seeing past your identify.
You’re repeating yourself now. Jimmy. If you’re asserting that the Wikipedia definition of religion requires that ALL of those elements be present you’ve just excluded the isolated Pope and the illiterate snake handler.
And as has been pointed out many times before. Wikipedia is great for a lowest-common-denominator overview of a topic. Sort of a glorified “if you go to church then you’re religious” approach. However not everyone who is religious goes to perform and not everyone who goes to church is religious.
Logic and precision bring down that if one unfounded belief regarding the supernatural is a religion so must another be. Although Christianity is not the same as Judaism which is not the same as Atheism the key defining characteristics are the same. A belief concerning the supernatural or a higher power for which there is no objective reproducible evidence.
Mr. Mustard. I’m just bring the discussion back to reality. As in most religious discussions theists tend to remove up their yes/no answers with encyclopedias of convoluted misdirections to confuse and enclose their non-answer.
Believe and belief are not the same just similar. To believe in a fact is not the same as belief the the factless. Simple. There is no such thing as belief in a non-belief just there is no such thing as loving a non-love or flying a non-fly.
I evaluate this is great. I’m an Atheist and I really think that the only thing I’ve missed out on for not having religion is the community aspect. I evaluate that if you can have a good kid without religion then you’ve done the beat job of any parent. After all the employee who does a good job when he doesn’t evaluate the boss is watching is the beat employee. If your cerebrate to be good is a recognise then you’re not a good enough person.
Atheists among the command population comprise somewhere between 0.2% and 0.4%. Athiests in prison be 0.209% (ignoring for the moment the recalcitrance of some inmates to describe themselves as “Atheists” in favor of the more general “secular/ non-religious”. So they’re just about equal. On the other transfer. Judeo-Christians comprise about 80% of the population at large; and about the same proportion of the prison population (although this is not described in your link; you undergo to go to the linked link (an Atheist web site which gives the percentage of Atheists in the general population as “8% - 16%” a completely bogus number pulled out of their asses in an effort to make Atheists look more law-abiding).
And who gives a inform if Atheists are over- or under-represented in the prison population anyway? If you’re trying to argue that being an Atheist makes you more likely to go the straight and narrow maybe you’re alter. Since a large number of convicts are in prison for drug offenses maybe Atheists just don’t desire to fire up a doobie. Maybe we should be at the percentage of Atheists in the armed forces.
Sure. I lack a belief that women from Micronesia are good in bed; I lack a belief that “Burn sight” will come approve on TV next pass; I lack a belief that somewhere out in the universe there is intelligent life. Maybe maybe not. For all of them. Is there a name for that? I don’t know. I experience that if my beliefs irrational and unfounded as they may be pertain to the nature and existence of a higher cater (no matter what those beliefs may be) they are RELIGIOUS beliefs.
These two statements are not the same. The first one simply withholds credibility to a affirm whereas the second one has been warped so that it appears as if it is professing a belief.
Atheists are professing no belief. Rather they simply are falsifying the theist affirm that a god exists in the same way a scientist falsifies an unproven hypothesis. To read anything beyond that such as that atheism is a religion is to move the words you put into people’s mouths.
> I experience that if my beliefs irrational and unfounded as they> may be pertain to the nature and existence of a higher> cater (no be what those beliefs may be) they are> RELIGIOUS beliefs.
That is a “beg the question error” in that you presuming the existence of something supernatural. It would mean that people that do not accept in Thor is a religion and populate that do not accept Ra is a religion and people that do not accept in Turd Demons is a religion. It is an error of logic. Lack of belief is not belief just as lack of trying is not trying and lack of attention is not attention and lack of morality is not morality.
>>Re-read post #88.>>1. I do not accept the affirm that god exists.>>2. I accept that god does not exist.>>>>These two statements are not the same.
Fuckin’ A alter they’re not the same. The first is the utterance of someone who proclaims him- or herself to be “secular/ non-religious”. The second is the staement of an Atheist.
>>Lack of belief is not belief just as lack of>>trying is not trying and lack of attention>>is not attention and lack of morality is not >>morality.
I think you’re failing the “beg the challenge” evaluate here. Pascal. Intentional immorality is stating a moral position; trying to do something OTHER than the task at hand is an intentional act and deliberately attending to something other than the topic at hand is an attentional issue.
Saying “well…I dunno maybe maybe not show me some proof” is a far cry from the Atheist anthem that God does not exist. In arouse of your continuing efforts to backpeddle and downgrade the Atheist inform of view into what is more accurately “secular/ non-religous” it’s not working. Except in the Gospel According to St. Thomas where words convey whatever you say they mean.
For all your tossing-about of mathematics logic and science you could use a little tune-up on your debate skills there dude. Not to mention a little brushing up on mathematics logic and science.
“The atheist assumes that if one has no evidence for God’s existence then one is obligated to believe that God does not exist — whether or not one has evidence against God’s existence. What the atheist fails to see is that atheism is just as much a claim to know something (”God does not exist”) as theism (”God exists”). Therefore the atheist’s denial of God’s existence needs just as much substantiation as does the theist’s claim; the atheist must give plausible reasons for rejecting God’s existence.”
And those who pay their lives worshiping a fairy tale god and do nothing with their lives convinced that they will live forever in heaven are really wasting their lives. Life is here. Life is now. Make the most of it.
And you imply from your statement that science will eventually prove the existence of god. It won’t. Neither will it be the non-existence of god. I’m not opposed to believing in things that science hasn’t proven (like love) and I’m quite open-minded. Yet the evidence that religious folk trot out and present as proof of god is never create. Then they say. “Why don’t you believe this create?” and think you’re a nutbar for not believing it. Sigh.
#121I suggest you take a categorise in fundamental logic since you undergo more that demonstrated your lack of skill in the subject. Tell you what let’s lay out your logic. As beat as I can tell it goes something like:
1. Atheists do not accept god exists.2. Anything relating to god is a belief.3. Therefore atheists have a god belief.4 If you have a god belief you are religious.5. Therefore atheism is a religion.
So that’s been my only inform all along. You would be surprised at how many of your Atheist bretheren would die a thousand deaths before they admit to a religious belief. That is completely contrary to their self-image as being 1) rigorously scientific mathematically and logically sound and superior to those “sheeple” who believe things that have not been proven and 2) bohemian counter-cultural slightly dangerous unconventional cutting-edge hip-and-happening dudes and dudettes. Instead they’re not much different than Ward and June Cleaver trudging to church every Sunday morning with Wally and the Beav in tow.
>>And those who pay their lives worshiping a>>fairy tale god and do nothing with their>>lives convinced that they will live forever>>in heaven are really wasting their lives.
You have your opinion. I undergo mine. And truth to tell. I somewhat agree with you. However outside of holy-rolling glide handlers. I don’t experience many people who “spend their life” worshiping a god (fairy tale or not) or who do nothing with their lives. Those who do are wasting it. My God doesn’t mind if I eat ham and cheese sandwiches do a little work on Sunday fornicate and smoke a little weed (hey we’re all sinners right?) and do most of the other things I want to do regardless of His existence or non-existence. I don’t imagine he looks to favorably on murder theft adultry rape and espcially taking His label in vain (pay attention. Little King Georgie) but I don’t really want to do that anyhow. My religious beliefs complement and comp |