Post moved back to top for additional comments.
An answer to those who ask how can you be moral and teach morality without religion. Sounds like it’s pretty easy when you skip the fear and shame and other negatives used by some religions to enforce morality.
“When you have kids,” says Julie Willey, a design engineer, “you start to notice that your co-workers or friends have church groups to help 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 Center in Palo Alto, Calif., for atheist Sunday school.
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 respond to the God-fearing majority in the U.S. “It’s important for kids not to look weird,” says Peter Bishop, who leads the preteen class 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 want their children to have.
#50 – (As OFTLO said) “Atheism is a religion like
>>not collecting stamps is a hobby.”
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.
Is atheism a religion? No.
Is not collecting stamps a hobby? No.
Is calling atheism a religion like calling not collecting stamps a hobby? Yes.
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 suggest there never will be? No. Will I change my point of view if evidence is found? Possibly, depending on the evidence. You routinely confuse passion and pragmatism.
Not really. How about Kim Jung-Il, the Assad family of Syria, Yassir Arafat, even Saddam Hussein?
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 mold of Hussein.
What is your point?
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 march in front of Barnes and Nobles because Harry Potter is an affront to God.
The communist leaders you keep 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.
I wonder, if theistic religions were outlawed in America, how long it would take for the Church of Atheism to start their own Great Leap Forward.
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 have a church and a social movement.
This tiresome circular argument has been settled a billion times and my side always wins because I know the definitions of words and the other side pulls definitions out of their collective asses.
Just suck it up, admit you are wrong, and live an irrational life. Whatever you do, the definitions of atheism, religion, etc., are set in stone and they aren’t what you think they are.
#61 – Believing is certainly a belief. And Atheists believe that God does not exist.
No they don’t, God boy. Atheists do not have a belief, by definition.
On the other hand, if I were convinced, to the extent that I would belittle, berate, imprison, 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.
That’s is an excellent description of how the so called Christian Right treat everybody else.
>>that exclude any atheist who says “give me
>>a shred of evidence or logic?”
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 counter. I have no problem with empiricism, inasmuch as things can be empirically determined.
>>Got to rely on those secular humanists to
>>remain in the majority to avoid torture
>>for the non-believers.
No arugment there. They also help avoid torture for the believers. Religous fanaticism (be it in the name of God or in the name 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 follow. Note the Inquisition and the Great Leap Forward.
If proof of no god was suddenly discovered all the god fearing religious would lose all reason for living. With no moral guidance, previously decent moral people would soon begin killing, stealing, and having no compassion for fellow humans at all.
Oh, except Mister Mustard. He’s cool.
Just to cut to the chase, don’t all parents use shame and fear to socialize their kids? “Don’t you want to wear big boy pants, or do you want all the other boys to laugh at you?” right down to the traditional threats of punishment for bad behavior. Anybody here using the Summerhill method of child rearing?
>>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 horse as long as you like, 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).
>>All the evidence that I found points…
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, except when it suited his needs to rally 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.
>>This tiresome circular argument has been
>>settled a billion times and my side always
>>wins
I imagine that, in your mind, your side (whatever that side might be) ALWAYS wins. That’s the nature of a true believer.
>>That’s is an excellent description of how
>>the so called Christian Right treat everybody
>>else.
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.
It’s also an excellent description of how Atheist fundamentalists treat everybody else.
Why don’t you just stick to your beliefs, an leave the rest of us the fuck alone?
TIA.
I do not believe in God.
Not believing is a belief.
Therefor I believe in God.
HEELLLLLLP!!!
#50
Re-read post #50
RE: Demonstration
That you do not understand my demonstration is exactly why you keep arguing from a position of ignorance. You continue to want to twist the words around to meet your own personal definitions.
RE: Morality
> And you deny that Atheists do
> exactly the same thing?
No I do not. However, I also make no preconceived notions about a person’s morality based on their beliefs. The only means we have to evaluate a person’s “morality” is their behavior. Do bad things and you are acting immorally. Simple as that.
> Did it occur to you that the vast majority
> of people profess a belief in some sort
> 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.
> I’ll bet there is a higher percentage
> all Atheists in the slammer than
> there are of all Christians.
And you would be wrong. There are the same or slightly more Christian prisoners than there are atheist prisoners..
#61
> And Atheists believe that God does not exist.
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 believe there is a god” and thus have created a different and mistaken meaning.
Mustardo==while mostly rational, lets explore your irrationality.
You say religion is “A willingness to marginalize, disenfranchise, ridicule, torture, imprison, and slaughter those who hold the opposing point of view” and claim that generally this is what atheism does?
Hmmmm. The Great Monolith of lazy thinking rears its ugly blog.
I agree that I think, and believe that most atheists also, make fun of, belittle, and are alternatively shocked, amused, and dismissing of the bible thumpers especially but moving up the chain to even the vauge “spiritualist” among us. But moving from the personal evaluation to objective action 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 imprison, torture, and slaughter in order to impose atheism or only to impose 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 shred of evidence or logic for god, personal or otherwise, and your religious argument goes where?
OK,
How many families FORCE there kids to go to church?
How many of these kids are FORCED to memorize the bible?
How many are given a choice, or even SHOWN there are other religions/beliefs??
HOW many have the ability to choose at a YOUNG AGE??
This really sounds like Brain washing..
I always have to laugh when religious folk trot out the tired argument that atheism is evil because of Stalin, Pol Pot, and their ilk.
These people were ruthless dictators and power hungry, paranoid murders. And all that is blamed on atheism? Give me a break. There is no more proof that they murdered because they were atheists than there is proof for a magical deity in the sky.
Stalin, PolPot and Hitler were christians that forgot to read their bible for a few days.
#67, Mr. Mustard said “Why don’t you just stick to your beliefs, an leave the rest of us the fuck alone?”
Nasty, nasty. Is that what they teach you in church?
I’ll pray to my non-god for you.
atheism = not believing in magic
if one’s definition of religion is so broad as to include atheism, then I guess one has to also include not believing in magic is a religion.
“Stalin, PolPot and Hitler were christians that forgot to read their bible for a few days.”
George W. Bush reads the Bible every morning and look how “well” things are.
I’m just too tired to keep kicking you. I know you are good in your heart, but for whatever reason, you are a crybaby when you perceive an insult to your faith, whether that insult is real or not.
>>and claim that generally this is what
>>atheism does?
Not any more than I believe that most Christians fuck little boys up the ass, steal old people’s money, or glorify themselves at the expense of other people.
That’s what extremist so-called “Christians” do, and it’s what extremist Atheists do also. Next?
>>did any of them imprison, torture, and
>>slaughter in order to impose atheism
Yes. It was the belief in God that was offensive to them. That’s why they banned churches and killed the worshipers.
>>Any at the end of the day, what are
>>you seeking with your definition
Nothing more than an admission from the Atheists that they too have a system of beliefs relating to God. And thus, they’re just like the rest of us luddite sheeple, operating on blind faith.
>>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 break, 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”.
The intolerant lean towards extreme measures, whether they be adherents of the Christian Church or of the Atheist one.
>>How many families FORCE there kids to go
>>to church?
How many families FORCE there (sic) kids to go to school? How many families FORCE their kids to take a bath? How many families FORCE their kids to put on clean clothes? How many families FORCE their kids to be polite to grownups?
In case you’ve never been part of a family, this “FORCING” is the way parents raise children. As long as the “FORCE” consists of something like “no more X-Box this week, if you don’t take a bath”, I don’t see anything particularly malignant about it..
>>I’m just too tired to keep kicking you.
I think you need some new steel-tipped boots, OFTLO. If you’ve been kicking me, I haven’t noticed. I see a whole lot of defensiveness though.
>>Are you having trouble reading? That should
>>NOT be the case if the religious are MORE
>>moral as they claim to be.
Do you have trouble with fractions, St. Thomas?
If there were 250 Zoroastrians in the United States and EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM WERE A CRIMINAL, there would still 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 recognize (or admit) that many convicts who call 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.
#79:
“I’ll be fine pleased to give you a break, just as soon as you stop with the drivel about the malfeasance of Ted Haggard, Jimmy Swaggart…”
I didn’t say a word about these people. Get your back down.
78–Mustard==good point regarding the definition(s) only applying to the extremes.
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?
If not all atheists are so extreme so as to torture non-atheists, then are there people who are just barely atheists who haven’t formed a belief system or is the transformation one in the same?
>>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?
If you’re trying to wear me down as usual, Boboli, you’re succeeding.
A belief system regarding the nature or existence of God is, by definition, a religion.
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 kill their infidels, to those who, like Eminem, just don’t give a fuck.
#82
You 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 seem 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 general population. If one group, say Christians, claim 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.
RE: “Bad” Christians
This little game goes like so:
“Hitler was a Catholic.”
“Yes, but he wasn’t a “real” Catholic since he did bad things.”
Sorry, but it does not work that way. We must accept that people that profess to belong to a given faith are of that faith. If an ax murder says they are a Christian, then they count as being Christian. You have to take the good with the bad.
Mustard, I’m only trying to understand your position.
So, you are still equating complicated, ritualized religion with the simple non belief in same.
I think you are agreeing that not all religionist and not all atheist are extremists.
So, my question remains unanswered by you==how many atheists are not religious–or are they all religious by your definition?
>>We are comparing the proportion in prison
>>with the proportion in the general population.
Until now, only *I* was talking about this. You have been talking about the absolute number of Christians (so-called) in the slammer.
If you have percentages, let’s see them.
>>So, you are still equating complicated,
>>ritualized religion with the simple non
>>belief in same.
Nope. I’m equating the simple belief in a higher power with the simple belief that a higher power 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.
>>how many atheists are not religious–or
>>are they all religious by your definition?
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.
Mustard, that is unique.
Recognize that if “all” of “x” is y then the meaning of X becomes irrelevant.
So, trying to find that continuum you admit to in part.
All religions are not the same. Catholics are different from Muslims for instance. Can you imagine how the atheist religious beliefs differ from Catholic beliefs?
So, you may be right in identifying certain similarities in two ideas but until you factor 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 post, I find the analysis that calling the presence of something the same as the absence of something to not be very illuminating.
Maybe more wisdom in the hairball?
>>I find the analysis that calling the presence
>>of something the same as the absence of
>>something to not be very illuminating.
No matter how many red herrings you litter the trail with, you won’t stand victorious until you wear me out.
BELIEF in God is clearly not the same thing as BELIEF that God does not exist. Football is not the same thing as field 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 deal with the supernatural, the link between the two is that they are both religious in nature.
And no more of that “not collecting stamps” shit, please. I just hope (and pray) that OFTLO never has to take the Miller Analogies Test. He’d flunk.