NationStates Jolt Archive

I posted this in another thread, but it was slightly off-topic, so I wanted to behave myself and start a fresh thread.

Please read this whole post before posting angry comments! I am not attacking religious people! I am very respectful of everyone, and I am hoping to have an intelligent discussion about this, not a "what a n00b" flame-fest. Thanks.

I just felt a need to give a shoutout to my atheist brothers and sisters. Atheism is really misunderstood by the general public, at least in my experience. Atheism can actually be positive and fulfilling - Because my reason for living and doing good comes from within, it feels more personal and legitimate. Plus, when I do something good, I know I've done it for the sake of being good itself, not because I expect to be rewarded (or expect to avoid punishment). Plus, if I'm wrong and there is a God, I doubt he'll care that I didn't believe in him as long as I've led a good life and helped others, right?

Religious people seem to think that atheism is like a personal attack on their beliefs. I believe that truth is subjective though, so me choosing to believe that there is no god is actually just as arbitrary as them choosing to believe there IS a god. Thus, I don't take a moral high ground and brush off religious people as all being stupid and illogical. Most everyone I know is religious, and we're still friends. I get over it, they get over it, we move on.

If a religious person is doing good because of their religion, I'm not going to be upset because they have the wrong motives for doing good. I'll just be pleased they're doing good. It's only when people start to take the Bible too literally that I begin to have a problem. Even then, I don't hate them - hate hasn't really gotten us too far. I just think they were raised that way and haven't had an opportunity to escape their somewhat narrow-minded world view.

I am tolerant of religion, and all I really ask is that people be tolerant of my lack of religion in return. If you are religious, I don't have a problem with that, honestly. Just don't take it too far. And please don't assume that any atheist you meet has no morals or that (as has been said to me many times) their atheism is just a phase, or a fad, that will soon pass. Atheism is part of larger world view I have, and I've thought it through over and over. This philosophy is personally meaningful and extremely flexible - it gets me through the day.

It seems that people perceive atheists as a group to be gruff, unhappy people who lack meaning and direction in their lives. This is simply not true. We are not waiting for a religious person to shower us with the love of God and lift the clouds that darken our skies. I am actually extremely happy and content with the direction of my life. I love my family, I love my friends, I love my college, and I love myself. Just don't try to make me love God - it won't work!

If you are religious, it is likely that your God is a loving one, and he (or she - and that goes for all "he"/"god" references) probably has no problem with atheists doing good in the world. So please don't roll your eyes when someone tells you they're an athiest! Don't assume that they are a whiny goth kid looking for attention by being "different." There will always be people like that (I dislike them as much as anyone), but I think 95% of Athiests are nowhere near that category.

Thoughts?

Omg Get Over It!
Nobody Wants To Argue With You Ok?? Belive What You Want And Let Other People Believe What They Want! Stop Trying To Convert People!

I thought it was a good post. Its probably true for most atheiests, though I do know a few who just hate religion.

Personally, I'm going on a church youth group retreat to find out why others believe in god.

Omg Get Over It!
Nobody Wants To Argue With You Ok?? Belive What You Want And Let Other People Believe What They Want! Stop Trying To Convert People!

Whoa, slow down there. I AM NOT TRYING TO CONVERT ANYONE TO ATHEISM! I was just dismissing some common misconceptions about it. I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH PEOPLE BEING RELIGIOUS.

Could someone reply who actually read what I wrote??

I thought it was a good post. Its probably true for most atheiests, though I do know a few who just hate religion.

Personally, I'm going on a church youth group retreat to find out why others believe in god.

There are clearly some who are atheists because they hate religion. I'm just saying mine is a different variety. I don't think basing your life around hating a group of people is a great way to live...

I didn't say you did hate religious types, I just know a few that really really hate religion because they see the fundamentalists corrupting it.

EDIT: why did I get the boo thumby thing? WHY!!!

I didn't say you did hate religious types, I just know a few that really really hate religion because they see the fundamentalists corrupting it.

EDIT: why did I get the boo thumby thing? WHY!!!

Sorry for the misunderstandings!
1. I know you weren't saying that - I was agreeing with you. I worded it poorly, sorry.

2. The thumbs down was for people who base their life on hating people, not for you.

my b!

Sorry for the misunderstandings!
1. I know you weren't saying that - I was agreeing with you. I worded it poorly, sorry.

2. The thumbs down was for people who base their life on hating people, not for you.

my b!

ah, okay. I still love you. :fluffle:

that is some hot smiley lovin' :fluffle:

what, did you expect anything less than hot smily love? :) :fluffle:

whoa it's a smiley threesome now :fluffle: :p

and the jealous husband: :mp5:

um, any on-topic posts other people?

okay. . . back on topic.

I think Athiesm has been misunderstood and has therefore gotten a bad rap over the centuries. Most people think athiests are depressive who want to run organized religion. Actually, most of the athiests I know do the opposite - they love to learn about religion. I think that many athiests simply want to know what they can about religions without having to follow one.

yeah i thought it was a good thread too. i'm sick of people being so fuckin negative all the time. but i do have to admit. hostile feelings between the religious and atheists arent exactly one-sided like your post suggests. most atheists i know are pretty dismissive of religious type folk. and that is enough reason to generate aggro. i agree with you on the point you made about how if i am an atheist and a good person then i know i do good because i want to not because i've been told to. it makes sense that spirituality is something you must learn on your own. not to be learned by rote in church.

Dawn well written....an atheist myself and if I got a dollar (I can even live with getting a swedish krona) for every time I have been asked why there is a reason for me to live, or why I would have morals I'd be rich...might even have the ability to pay my student loan =)

Apperently one must have an old guy living up there to have morals according to some people...and I live in Sweden which isn't even a very religous country :)

-snip-
Religious people seem to think that atheism is like a personal attack on their beliefs. I believe that truth is subjective though, so me choosing to believe that there is no god is actually just as arbitrary as them choosing to believe there IS a god. Thus, I don't take a moral high ground and brush off religious people as all being stupid and illogical. Most everyone I know is religious, and we're still friends. I get over it, they get over it, we move on.
-snip-

Pretty good post. You sound like a decent guy. But I do have one comment on the above paragraph. I'm all for doing the right thing just because it's the right thing or out of a desire to help people, but I always get tripped up by one thing. How is it that atheism can come up with a rational set of morals? You admit above that truth is subjective, so doesn't that mean that morals are subjective too? Doesn't it all boil down to taste? Relative morality isn't really morality. It's just what we use so that we can say that we are moral. But if morals are relative, then who is to say that it's really moral? I'd be much more inclined to be a nihilist than a relative moralist.

Just a thought.

I don't roll my eyes out non-Christians. I care deeply for them because when you die, you could go to heaven or hell. Hell was never made for man, it was made for Satan and his fallen angels. I don't want you to have to spend eternity hating yourself and regretting what you did. Then again, I have noticed I am possibly the only Christian on this forum that doesn't froth out the mouth and act completely irrational, hypocritical, and other such foolish actions...woops aren't we Christians not supposed to judge?

Pretty good post. You sound like a decent guy. But I do have one comment on the above paragraph. I'm all for doing the right thing just because it's the right thing or out of a desire to help people, but I always get tripped up by one thing. How is it that atheism can come up with a rational set of morals? You admit above that truth is subjective, so doesn't that mean that morals are subjective too? Doesn't it all boil down to taste? Relative morality isn't really morality. It's just what we use so that we can say that we are moral. But if morals are relative, then who is to say that it's really moral? I'd be much more inclined to be a nihilist than a relative moralist.

Just a thought.

As unpleasant as the thought may be, I believe morals are relative. However, I'm a bit of a believer (among other things) that much of what we do is geared towards survival of the species.

We see it in other animals, where certain species work together in groups and help each other because it increases the chances of survival.

I sometimes think that many of the things we do that give us a "good feeling" are kinda hardwired in to promote survival - certainly the fact that sex feels so damned good is proof (to me at least) that this is a feasible possibility.

So... when I help someone I get a good feeling and it makes me want to help again.

Hopefully this makes sense...

I'm sure Hitler got a great feeling order many Jews to die.


edit: please take that in a kind, barely-mocking tone. I only mean it to be slightly sarcastic. A very minor poke in the ribs if you will,,

I just felt a need to give a shoutout to my atheist brothers and sisters. Atheism is really misunderstood by the general public, at least in my experience. Atheism can actually be positive and fulfilling - Because my reason for living and doing good comes from within, it feels more personal and legitimate. Plus, when I do something good, I know I've done it for the sake of being good itself, not because I expect to be rewarded (or expect to avoid punishment).

So a Christian/Budhist/Taoist/Wiccan/Muslim/Jew, etc. cannot do good just for the sake of doing good and without thought of punishment/reward in the afterlife? Is that what you claim? If so, you might need to re-think that idea.


Plus, if I'm wrong and there is a God, I doubt he'll care that I didn't believe in him as long as I've led a good life and helped others, right?

Wrong! at least from the Christian/Muslim/Jewish point of view.

Religious people seem to think that atheism is like a personal attack on their beliefs.

Not all Religious people think that, I for one.

I believe that truth is subjective though,

So if it feels good, do it? There are no universal, objective truths or standards? Even cold blooded, pre-meditated murder of a 6 month old child is alright if you have, in your own mind (i.e. "subjectively") determined that "in truth" when he grows up he'll be a serial rapist?

so me choosing to believe that there is no god is actually just as arbitrary as them choosing to believe there IS a god.

I'd agree except for one thing, if you're right, then nothing happens to them in the end. If they're right, you're screwed.

Thus, I don't take a moral high ground and brush off religious people as all being stupid and illogical. Most everyone I know is religious, and we're still friends. I get over it, they get over it, we move on.

That's nice to hear.

If a religious person is doing good because of their religion, I'm not going to be upset because they have the wrong motives for doing good.

Just remember the motives are wrong in your and like minded peoples mind only. To the religious person, they are doing good for the correct motive. And for you to say they are doing it for the wrong motives reveals some bias on your part IMHO.

I'll just be pleased they're doing good.

surely no one could could complain when anyone is doing good, aetheist or christian.

It's only when people start to take the Bible too literally that I begin to have a problem.

Believe it or not, most Christians have the same problem with other Christians who fail to recognize allegory, symbolism and related concepts in the bible.

Even then, I don't hate them - hate hasn't really gotten us too far. I just think they were raised that way and haven't had an opportunity to escape their somewhat narrow-minded world view.

Glad to see you don't think christians are stupid and illogical, sorry to see you think they have a narrow minded world view. If you disagree with their world view, that is fine. To state it is "narrow minded" reveals a bias and bigotry towards christians who believe in the bible - you are evidencing a trait you are claiming you don't have.

I am tolerant of religion, and all I really ask is that people be tolerant of my lack of religion in return.

Glad to see you are tolerant of narrow minded people. That's nice of you. Though don't you think if you were really tolerant you wouldn't call them "narrow minded?"

If you are religious, I don't have a problem with that, honestly. Just don't take it too far.

How far is "too far" and who is in charge of making that determination? Is it an objective standard or a subjective one that varies from person-to-person?

And please don't assume that any atheist you meet has no morals or that (as has been said to me many times) their atheism is just a phase, or a fad, that will soon pass. Atheism is part of larger world view I have, and I've thought it through over and over. This philosophy is personally meaningful and extremely flexible - it gets me through the day.

I don't assume any of those things about an aetheist and I'm glad you find it fullfilling for yourself. Please continue to do good. And yes, aetheism is an extremely flexible belief system as it gives you the inherent right to do whatever you want without reference to any source as to what is the right thing to do other than yourself. If you believe it is the right thing to do, then it doesn't matter about anything else, you can do it because you have determined within yourself it is ok, even if it contradicts some external "guideline."


It seems that people perceive atheists as a group to be gruff, unhappy people who lack meaning and direction in their lives. This is simply not true.

I don't think that about aetheists, sorry.

We are not waiting for a religious person to shower us with the love of God and lift the clouds that darken our skies. I am actually extremely happy and content with the direction of my life. I love my family, I love my friends, I love my college, and I love myself. Just don't try to make me love God - it won't work!

Glad to see you are happy. Note however, that religious people can't shower you with the love of God and lift the clouds that darken your sky. Only God can do that and you have to let him. And I would never try to make you love God, no one can "make" anyone love anybody else. I'd no more try to make you love God than I'd try to make you love your worst enemy. However, I reserve the right to respectfully attempt to get you to acknowledge the existence of God - love him, that is your choice.

If you are religious, it is likely that your God is a loving one, and he (or she - and that goes for all "he"/"god" references) probably has no problem with atheists doing good in the world.

I think you are probably correct in that regard.

So please don't roll your eyes when someone tells you they're an athiest!

I don't

Don't assume that they are a whiny goth kid looking for attention by being "different." There will always be people like that (I dislike them as much as anyone), but I think 95% of Athiests are nowhere near that category.

I don't assume that and I figure you are probably right about the other 95% as well.

Thoughts?

Well, many of mine are expressed above. I figure you can read them. I do think you exhibit a bias as you clearly view religious people as "narrow minded" and as "doing good with the wrong motive." On the other hand, I'll give you credit for attempting a thoughtful post and not flamebaiting or being rude. I also think that there is a loud and vocal minority of aetheists and religious people (of most all religions) that have shot off their mouth and given the majority of their groups a bad name or created a guilt by association scenario.

I have no problem with an aetheist who says "I'm sorry, I just can't bring myself to believe in (a) God" and leave it at that. I do have a problem with those that say "You're stupid to believe in God" (or words to that effect). I'm not saying you do that, but you exhibit an tendency by your remarks to at least think that way.

Holy tacos batman! Norleans, you are awesome! You are like a christian version of Bottle or Dempublicants..or maybe you aren't christian. But you have a religous mindset it seems..

Holy tacos batman! Norleans, you are awesome! You are like a christian version of Bottle or Dempublicants..or maybe you aren't christian. But you have a religous mindset it seems..

Thank you.

I'm sure Hitler got a great feeling order many Jews to die.


edit: please take that in a kind, barely-mocking tone. I only mean it to be slightly sarcastic. A very minor poke in the ribs if you will,,

Oh, I never said it was guaranteed to work "correctly" for all people. Yes, Hitler probably did get a deep sense of satisfaction for what he believed was a good thing (and I'm not endorsing that in any way, shape or form).

There will always be "deviants" (and I don't mean that with a negative connotation per se) that do not function in the way nature intended...

Sorry, if I'm sounding vague. It is Friday afternoon, I'm tired and just want the weekend to hurry up and get here.

Let me see if I can have another crack at this... I go with the theory of evolution, survival of the fittest and all that sort of thing. I believe that everything is "programmed" to a certain degree to attempt to maintain the surivival of their own species but this does not have to be at the cost of the individual sense/personality (for instance, when you look at wolf packs you see the same roles over and over again but just because one wolf is the alpha male doesn't mean it has the same personality as all other alpha males).

Yet, this doesn't mean that there is no such thing as an "evil" (or morally wrong or whatever you'd like to call them) person. We're selfish and sometimes our selfishness overrides our ability or desire to help others. Sometimes it is simply a matter of brain chemistry... for whatever reason some people are wired differently (I won't call it "flawed", just different).

Okay... I think if I keep going I'm just going to confuse myself and make things really convoluted. Do you understand what I'm getting at though?

As unpleasant as the thought may be, I believe morals are relative. However, I'm a bit of a believer (among other things) that much of what we do is geared towards survival of the species.

We see it in other animals, where certain species work together in groups and help each other because it increases the chances of survival.

I sometimes think that many of the things we do that give us a "good feeling" are kinda hardwired in to promote survival - certainly the fact that sex feels so damned good is proof (to me at least) that this is a feasible possibility.

So... when I help someone I get a good feeling and it makes me want to help again.

Hopefully this makes sense...

It makes sense, but it sounds like we're deciding "moral" by "good for the species." This does leave us with some serious dilemmas. For example, shouldn't we kill off people who display traits of genetic diseases to prevent them from passing on to the next generation? Or at least sterilize them? I would be a candidate because of a history of cancer on both sides of my family.

And you didn't really address my previous question. If morality is relative, then how can we call it anything but taste? Supposedly, by this reasoning, we can't puch our morality on others. But this seems to be a moral rule above myself, and hence wouldn't be relative. Or what if my personal, relative morality required that I press my morality on you? Relative morality leaves to many questions unanswered for me to buy it. It all just seems to degenerate into either a self-contradiction or nihilism.

It makes sense, but it sounds like we're deciding "moral" by "good for the species." This does leave us with some serious dilemmas. For example, shouldn't we kill off people who display traits of genetic diseases to prevent them from passing on to the next generation? Or at least sterilize them? I would be a candidate because of a history of cancer on both sides of my family.

And you didn't really address my previous question. If morality is relative, then how can we call it anything but taste? Supposedly, by this reasoning, we can't puch our morality on others. But this seems to be a moral rule above myself, and hence wouldn't be relative. Or what if my personal, relative morality required that I press my morality on you? Relative morality leaves to many questions unanswered for me to buy it. It all just seems to degenerate into either a self-contradiction or nihilism.

You make this point so much better than I did. Well said, succint and to the point.

So if it feels good, do it? There are no universal, objective truths or standards? Even cold blooded, pre-meditated murder of a 6 month old child is alright if you have, in your own mind (i.e. "subjectively") determined that "in truth" when he grows up he'll be a serial rapist?

See, this is an area that I find fascinating.

I don't believe there are any universal, objective truths or standards. I would agree that there are certain values/morals/truths that are held by a majority of people which we could define as "common morality" perhaps.

In the example that you've given, I think it would be wrong to murder a child because you have some convinction that he'll grow up to be a serial rapist later in life. Yet, I'm almost sure there are others that will see nothing particularly wrong with that action provided the justification was sufficient.

Doors used the example of Hitler. There are people that believe that he was a criminal madman, there are others that believe he was a genius and had the right idea(s). Which of them is right? Which is wrong?

The best I feel that we can do is make our own decision on his actions. Let's pretend for a moment that we could take an instant poll of the entire population of the earth and tally it up. If a majority of people thought he was wrong, does that mean that he was universally wrong?

For the record, I hope Hitler spends eternity in hell/hades/oblivion but that doesn't mean I'm "right" in thinking that.

It makes sense, but it sounds like we're deciding "moral" by "good for the species." This does leave us with some serious dilemmas. For example, shouldn't we kill off people who display traits of genetic diseases to prevent them from passing on to the next generation? Or at least sterilize them? I would be a candidate because of a history of cancer on both sides of my family.

And you didn't really address my previous question. If morality is relative, then how can we call it anything but taste? Supposedly, by this reasoning, we can't puch our morality on others. But this seems to be a moral rule above myself, and hence wouldn't be relative. Or what if my personal, relative morality required that I press my morality on you? Relative morality leaves to many questions unanswered for me to buy it. It all just seems to degenerate into either a self-contradiction or nihilism.

Okay... so if morality is absolute, why do we have "moral dilemmas"? Why do we often find ourselves in situations where the "right thing to do" is not clear and easy but complex?

Those are the questions that I have that prevent me in accepting a universal moral code. I'd be very interested in responses to this.

I don't roll my eyes out non-Christians. I care deeply for them because when you die, you could go to heaven or hell. Hell was never made for man, it was made for Satan and his fallen angels. I don't want you to have to spend eternity hating yourself and regretting what you did. Then again, I have noticed I am possibly the only Christian on this forum that doesn't froth out the mouth and act completely irrational, hypocritical, and other such foolish actions...woops aren't we Christians not supposed to judge?
That sentiment isn't generally resented by atheists as much as the way most christians take that as a way to be condescending and try to force others to go it their way. At least it seems that way to me. Being a non-christian in a nation that is something like 85% christian is not an easy thing. Chrisitans don't truly appreciate how saturated the American society is in christianity or how much non-christians are made to feel like outsiders in our own home country.

Try being a non-christian on any major holiday, particularly Christmas when us non-christians have to hear what seems like the endless bleeting of "the reason for the season". As if the Christmas holiday concept doesn't exist in any other religion. Christians sure as heck didn't come up with the christmas tree (there weren't any pine trees in the middle east), the wreath, holly, mistletoe, egg nog, cider, Santa Claus and his 8 reindeer, presents and so on. Yet christians (at least in my area) will deny that any other holiday exists at that time of year. How is that supposed to make a non-christian feel when they hear this stuff 24/7 for 2 solid months. This stuff is spewed EVERYWHERE. I can't turn on the radio, television or talk to someone without having to hear these things and it seems like it's nonstop.

Sorry, I think I've gone off on a bit of a tangent. This is just one example of the kind of thing that non-christians deal with everyday and it becomes REALLY frustrating sometimes, especially when christians get on the major media outlets and start complaining about how christianity is being oppressed in America.

OK, actually done this time. :cool:

Oh, I never said it was guaranteed to work "correctly" for all people. Yes, Hitler probably did get a deep sense of satisfaction for what he believed was a good thing (and I'm not endorsing that in any way, shape or form).
You're not suggesting that Hitler was an atheist are you?

You're not suggesting that Hitler was an atheist are you?

Errr... I don't believe I'm suggesting anything about Hitler. Why?

All widespread religions claims that if you do not believe in them, you will go to hell.

What does that tell us?

Correct...
If the theory is right, then everyone will go to hell for not belonging to every religion that believes in heaven/hell. If i am going to hell anyway, i would like to make the journey there as pleasant as humanly possible. Without restrictions!

Okay, I'm an atheist but I don't think that means I don't need meaning for my actions. It means I don't believe in a personlike God who knows all. Truth is subjective, but not in a way that we could never agree about certain simple aspects of life. Killing feels mostly wrong in simple situations; but there are times you can do it to prevent more pain. Killing terrorists who are taking hostages, and (not everyone will agree) abortion and euthanesia. Christians sometimes say atheists have no respect for life and its mystic characteristics. But most of us have an almost holy respect for the integrity of life.
You shouldn't discuss about good and wrong (or evil or sinful). I am an emotivist, which means I think ethic statements are nothing more than the expressions of emotions. And it sounds frightening to say, but the first implication is that the majority who can think of the most convincing arguments is "right". But of course humans are bound by a shared spiritual feeling for meaning. Pain feels meaningless. Death feels meaningless. Cooperation and loyalty feels meaningfull. This has a basis in our early history as man-apes, but I do think there is more than just survival of the fittest. Something which we all can experience. You can call it God leeting you know that he's out there, or you can call it become Zen etc. I just think that as an atheist, my own truth is not enough.

I posted this in another thread, but it was slightly off-topic, so I wanted to behave myself and start a fresh thread.

Please read this whole post before posting angry comments! I am not attacking religious people! I am very respectful of everyone, and I am hoping to have an intelligent discussion about this, not a "what a n00b" flame-fest. Thanks.

I just felt a need to give a shoutout to my atheist brothers and sisters. Atheism is really misunderstood by the general public, at least in my experience. Atheism can actually be positive and fulfilling - Because my reason for living and doing good comes from within, it feels more personal and legitimate. Plus, when I do something good, I know I've done it for the sake of being good itself, not because I expect to be rewarded (or expect to avoid punishment). Plus, if I'm wrong and there is a God, I doubt he'll care that I didn't believe in him as long as I've led a good life and helped others, right?

Religious people seem to think that atheism is like a personal attack on their beliefs. I believe that truth is subjective though, so me choosing to believe that there is no god is actually just as arbitrary as them choosing to believe there IS a god. Thus, I don't take a moral high ground and brush off religious people as all being stupid and illogical. Most everyone I know is religious, and we're still friends. I get over it, they get over it, we move on.

If a religious person is doing good because of their religion, I'm not going to be upset because they have the wrong motives for doing good. I'll just be pleased they're doing good. It's only when people start to take the Bible too literally that I begin to have a problem. Even then, I don't hate them - hate hasn't really gotten us too far. I just think they were raised that way and haven't had an opportunity to escape their somewhat narrow-minded world view.

I am tolerant of religion, and all I really ask is that people be tolerant of my lack of religion in return. If you are religious, I don't have a problem with that, honestly. Just don't take it too far. And please don't assume that any atheist you meet has no morals or that (as has been said to me many times) their atheism is just a phase, or a fad, that will soon pass. Atheism is part of larger world view I have, and I've thought it through over and over. This philosophy is personally meaningful and extremely flexible - it gets me through the day.

It seems that people perceive atheists as a group to be gruff, unhappy people who lack meaning and direction in their lives. This is simply not true. We are not waiting for a religious person to shower us with the love of God and lift the clouds that darken our skies. I am actually extremely happy and content with the direction of my life. I love my family, I love my friends, I love my college, and I love myself. Just don't try to make me love God - it won't work!

If you are religious, it is likely that your God is a loving one, and he (or she - and that goes for all "he"/"god" references) probably has no problem with atheists doing good in the world. So please don't roll your eyes when someone tells you they're an athiest! Don't assume that they are a whiny goth kid looking for attention by being "different." There will always be people like that (I dislike them as much as anyone), but I think 95% of Athiests are nowhere near that category.

Thoughts?

What a wimp

Hey thanks for keeping this post 99% respectful and on-topic. Very refreshing! The 2 or 3 threads I started before devolved very quickly into flaming.

A few things:

To Norleans: You are correct. I do exhibit that bias. I am "working on it" if you will. I think I used to be more of the "annoying atheist" type that totally blew off all Christians, but that is clearly wrong. So maybe I'm still just getting over. So yeah, fair enough on that one. But thanks for recognizing that I was not flame-baiting and was trying to be respectful

About the morality debate: I have a totally different take on this - I'm not quite sure I buy the survival of the species thing. Here's how my view goes:
-Truth is subjective. HOWEVER, it is not useful to walk around everday in a postmodern haze, thinking that nothing is real. Even if I am unsure that anything is real, I have to understand that 99% of people think that what they experience on a day-to-day basis IS real. Thus, I justify good acts because I'm improving someone else's EXPERIENCED/PERCEIVED REALITY - whether or not it is in fact real is irrelevant. If I make someone else have a better reality, I feel good because I like other people and seeing them happy makes me happy.

I think this solves the Hitler problem - because even though Hitler was doing what HE thought was right, he was clearly not improving the reality of life as a Jew to put it mildly!

That's some good common ground right there. I think we could all happily join in a loud chorus of FUCK HITLER! Damn, what an asshole. I consider myself to essentially be a pacifist, but if I had the opportunity to time-travel and kill one person, it would be him and I would totally do it. Fyi.

No more thoughts on this?

There are clearly some who are atheists because they hate religion. I'm just saying mine is a different variety. I don't think basing your life around hating a group of people is a great way to live...


a) you're referring to antitheists

the topic is about atheists

b) the third sentence is rather hypocritical when you look at what has been done to atheists by the religious nuts throughout history

Hear Hear! Great post, I'm an atheist and couldn't agree more, especially about respecting relgions, or the lack of it. I do believe that is very important, in many areas of life. Many relgions, such as Christianity and Islam are 'crusading' religions. Everyone needs to share their believes otherwise they will not get into heaven e.t.c. This is what can get to people in everyday life, on the subject of aborton for example. Christians believe in the Sanctity of life, it is given by God and so can only be taken away by God. Therefore they believe abortion should be illegal. But I don't believe in God, the sanctity of life, and so therefore that argument for me is useless. What to do? Christians need to protect their believes, but I need to protect mine. I suppose you don't have to get an abortion, but you shouldn't stop someone else from doing so.

Sorry for using this example as it is very sensitive and I don't want to lead the thread away, but things like this can be complicated. While Christians may believe one thing, someone else may believe another, and so I believe it is important not to be crusading, whether you are religious or atheist.

I like your point about not crusading from either side of the debate.

I would just be careful though - don't overgeneralize. As a religion, Christianity certainly has a history of the crusading mentality, HOWEVER I don't know many (or any) Christians who try to impose their faith on others directly. Or atheists who try to get their religious friends to abandon their faith. Personally, I don't think religion is

The abortion thing is different - that's an indirect imposition of belief on others. I believe it is wrong to try to do that, and I am strongly pro-choice. But some may say that being pro-choice is the also imposing your beliefs on others, but by that logic, isn't all of politics about that? I think the reason the abortion thing is so annoying to me is that it isn't a random group of people who just disagree, it's a certain religion whose followers have been told abortion is wrong and feel the need to make that decision for others. Not that the followers don't honestly believe it's wrong, but still...

Omg Get Over It!
Nobody Wants To Argue With You Ok?? Belive What You Want And Let Other People Believe What They Want! Stop Trying To Convert People!
yea i wish people would stop posting this crap...

Athiests are evil people at heart. They reject God and teh Bible. That means that they have no morals becaus all morality comes from the Bible and the Ten Commandments. It's becaus of athiests that we have gays trying to marry we have crazy new cults beastiality masturbation and kids turning to crack and islam. Without Jesus in your hearrt you are open to being posesed by by demons. As it is most athiests are posesed

Athiests are evil people at heart. They reject God and teh Bible. That means that they have no morals becaus all morality comes from the Bible and the Ten Commandments. It's becaus of athiests that we have gays trying to marry we have crazy new cults beastiality masturbation and kids turning to crack and islam. Without Jesus in your hearrt you are open to being posesed by by demons. As it is most athiests are posesed


I suggest you bow before the pope as your heathen protestant flith is infecting our youth.

I suggest you bow before the pope as your heathen protestant flith is infecting our youth.
The pope is the antichrist.

Okay... so if morality is absolute, why do we have "moral dilemmas"? Why do we often find ourselves in situations where the "right thing to do" is not clear and easy but complex?

Those are the questions that I have that prevent me in accepting a universal moral code. I'd be very interested in responses to this.

It's because we don't know everything. If we knew everything, then it would be very easy to see what is right and wrong. That is one of the reasons that I believe in the Christian system of morality. God, being all-knowing, can give us an absolute moral code that we can follow.

Using something in an above post, the question is whether or not is it justified to kill someone whom I am sure will become a mass-rapist or murderer. Because I don't know everything, this would be wrong. I cannot kill based on speculation. This is why Christians are commanded not to judge. We can judge actions, but we cannot judge people. We don't know their circumstances.

Please, don't go off on a tangent about teh omniscience of God. One, this would be hijacking the thread. Two, this usually leads into pointless debates about which nothing is ever solved, and it just inflames people. I'd rather not go there.

In reference to the original post, I swap between atheism and agnosticsm but I would agree with basically everything you said.

I do know plenty of atheists who do act like jerks -'Christians are stupid' 'I'm so superior and clever compared to you all' etc etc- type of thing and they give atheists a bad name. But I'm sure religious people can see that certain people from their religions give them a bad name aswell. Everywhere you go you're going to get that.

On abortion.... I'm pro-choice and personally I don't see that pressing my beliefs on anyone. Legal abortion isn't making pro-life people have abortions or making them agree with abortion. Whereas banning abortion would mean that pro-choice people are restricted to do something that they see as morally acceptable.

Athiests are evil people at heart. They reject God and teh Bible. That means that they have no morals becaus all morality comes from the Bible and the Ten Commandments. It's becaus of athiests that we have gays trying to marry we have crazy new cults beastiality masturbation and kids turning to crack and islam. Without Jesus in your hearrt you are open to being posesed by by demons. As it is most athiests are posesed

Dude, as a Christian, I think I need to say this publicly.

Buzz off! You're giving the rest of us a bad name! Fire and brimstone is not likely to lead to the salvation of souls! Either post with dignity and respect, or get off the forums!

We now return to our regularly scheduled debate....

It's because we don't know everything. If we knew everything, then it would be very easy to see what is right and wrong. That is one of the reasons that I believe in the Christian system of morality. God, being all-knowing, can give us an absolute moral code that we can follow.

Using something in an above post, the question is whether or not is it justified to kill someone whom I am sure will become a mass-rapist or murderer. Because I don't know everything, this would be wrong. I cannot kill based on speculation. This is why Christians are commanded not to judge. We can judge actions, but we cannot judge people. We don't know their circumstances.

Please, don't go off on a tangent about teh omniscience of God. One, this would be hijacking the thread. Two, this usually leads into pointless debates about which nothing is ever solved, and it just inflames people. I'd rather not go there.

Oh, you won't find me debating the omniscience of God with you. Not because I also believe that God is omniscient but because I've got my beliefs and you've got yours... and since neither of us is probably interested in converting the other, that is where we'll leave things.

I will comment though that the idea of a "universal truth" is common amongst the Christians I know. Having said that, I honestly don't know a great deal of Christians so I can't say if this is true for all of them. What I have noticed is that their idea of "universal truth" stems from God, right?

My concept of a "common morality" or perhaps a "common truth" stems from my personal belief in the natural order of things. It doesn't really allow for an all-seeing "universal truth" since there is no deity behind it to ultimately determine what is right and what is wrong.

So I guess this is the point where we shake hands and go our separate ways? Many thanks for the discussion :D

Dude, as a Christian, I think I need to say this publicly.

Buzz off! You're giving the rest of us a bad name! Fire and brimstone is not likely to lead to the salvation of souls! Either post with dignity and respect, or get off the forums!

We now return to our regularly scheduled debate....

Don't get too worked up over Jesussaves, most of us recognise him for the parrot that he is ;)

Athiests are evil people at heart. They reject God and teh Bible. That means that they have no morals becaus all morality comes from the Bible and the Ten Commandments. It's becaus of athiests that we have gays trying to marry we have crazy new cults beastiality masturbation and kids turning to crack and islam. Without Jesus in your hearrt you are open to being posesed by by demons. As it is most athiests are posesed

Please note that as a christian, I do not ascribe to or condone this attitude. This is one of the vocal minorities that give me a bad name and cause me to be cast in a bad light under the "guilt by association" theory.

Jesussaves, your approach to what was a respectful discussion among people with differing viewpoints shames me as a Christian. You will never convert anyone if this is your tactic. You're as "bad" as the aetheist who claims all believers in God are "stupid." You should also re-study your bible a bit as, according to Jesus, all morality comes from his "new commandment" - "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." Loving yourself or your neighbor does not include berrating yourself or your neighbor as "evil" because they believe or behave in a manner you dissaprove of. I suspect you have more than one small splinter in your eye you need to remove before you concern yourself with the log in Actually's and you might need to check the stones you are throwing since "all fall short of the glory of God" and only "those who are without sin" may "cast the first stone."

Actually, thanks for recognizing your bias and thanks for being willing to listen to other points of view in a respectful manner. Please Ignore Jesussaves as he is part of the vocal minority I mentioned that hurts both sides of the issue.

I would like to know something about how people view atheist views. Do non-atheists view atheists who attempt to convert people away from religion as intolerant? I don't mean those who hate religion for no reason, I mean those like me who believe we are doing it for a good cause. Are people like me intolerant?

I would like to know something about how people view atheist views. Do non-atheists view atheists who attempt to convert people away from religion as intolerant? I don't mean those who hate religion for no reason, I mean those like me who believe we are doing it for a good cause. Are people like me intolerant?

As long as you are willing to respectfully allow me to try and "convert" you from aetheism to a belief in God (not necissarily Christianity, just belief in a supreme, all powerful being), then the answer is no. You explain calmly and rationally your beliefs and why you think there is no God without condemming me for believing otherwise and then listen in the same fashion as I explain calmly and rationally why I disagree and think there is a God without condemning you for believing differently and neither of us judges the other as "evil" or "stupid" or any number of other epithets, then neither you nor I are "intolerant." Sadly, there are people on both sides who have an inability to do this.

As an aside (that might be important though) you note that some aetheists might try to "convert" a "believer" to aetheism out of a belief you are doing it for a "good cause." However, if there is no God and "good" is relative to the situation, how do you define what is "good cause?"

Athiests are evil people at heart. They reject God and teh Bible. That means that they have no morals becaus all morality comes from the Bible and the Ten Commandments. It's becaus of athiests that we have gays trying to marry we have crazy new cults beastiality masturbation and kids turning to crack and islam. Without Jesus in your hearrt you are open to being posesed by by demons. As it is most athiests are posesed

The pope is the antichrist.

LOL! You should so be a comdedian! I find it hard to believe you are serious, I am an atheist and I am sooooo evil. I don't care for anyone but myself, oh, my favourite snack is children. And I'm a muslim and the pope, oh, and i'm on crack, not to metion I'm gay, I was possessed when I was twelve. I remember the day well. A big red devil with horns went 'BOOO!' and jumped into me. Then my head spun around and I threw up green gunge.

Think before you speak, are all atheists murderers? Do we all steal? Are we all evil people? Just because people do not share similar views to you, does not mean we are evil monsters. Even though I am atheist does not mean I have to enforce my believes on others. I suppose I am actually a humanist, I believe in the good of humanity, and I find satisfaction from helping others and living my life which makes me happy and others around me happy. That is what is most important. Do what makes you happy, as long as it doesn't harm anyone else. If being Christain makes you happy, do it. Its not affecting me in any way, I am happy you have found fullfillment. I used to be christian, I was brought up as one but I lost my faith and found it hard to believe a God existed. I was unwilling to give it up, but when I finally accepted it I found a personal sense of satisfaction. I was truly happy about everything in my life, and when someone does something good, like the response to the Tsunami disaster, I think 'God didn't do that, someone gave money on their own free will.' That is what makes me happy. God doesn't exist for me, but he could exist for you.

I am not trying to force my beliefs on anyone else, if being a Christian and doing something for God who exists (for you) makes you happy, do it, and good luck to you I say. The Most important thing in this argument I think is that God doesn't exist for me, but that doesn't mean he can't exist for you.

I would like to know something about how people view atheist views. Do non-atheists view atheists who attempt to convert people away from religion as intolerant? I don't mean those who hate religion for no reason, I mean those like me who believe we are doing it for a good cause. Are people like me intolerant?

The ones who say that they are atheists and leave it at that, I don't mind. Even if they like to debate and keep it civil, that's cool. The ones who say things like, "Religon is stupid and for the weak-minded," are the ones that irritate me.

Please note that as a christian, I do not ascribe to or condone [Jesussaves'] attitude. This is one of the vocal minorities that give me a bad name and cause me to be cast in a bad light under the "guilt by association" theory.....

Actually, thanks for recognizing your bias and thanks for being willing to listen to other points of view in a respectful manner. Please Ignore Jesussaves as he is part of the vocal minority I mentioned that hurts both sides of the issue.

Don't worry, I won't judge you by people like that! Just as there are people who are a little too religious (Jesussaves) there are people who are more than a little too atheist. Should that post by jesussuaves be reported? I guess he was just expressing his opinion - but it was kind of flaming. I don't really care enough to - I don't know the specific rules well enough.

As for being humble/respectful - no problem. This has been a good thread by and large. No need to get angry. Like I said before, flaming doesn't get us anywhere. I'm learning a lot from everyone, and there's nothing better than having an open mind and learning from people with other views. That's the democratic (like democracy the government, not Party) way!

I basically believe that the best overarching philosophy anyone can have is to be open-minded. Being religious doesn't preclude you from having an open mind. I think many atheists forget this. But yeah, anyone who believes TOO strongly in only one thing is dangerous - that's the beginning of fundamentalism. Someone who is SO atheist that they hate religious people is just as bad as someone who is SO religious that they hate atheists. I feel that for someone to feel this way, their life must have been entirely consumed by one thing. That is really really unhealthy. In my experience, the happiest and healthiest elderly people are the ones who keep their minds active and flexible as they age. It's too easy to get set in one way of thinking. There is NO one correct way to think, in my opinion. I don't think it's necessarily "flip-flopping" to diversify and exhibit interests in other philosophies. We can learn something from just about every philosophy. Even Nazism: we can learn how radicalism hurts people and spirals out of control.

In reference to the previous post about attempted conversion - It was nice to see that exchange, where you two agreed that you could try to explain something respectfully, but it would be wrong to try to force or guilt the other person into changing. Those are my beliefs as well, although I doubt I would ever actively try to convert people. I'm not so sure of myself I want to drag everyone onto my side. I think religion or its absence should be 100% personal - if truth is subjective and socially constructed, than we should all be able to have our own views on these subjects. They will be more meaningful that way.

I think organized religion is a little bit dangerous because it's no longer personal - it's imposed. HOWEVER, this is only true if a member of this church believes in everythign it says without question - it seems to me that most religious pick and choose different parts of their religion to believe in, and to me that is completely fantastic. I have ZERO problem with someone who is thinking actively about their faith and decides to accept some parts and reject others. If that's a useful way for them to live, more power to them.

I am not going to argue against most aspects of Christian morality, actually. Who's really going to argue that murder and stealing are okay? In terms of basic stuff like that, I have no problem with people living religious lives. Heck, if everyone lived like Jesus, the world would probably be a far better place. It's only the extension of these morals that bothers me. Yes, I believe in the intrinsic value of all life, even animals. NO, I don't believe that gives Christians a right to impose an extension of this belief in the case of abortion. There's just a line, and to be honest, it seems a majority of Christians don't cross it.

I think with respect, understanding and polite communication, atheists and religious people can live happily side-by-side. I do in my own life.

Thanks so much for keeping this a nice discussion - keep it up!

SO I just got back super late and am really tired, I hope I don't sabotage this thread but...

FINALLY! I sure hope I am not lieing to myself but Robbopolis and Norleans seem to be very similar to me and they acting rational, respectful, and kind. Thank you for coming here!!

Next..

I think this solves the Hitler problem - because even though Hitler was doing what HE thought was right, he was clearly not improving the reality of life as a Jew to put it mildly!

As I understand it, the majority of Germany thought he was doing the right thing too. As well as the Anti-Semitic Russians., no doubt. He was not helping the Jews, but if he hadn't started a big foolish was he would have upped the amount of Aryans (Germans) who were rich.



Next... Jesussaves is pitiful and probably just some lamer mocking christians.


Next...Anyone who tries to convert you isn't intolerant, they are caring for you. I want to "convert" friend A because your soul is eternal, when you die you either go to heaven or hell. I want to be in heaven with him..

I would think an athieist would want to "convert" a christian because he (athieist) sees christianity as foolish and a wastefull for the christian. The athieist desires to see all humans living their lives to their fullest extent instead of putting themselves in foolish and confusing boundaries and laws.


Also, not all religions say you will go to "hell" if you do not convert.


Lastly, I apologize for any offence material I might have in here. I am tired and just shooting out ideas. Forgive my spelling, grammar, and capitlization.

Anyone who tries to convert you isn't intolerant, they are caring for you. I want to "convert" friend A because your soul is eternal, when you die you either go to heaven or hell. I want to be in heaven with him..

I would think an athieist would want to "convert" a christian because he (athieist) sees christianity as foolish and a wastefull for the christian. The athieist desires to see all humans living their lives to their fullest extent instead of putting themselves in foolish and confusing boundaries and laws.


Also, not all religions say you will go to "hell" if you do not convert.


I understand why Christians try to convert friends - but knowing that it wouldn't have a lot of effect on me, I guess I'm just saying save yourself the time. However, I if a Christian patiently (I'm ignorant, really) and politely explained their beliefs without judging me, I would listen for sure.

As an atheist, personally, I would actually NOT try to to convert someone to atheism. I think if the person is happy as a Christian they probably wouldn't benefit from trying to be atheist -it would make their life more difficult if anything. I would explain why I believe what I do, but I wouldn't try to make someone something they're not. For me, choosing a religion isn't a decision where you can make a single right choice and a lot of bad ones - religion or its absence seems totally personal to me and if being Christian is what gets someone through the day, I don't care too much. I would just ask for the same respect back, and I don't think that's too much to ask.

Thanks again for the respectful posts. I would love to get the perspective of someone who practices Islam, Judaism, or an Eastern religion since we haven't heard those voices yet.

I'm sure Hitler got a great feeling order many Jews to die.


edit: please take that in a kind, barely-mocking tone. I only mean it to be slightly sarcastic. A very minor poke in the ribs if you will,,

actually, he probably did. he probably thought he was doing the world a favour.

"No man chooses evil because it is evil; he only mistakes it for happiness, the good he seeks." - Mary Wollstonecraft

I AM NOT trying to justify Hitler in any way whatsoever, I am simply saying he probably got a great feeling because he was trying to make the world better, in his mind.

whoa it's a smiley threesome now :fluffle: :p

and the jealous husband: :mp5:

um, any on-topic posts other people?
I like the way a lot of the main points are in bold. I won't deny it, sometimes really long posts make mind mind switch off, being able to scan through is a major bonus.

However...
I'm going to try and briefly drag it off topic again; kudos to anyone who can extend the quoted "story" using only smilies and minimal words. Because i'm bored, tired, and not a little tipsy. ;)

actually, he probably did. he probably thought he was doing the world a favour.Twisted ideals, but if he really believed in it then i admire his conviction.

I personally wouldn't have been so narrowminded, DEATH to the humans! (joke, joke, please don't attack me!)

I posted this in another thread, but it was slightly off-topic, so I wanted to behave myself and start a fresh thread.

Please read this whole post before posting angry comments! I am not attacking religious people! I am very respectful of everyone, and I am hoping to have an intelligent discussion about this, not a "what a n00b" flame-fest. Thanks.

I just felt a need to give a shoutout to my atheist brothers and sisters. Atheism is really misunderstood by the general public, at least in my experience. Atheism can actually be positive and fulfilling - Because my reason for living and doing good comes from within, it feels more personal and legitimate. Plus, when I do something good, I know I've done it for the sake of being good itself, not because I expect to be rewarded (or expect to avoid punishment). Plus, if I'm wrong and there is a God, I doubt he'll care that I didn't believe in him as long as I've led a good life and helped others, right?

Religious people seem to think that atheism is like a personal attack on their beliefs. I believe that truth is subjective though, so me choosing to believe that there is no god is actually just as arbitrary as them choosing to believe there IS a god. Thus, I don't take a moral high ground and brush off religious people as all being stupid and illogical. Most everyone I know is religious, and we're still friends. I get over it, they get over it, we move on.

If a religious person is doing good because of their religion, I'm not going to be upset because they have the wrong motives for doing good. I'll just be pleased they're doing good. It's only when people start to take the Bible too literally that I begin to have a problem. Even then, I don't hate them - hate hasn't really gotten us too far. I just think they were raised that way and haven't had an opportunity to escape their somewhat narrow-minded world view.

I am tolerant of religion, and all I really ask is that people be tolerant of my lack of religion in return. If you are religious, I don't have a problem with that, honestly. Just don't take it too far. And please don't assume that any atheist you meet has no morals or that (as has been said to me many times) their atheism is just a phase, or a fad, that will soon pass. Atheism is part of larger world view I have, and I've thought it through over and over. This philosophy is personally meaningful and extremely flexible - it gets me through the day.

It seems that people perceive atheists as a group to be gruff, unhappy people who lack meaning and direction in their lives. This is simply not true. We are not waiting for a religious person to shower us with the love of God and lift the clouds that darken our skies. I am actually extremely happy and content with the direction of my life. I love my family, I love my friends, I love my college, and I love myself. Just don't try to make me love God - it won't work!

If you are religious, it is likely that your God is a loving one, and he (or she - and that goes for all "he"/"god" references) probably has no problem with atheists doing good in the world. So please don't roll your eyes when someone tells you they're an athiest! Don't assume that they are a whiny goth kid looking for attention by being "different." There will always be people like that (I dislike them as much as anyone), but I think 95% of Athiests are nowhere near that category.

Thoughts?

Finally. I am exactly the same.

As an aside (that might be important though) you note that some aetheists might try to "convert" a "believer" to aetheism out of a belief you are doing it for a "good cause." However, if there is no God and "good" is relative to the situation, how do you define what is "good cause?"

Any cause that is in the interests of humanity as a species. That's not true for all atheists, but it is some like myself.

I would think an athieist would want to "convert" a christian because he (athieist) sees christianity as foolish and a wastefull for the christian. The athieist desires to see all humans living their lives to their fullest extent instead of putting themselves in foolish and confusing boundaries and laws.


Yeah, this guy's got it.

okay. . . back on topic.

I think Athiesm has been misunderstood and has therefore gotten a bad rap over the centuries. Most people think athiests are depressive who want to run organized religion. Actually, most of the athiests I know do the opposite - they love to learn about religion. I think that many athiests simply want to know what they can about religions without having to follow one.

In studying early christianity,I found it interesting that they were called atheists (negative connotation) by the older pantheistic religions.The RCC and consequently the Protestant church has re-defined atheism as a lack of belief in their GOD. Peace

So a Christian/Budhist/Taoist/Wiccan/Muslim/Jew, etc. cannot do good just for the sake of doing good and without thought of punishment/reward in the afterlife? Is that what you claim? If so, you might need to re-think that idea.

No, that's not wha he claimed. :rolleyes:

Wrong! at least from the Christian/Muslim/Jewish point of view.

So I take it that the Bible is wrong in saying that Jesus said that anyone could enter 'God's Kingdom' as long as they loved each other then? The only people I know of who held that idea were the early recruiters of the churches and possibly Jack Chick. You're not Jack Chick in disguise, are you? :eek: :p

So if it feels good, do it? There are no universal, objective truths or standards? Even cold blooded, pre-meditated murder of a 6 month old child is alright if you have, in your own mind (i.e. "subjectively") determined that "in truth" when he grows up he'll be a serial rapist?

He never mentioned standards, just truth.....and on that subject, I think he means that NOTHIING is true....subjective can also mean illusionary. Nothing that we know of is necessarily true. For example, is it truth that this room exists? As it is based only on our perceptions, our perceptions could be being decieved. He is trying to say that certain religious people cannot take atheism as an attack on their beliefs as we cannot know that anything we know of is true.

I'd agree except for one thing, if you're right, then nothing happens to them in the end. If they're right, you're screwed.

See my comment on 'God's Kingdom'. I see you're bringing up Pascal's Wager....but belief is not something you can change. I do not believe that your real name is "Eddy the Naughty Gnome" and that you live in the Land of the Jumblies, and even if I wanted to believe that, I can't just say "Oh, if I believe that you're Eddy the Naughty Gnome and live in the land of the Jumblies then I get the best chances both ways, so I should better start believing!" because you can't MAKE yourself believe something unless you want to brainwash yourself.

Glad to see you don't think christians are stupid and illogical, sorry to see you think they have a narrow minded world view. If you disagree with their world view, that is fine. To state it is "narrow minded" reveals a bias and bigotry towards christians who believe in the bible - you are evidencing a trait you are claiming you don't have.

But then, people who take anything literally ARE usually narrow-minded - narrow-minded not necessarily being derogatory, but simply showing that they're not so open-minded on the subject as certain others.

Glad to see you are tolerant of narrow minded people. That's nice of you. Though don't you think if you were really tolerant you wouldn't call them "narrow minded?"

See the above. I think that if he was completely thinking about the wording of his post then he wouldn't have made SUCH a sweeping generalisation, but I don't think he's not necessarily intolerant for that.

How far is "too far" and who is in charge of making that determination? Is it an objective standard or a subjective one that varies from person-to-person?

I suppose objective, because in some people's opinions, believing in a god is taking it too far. Something like doing immoral actions, such as killing, in the name of religion is wrong, or making it your 'duty' to go around trying to convert everyone you see is too far in most people's opinions.

I don't assume any of those things about an aetheist and I'm glad you find it fullfilling for yourself. Please continue to do good. And yes, aetheism is an extremely flexible belief system as it gives you the inherent right to do whatever you want without reference to any source as to what is the right thing to do other than yourself. If you believe it is the right thing to do, then it doesn't matter about anything else, you can do it because you have determined within yourself it is ok, even if it contradicts some external "guideline."

That is good - I think he was aiming that comment at those who do, because there are quite a few on this forum. It doesn't quite give you the right because of the legal system, which sets down morals which, in the most part, are withheld by everyone, including atheists, because those are the views held by modern society. But even without religion, these morals would still have emerged, as things that you shouldn't do spurr guilt, often sadness, and in many cases not doing them is a good survival tactic for the whole species - for example, Cannibalism is not as common as one might htink in species, as although it's beneficial for the individual animal, it isn't for the species as a whole. However, you are right, one doesn't have to stick by the emotional guidelines, although most creatures tend not to.

I don't think that about aetheists, sorry.

Yes, but as I said, quite a few do.

Glad to see you are happy. Note however, that religious people can't shower you with the love of God and lift the clouds that darken your sky. Only God can do that and you have to let him. And I would never try to make you love God, no one can "make" anyone love anybody else. I'd no more try to make you love God than I'd try to make you love your worst enemy. However, I reserve the right to respectfully attempt to get you to acknowledge the existence of God - love him, that is your choice.

Then how come religious people aren't always happy? Everyone has 'dark clouds' and 'clear skies'. And you are right in saying that no-one can 'make' anyone love anyone - and itis the same with belief. So why do certain people resort to Pascal's Wager? For if no-one can 'make' us love someone, we cannot 'make' ourselves love someone.

I think you are probably correct in that regard.

So how come you (singular) hold the idea that atheists can't get to heaven? Because if that's true, does that not mean that God has some problem against them?

I don't

Some do.

I judge religions by the movies they have given us. Christianity has given us Neon Genesis Evangelion. Buddhism gave us The Matrix. Taoism gave us Star Wars. I ask you, what classics has atheism ever inspired?

None, as it's not so much a religion but lack of it. But there have been los of movies about scientists. Does that count? :)

I judge religions by the movies they have given us. Christianity has given us Neon Genesis Evangelion. Buddhism gave us The Matrix. Taoism gave us Star Wars. I ask you, what classics has atheism ever inspired?

Good point - you talked me out of atheism!

Just kidding.

There are no good atheist movies. I'm working on a good atheist nonfiction book though.... maybe someday we'll have a movie. In the USA (where 80-90% of people describe themselves as "extremely religious") no one would attend an atheist movie, or at least that's what Hollywood would say as the reason they're not going to make it.

Not to be repetitious, but thanks again for keeping on topic and polite - it makes a huge difference and we get WAY more ideas out there.

I'll make a longer post later, I gotta do some stuff in the real world now...

No, that's not wha he claimed. :rolleyes:



So I take it that the Bible is wrong in saying that Jesus said that anyone could enter 'God's Kingdom' as long as they loved each other then? The only people I know of who held that idea were the early recruiters of the churches and possibly Jack Chick. You're not Jack Chick in disguise, are you? :eek: :p

Jesus said he was the way, the truth, and the life. No one could come to the father except through him. And God's Kingdom (a.k.a. heaven, eternal life) could only be reached by blah blah blah.....Where did you come up with Jesus saying anyone could enter 'God's Kingdom' through love of each other?

Any cause that is in the interests of humanity as a species. That's not true for all atheists, but it is some like myself.

Wouldn't it be good for the species to kill off those with genetic diseases? I have histories of cancer on both sides of my family, so should I be killed off? Or maybe we should start killing people in India and China to help curb overpopulation.

I'm not advicating such policies, but they do seem justified in your definition of a "good cause."

I agree with Robbo...and


bump

I agree with Robbo...and


bump

Wow. I got someone to agree with me. That doesn't happen very often.

[QUOTE=Robbopolis]It's because we don't know everything. If we knew everything, then it would be very easy to see what is right and wrong. That is one of the reasons that I believe in the Christian system of morality. God, being all-knowing, can give us an absolute moral code that we can follow.
/QUOTE]

May I ask how that is an absolute moral code? The moral tenets of Christianity have changed over the years. At one time it was considered 'good' to burn heretics at the stake or enslave the 'heathen races' for their own benefit. I am not trying to say that these things should be held against modern Christians or even Christianity itself, but the morals and doctrines of the Christian churches (even now they do not all agree on every point) have changed throughout the ages - that is just historical fact. I have heard the argument that the actions of whatever time period or that members of whatever denomination are not 'real' Christians (as I have heard some Christians says about Catholics and Mormons), but how does a human tell what or the 'real' Christians are? For that matter the Christian relgion is not the only one that is based on morality handed down from all knowing supreme being. Even if one believes in an absolute, that absolute is chosen - whether through rational deliberation, internal revelation, or some combination thereof (it is not for me to say if the choice/revelation was correct or not, or even if there is such a thing as a correct choice). I would suppose atheist choose their morality in the same way, by finding the system which best allows them to function in an ethical manner in society. For one who doesn't believe in a specific supreme diety as defined by a specific denomination, the choice to follow a one moral code out of the many which have been said to be handed down by a god seems just as random and as arbitrary as you feel atheists are being.

I judge religions by the movies they have given us. Christianity has given us Neon Genesis Evangelion. Buddhism gave us The Matrix. Taoism gave us Star Wars. I ask you, what classics has atheism ever inspired?

go buddhism and taoism!

Christianity has given us Neon Genesis Evangelion. Buddhism gave us The Matrix. Taoism gave us Star Wars.
go buddhism and taoism!
Ahem... go christianity? Neon Genesis Evangelion was top banana, even if it did confuse the hell out of me. :)

May I ask how that is an absolute moral code? The moral tenets of Christianity have changed over the years. At one time it was considered 'good' to burn heretics at the stake or enslave the 'heathen races' for their own benefit. I am not trying to say that these things should be held against modern Christians or even Christianity itself, but the morals and doctrines of the Christian churches (even now they do not all agree on every point) have changed throughout the ages - that is just historical fact. I have heard the argument that the actions of whatever time period or that members of whatever denomination are not 'real' Christians (as I have heard some Christians says about Catholics and Mormons), but how does a human tell what or the 'real' Christians are? For that matter the Christian relgion is not the only one that is based on morality handed down from all knowing supreme being. Even if one believes in an absolute, that absolute is chosen - whether through rational deliberation, internal revelation, or some combination thereof (it is not for me to say if the choice/revelation was correct or not, or even if there is such a thing as a correct choice). I would suppose atheist choose their morality in the same way, by finding the system which best allows them to function in an ethical manner in society. For one who doesn't believe in a specific supreme diety as defined by a specific denomination, the choice to follow a one moral code out of the many which have been said to be handed down by a god seems just as random and as arbitrary as you feel atheists are being.

The moral code is absolute because it doesn't change. How we behave and how we percieve that code does change. Or perception of that code changes based on both revelation and rational thought.

God's law is not arbitrary. Some people argue that way from the Divine Command theory, where things are good because God says they are good. The other common theory is that God tells us things are good because they are good independant of Him. But the problem here is that it makes morality appear to be above God. I take a third path. When God created the world, He built morality into the system. When an engineer tells you to change your oil every 3000 miles, he's not being arbitrary. He designed the car, so he should know it's limits and how to care for it properly, unless you want it to fall apart. By the same token, God tells us what is right and wrong because He understands how the whole of creation works, and we don't. God is not being arbitrary, nor is He beneath morality. It is just a part of how things are, like gravity.