Atheism-o-Phobia

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
41

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]AlisaV wrote:
Yep, the world is hard on us.

What do you want? It’s a minority view. It’s historically unnatural. It’s mildly subversive. People are not as open-minded as they like to think they are. Resignation’s my first instinct, but it isn’t right, and I’m trying (in my weenie internet way) to fight that instinct.

Atheism is what happens when you think about the notion of a God, and take it seriously, and realize what it would imply, and worry at it like a terrier until it gives way. And then – the hard part – you actually have to stand by that sense of incredulity, and not imagine your doubt away. And you have to profess it publicly to a world that thinks you’re either monstrous or weak. I’m not ready to do that, but maybe someday I will be. I know someone who has done it in a situation where it’s VERY hard to be openly atheist. There’s courage in that.

The whole Stalin thing is ludicrous, as I hope everyone realizes. (You do know the Czars were Russian Orthodox, don’t you? And Hitler was a Christian.) Atheists are not as a class inclined to become or sympathize with mass murderers. And even if they were – would that have any bearing on whether there is or is not a God? Suppose, for the sake of argument, that we’re all thoroughly horrible people. Would that put a God in heaven? I may be as lousy as can be, but, you know, e puor si muove.[/quote]

Yeah…and Castro is Catholic…I’m sorry but Neither Stalin or Russian Czars or Hitler even hold a resemblance of what is supposed to be a Christian. Just because someone uses something to persuade people (propaganda) doesn’t mean they believe it. [/quote]

Much in the same way that many Communist/atheist leaders use Marx’s writings for propaganda. It’s more than a one way road.

42

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]AlisaV wrote:
Yep, the world is hard on us.

What do you want? It’s a minority view. It’s historically unnatural. It’s mildly subversive. People are not as open-minded as they like to think they are. Resignation’s my first instinct, but it isn’t right, and I’m trying (in my weenie internet way) to fight that instinct.

Atheism is what happens when you think about the notion of a God, and take it seriously, and realize what it would imply, and worry at it like a terrier until it gives way. And then – the hard part – you actually have to stand by that sense of incredulity, and not imagine your doubt away. And you have to profess it publicly to a world that thinks you’re either monstrous or weak. I’m not ready to do that, but maybe someday I will be. I know someone who has done it in a situation where it’s VERY hard to be openly atheist. There’s courage in that.

The whole Stalin thing is ludicrous, as I hope everyone realizes. (You do know the Czars were Russian Orthodox, don’t you? And Hitler was a Christian.) Atheists are not as a class inclined to become or sympathize with mass murderers. And even if they were – would that have any bearing on whether there is or is not a God? Suppose, for the sake of argument, that we’re all thoroughly horrible people. Would that put a God in heaven? I may be as lousy as can be, but, you know, e puor si muove.[/quote]

Yeah…and Castro is Catholic…I’m sorry but Neither Stalin or Russian Czars or Hitler even hold a resemblance of what is supposed to be a Christian. Just because someone uses something to persuade people (propaganda) doesn’t mean they believe it. [/quote]

Much in the same way that many Communist/atheist leaders use Marx’s writings for propaganda. It’s more than a one way road.[/quote]

Yeah except you don’t have to corrupt marxist writings to find it illogical and non-sense. However any of those heinous leaders had to corrupt basic tenets of theology to use it as propaganda.

43

I wouldn’t say that Marxism didn’t make sense… it just wasn’t something that’s suppose to come about through a totalitarian state and not something that’s ever come to fruition (personally, I doubt it ever will… but that’s another thread). And again… Marx’s atheism is just one brand, an outdated one at that. I hate to make it look like I’ve given you a moving target, but I really feel it’s an important point to make. Besides, most atheists aren’t even Marxist.

Atheism is a really broad term and includes more than one ‘belief system’.

Also, many would say that that certain religions are made of non-sense. Like there are certain items in the bible that are gold to me, but others that are just silly that don’t make sense in the modern world. I could extend the idea to other religions like Hinduism or Taoism.

44

Chris, we obviously got nowhere with the semantics stuff. No matter, it’s not that important. But in the interest of completeness, yes, I know what Gnosticism with a capital “G” is. It is a type of religion. Different from gnosticism with a small “g.” The term gnostic with a small “g” can be paired with the term atheist and it will not be a contradiction. It’s all explained here: http://freethinker.co.uk/2009/09/25/8419/

As for whether religion will die out, it’s interesting that people today no longer believe in Zeus or Thor. Those religions died. Why?

I wonder what Augustine and Aquinas would say if they were alive today.

I have tried to prove the existence of God through reason. The best I could get was Deism. It is possible that there exists a deistic being that started the universe. But that’s it. This being in no way intervenes in our lives. There is no way that a benevolent being who supposedly loves us would allow little kids to suffer and die.

45

569×582 77.2 KB

hmm

46

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Oh thanks, I guess I’ll disregard the 1500-1700 years of record keeping and historians, along with the philosophers, theologians, priests, laity, and I’ll just believe your belief that you probably picked up in some atheist “historian” book on the Bible that it was written in fragments, sometimes hundreds of years apart, based on hearsay of illiterate people. Yeah I’m sure Jesus would say the words fucked up too. What crassness. Maybe you should actually pick up a history book, instead of reading fiction on shit that you don’t know about.
[/quote]

Listen, I am not going to get drawn into a religious argument, simply because it pains me to do so…like hearing nails on a chalkboard. Will you at least acknowledge that the bible is a compendium of different texts, written over a significant time frame, in an era when record keeping might not have been the best, and that translation between languages can obscure the meaning of something, even under the best circumstances? Is this reasonable to you?

47

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]AlisaV wrote:
Yep, the world is hard on us.

What do you want? It’s a minority view. It’s historically unnatural. It’s mildly subversive. People are not as open-minded as they like to think they are. Resignation’s my first instinct, but it isn’t right, and I’m trying (in my weenie internet way) to fight that instinct.

Atheism is what happens when you think about the notion of a God, and take it seriously, and realize what it would imply, and worry at it like a terrier until it gives way. And then – the hard part – you actually have to stand by that sense of incredulity, and not imagine your doubt away. And you have to profess it publicly to a world that thinks you’re either monstrous or weak. I’m not ready to do that, but maybe someday I will be. I know someone who has done it in a situation where it’s VERY hard to be openly atheist. There’s courage in that.

The whole Stalin thing is ludicrous, as I hope everyone realizes. (You do know the Czars were Russian Orthodox, don’t you? And Hitler was a Christian.) Atheists are not as a class inclined to become or sympathize with mass murderers. And even if they were – would that have any bearing on whether there is or is not a God? Suppose, for the sake of argument, that we’re all thoroughly horrible people. Would that put a God in heaven? I may be as lousy as can be, but, you know, e puor si muove.[/quote]

Yeah…and Castro is Catholic…I’m sorry but Neither Stalin or Russian Czars or Hitler even hold a resemblance of what is supposed to be a Christian. Just because someone uses something to persuade people (propaganda) doesn’t mean they believe it. [/quote]

Does this also apply to priests, Popes, and the Catholic church throughout history?

48

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

Why is there irony in an atheist having a core belief?[/quote]

Because in an atheist’s world, all beliefs are negotiable, and none are “right” or “wrong”. That’s ironical.

Atheists believe the only existence is worldly, and when politicians get interested in creating paradise on Earth and liberating humans from all these unfair terrestrial restraints, millions of people get slaughtered. See Communism, Socialism and the 20th Century.

And that is precisely the problem - atheists don’t have a good sense of “restraint” as to what constitutes “continued betterment of our species…”, and since all morality is negotiable, there is little reason to want their political philosophy put into action.

Doesn’t matter - since atheist morality is all relative, a “nihilist” perspective is just as good as a “Golden Rule” perspective - and an atheist doesn’t have a worthwhile argument that one is right and one is wrong.

No thanks. I don’t want any political/philosophical intellectual architecture affirming moral relativism any where near the levers of power.

49

[quote]PimpBot5000 wrote:

Listen, I am not going to get drawn into a religious argument, simply because it pains me to do so…like hearing nails on a chalkboard. Will you at least acknowledge that the bible is a compendium of different texts, written over a significant time frame, in an era when record keeping might not have been the best, and that translation between languages can obscure the meaning of something, even under the best circumstances? Is this reasonable to you?
[/quote]

You don’t want to get drawn into a religious argument - got it. You just want to be able to freely attack the basis for Christianity without having to deal with any resistance.

Don’t take offense but your argument has no basis in fact. It’s the typical atheist argument for claiming that there is no God. I’ve heard it many times and each time I have successfully refuted it with the facts.

Do a little research you’ll find as I did that the current Christian Bible is very accurate. In fact more accurate than other ancient documents such as the writings of Plato, Aristotle, Tactius and others. In fact, it has been found to be 99.5% accurate relative to the original text.

Read the following it has some interesting information on it and you should avail yourself to all the facts before you fully make up your mind.

50

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

Why does it exists?

Why do many people view atheists as morally inferior?[/quote]

Well, you don’t have it quite right - thinking atheists are “morally inferior” isn’t a phobia of atheists - dislike or disdain or lack of respect is not the equivalent of fear.

If you spend extended time with an atheist really drilling down into their core belief (irony alert), you learn that, usually, this person is not someone you would want shaping ideas or leading public policy.

At the end of it, atheists’ worldview is that Man is the End (the only End) unto himself, and that he serves nothing higher than himself (and his terrestrial desires and wants and appetites) - wisdom has taught that you allow this concept to be legitimately represented in politics at your civilization’s peril.[/quote]

Whether atheists are good or bad people, and whether atheism is good or bad for society, is an interesting question and I’m not sure you’re wrong. I think religion does a lot of bad things for politics (encourages tribalism, hierarchy, guilt, belligerence, credulity.) But there are a lot of people who are motivated by faith to hold themselves to a higher moral standard than the rest of us – so much so, that sometimes I wonder if you’re right, and that our society would lose something if everyone were an atheist.

But here’s the thing. The way you’re setting up the issue shows that you’re not really interested in truth vs. falsehood. You’re talking about whether atheists are bad people – not whether they’re correct.

That’s not necessarily a bad thing. You remind me of my grandmother, who once told my mom “I don’t care what religion you raise your kids, but make sure they believe something.” Granny was a good person, and her religion motivated her to go above and beyond in helping others, and she just wanted to share her values. But if you actually look at that sentence – and observe that different religions conflict theologically – you see that Granny didn’t really care about whether the tenets of religion were factually true. She just wanted her grandkids to be raised with an ethical framework. It’s a perfectly good way to see the world, but it’s not about truth.

For better or for worse, I do care about what’s factually true and what isn’t. I can’t “believe” something that isn’t believable, I can’t “believe” something if the evidence goes the other way, even if it would be better for me if I believed it. Even if it’s a belief that would benefit society. It makes me a little sick even to think of trying to fool myself. I’m not resigned enough yet, I guess, to do what Pascal did and try to induce belief, just because it gives me membership in a community and a set of principles and some comforting thoughts. Maybe it’s just that I’m young enough to be a little dumb and spunky, but I actually don’t want to do things that my reason rejects.

There are other people who are built like me. I’d ask you to give them a chance. Some of them are really all right, and not amoral and hedonistic. And there are times when a person who cares about the truth is really handy to have around.

51

atheism makes real religious people (loons, these are a bit rare), the semi-religious (most guys who argue loudly) and the half hearted (most “christians”) uneasy, because they say the emperor is naked before a butt naked, elephantine emperor.

chris’ drivel here is especially repulsive

[quote]
…dogmas of atheism…
…when you guys produce people like Stalin and basically every Russian Czar that existed…
…Atheist leaders, Russian Czars, Castro, Hitler,…[/quote]

so tired of this shit. So I even won’t bother “arguing” here.
It speaks a lot about our societies where the dumbest and loudest can get away with this stuff (black is white and 3=5).

[quote]
“I think Atheism is ridiculous you could see normal people, being atheist even, have a reason to be moral. Cooperation needs to have some kind of moral level, even one of the most known Atheists, Ayn Rand held Natural Law (which she learned from St. Augustine & St. Aquinas) as to be the Proper form of morals. However most religions hold Natural Law as a natural pillar to their religion so it can be conveyed that they would likely hold some kind of high morals. However Atheism does not have a moral pillar, it is just the direct schism against God”[/quote]
This is important:
the moral highground cannot come from above, because he does not speak for himself. At best, if there was an invisible, sadist, male magician like the popular “gawd”, his words of wisdom get distorted all the time.
Evolution offers far, far better explanations why we act like we act, even if it’s still more awesome claiming “it wasn’t cheating” but “rape by incubi” .
But even that won’t cut it if you don’t embrace it freely:
At a certain points, you have to make a conscious decision which “moral code” you are following. This is arbitrary, but the beauty is that you can communicate with your fellow men and work on those ideas. You cannot do this with gods, who only speak though a caste of priests , who are, in 99% of all cases, for above the common folks (I wonder why?)
Civilizations did this all the time, but because unenlighment was pending, they always had to justify it by mingling in a divine construct ; be it as a commandment or a case of descendency, as in: I am the son of x and am therefore above vou.

Today, we have to break the last shackles of this ignorance , more then ever. We have to make our own decisions (as we already did all the time) and stand by them. And we need to ask more questions and kill all the holy cows.

There may be a god, gods or something like that but we surely won’t comprehend this with our tiny brains the same way ants don’t understand human concepts.
Saying otherwise is minblowinlgy stupid and downright arrogant.

52

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Oh thanks, I guess I’ll disregard the 1500-1700 years of record keeping and historians, along with the philosophers, theologians, priests, laity, and I’ll just believe your belief that you probably picked up in some atheist “historian” book on the Bible that it was written in fragments, sometimes hundreds of years apart, based on hearsay of illiterate people. Yeah I’m sure Jesus would say the words fucked up too. What crassness. Maybe you should actually pick up a history book, instead of reading fiction on shit that you don’t know about.[/quote]

there was no jesus and the anecdotes of him are all far older then him. How do you explain that?
The wonders and various gods (which even the bible mentions), which were abundant back then and aren’t now, the stolen myths and the convergent myths around the world. the “absence” of god in hundreds of thousands of years in mankind’s history, the oral tradition, which is, again, pretty similar across the world, and which doesn’t give a shit about details and words. etc etc

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
You obviously have never picked up a Bible because even though part of the fundamentals are in the 10 commandments, the whole ten commandments are not the basic fundamentals. And there is more to being a Christian than just the fundamentals. Sorry, as a Christian you don’t get to pick a choose what you follow, in the Catholic Church we have a name for those people. Cafeteria Catholics. Mormons have a name for the same thing in their church, Jack Mormons. Secular Jews in Judaism, and I’m sure Muslims the same thing. As I say, if you’re not going to follow the damn instructions fuck it. Might as well go through the thing blind.
[/quote]
perhaps you’ll tell us straight why you won’t follow some EXPLICIT words and follow others , which are rather vague, then? Why don’t you just drop the old testament completely if it’s just “history”. Why do you refuse to look at the rest of the bible from a historic point of view? This is the archetype of today’s mildly religious, semi-educated, cherrypicking, cafeteria religiousness,

53

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

Why is there irony in an atheist having a core belief?[/quote]

Because in an atheist’s world, all beliefs are negotiable, and none are “right” or “wrong”. That’s ironical.

Atheists believe the only existence is worldly, and when politicians get interested in creating paradise on Earth and liberating humans from all these unfair terrestrial restraints, millions of people get slaughtered. See Communism, Socialism and the 20th Century.

And that is precisely the problem - atheists don’t have a good sense of “restraint” as to what constitutes “continued betterment of our species…”, and since all morality is negotiable, there is little reason to want their political philosophy put into action.

Doesn’t matter - since atheist morality is all relative, a “nihilist” perspective is just as good as a “Golden Rule” perspective - and an atheist doesn’t have a worthwhile argument that one is right and one is wrong.

No thanks. I don’t want any political/philosophical intellectual architecture affirming moral relativism any where near the levers of power.[/quote]

The only thing that the moral relativism argument proves is that humans needed to invent religions and some type of God as a means to help enforce a moral code. It’s the whole “don’t do bad things because God is watching and he will punish you” idea meant to scare people into acting morally even if they think they won’t be caught. While this explains why religion was invented, it in no way proves the existence of a God. And I would argue that it doesn’t always work. The Catholic priest pedophile cases come to mind. Yes, I’m bringing that up, because it’s important. Here we have a group of men who promised to serve God. With this comes an implied promise that they would act along the lines of the highest moral standards. And yet, they somehow justified their acts of sexual molesting children. Many told the kids that God would punish them if they told anyone what had happened. What made matters worse was the subsequent cover up by church officials. This was nothing short of a criminal conspiracy.

My point is this: spare me the nonsense of atheists have no morals. Experience and history make it clear that belief in a God in no way guarantees moral actions. Not even close.

54

[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

Why is there irony in an atheist having a core belief?[/quote]

Because in an atheist’s world, all beliefs are negotiable, and none are “right” or “wrong”. That’s ironical.

Atheists believe the only existence is worldly, and when politicians get interested in creating paradise on Earth and liberating humans from all these unfair terrestrial restraints, millions of people get slaughtered. See Communism, Socialism and the 20th Century.

And that is precisely the problem - atheists don’t have a good sense of “restraint” as to what constitutes “continued betterment of our species…”, and since all morality is negotiable, there is little reason to want their political philosophy put into action.

Doesn’t matter - since atheist morality is all relative, a “nihilist” perspective is just as good as a “Golden Rule” perspective - and an atheist doesn’t have a worthwhile argument that one is right and one is wrong.

No thanks. I don’t want any political/philosophical intellectual architecture affirming moral relativism any where near the levers of power.[/quote]

The only thing that the moral relativism argument proves is that humans needed to invent religions and some type of God as a means to help enforce a moral code. It’s the whole “don’t do bad things because God is watching and he will punish you” idea meant to scare people into acting morally even if they think they won’t be caught. While this explains why religion was invented, it in no way proves the existence of a God. And I would argue that it doesn’t always work. The Catholic priest pedophile cases come to mind. Yes, I’m bringing that up, because it’s important. Here we have a group of men who promised to serve God. With this comes an implied promise that they would act along the lines of the highest moral standards. And yet, they somehow justified their acts of sexual molesting children. Many told the kids that God would punish them if they told anyone what had happened. What made matters worse was the subsequent cover up by church officials. This was nothing short of a criminal conspiracy.

My point is this: spare me the nonsense of atheists have no morals. Experience and history make it clear that belief in a God in no way guarantees moral actions. Not even close.[/quote]

And, at least as important, not believing in God does not automatically leads to immoral acts.

t does not work in either direction.

55

[quote]ZEB wrote:

You don’t want to get drawn into a religious argument - got it. You just want to be able to freely attack the basis for Christianity without having to deal with any resistance.

[/quote]

People are free to attack my beliefs all they want. I’m just saying that there are already 100+ threads of religious debate on this site, the majority of which haven’t led anywhere (although I did enjoy “misconceptions of Christianity”), which is why I’d prefer not to get into a religious argument.

And thank you for the link. I will read it.

56

[quote]orion wrote:

And, at least as important, not believing in God does not automatically leads to immoral acts.

t does not work in either direction.
[/quote]

There is some evidence to suggest that evolution has hard-wired certain social behaviors, aka morality, into our brains. This is seen in other animals that form herds, packs, or are otherwise social. For instance, it is not the norm to see animals of the same species kill one another unless they are solitary, non-social animals. There are also several species that form lifelong bonds with their mates. Such behaviors are not unique to humans.

57

[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
BTW Chris - Regarding your argument that atheism someone lead to Hitler, Stalin, and all that. As a student of philosophy, I’m sure you know the fallacy of post hoc ergo propter hoc. In statistics, this is known by the maxim that correlation does not equal causation. Even if Hitler, et al., were atheists, you cannot say that this is what caused their murderous nature.

Hitler was a sociopath. He probably viewed himself as somewhat of a deified being and he created a whole religion around himself, with the SS as the priests, and the Jews and other people he considered undesirable as Satan. I would argue that he was not a true atheist because most atheists don’t care at all for organized religion.

From my own experience, I can tell you that what started me on the road to disbelief was the realization that organized religion was just another bullshit bureaucracy created by humans. I may one day decide that God religion exists, but I’ll never go back to an organized religion. They always seem to need money.[/quote]

Even the SS was largely and openly christian. The whole country was.
Hitler was depicted as a christian knight in nazi art sometimes, never, ever as a pagan warlord. And his rambling often mentioned the fight against ungodly bolshevism.
Even the vatican congratulated him most amiably every year on his birthday (which pagan gets this kind of attention?).
Yes, given the choice, he would have substituted the “jewish god” with a more “nordic” (or I should say, neo-classical, wagnerian fantasy) pantheon or belief, but that doesn’t tell us much because every big, violent ruler bent religion according to his needs - even today (Saddam, Bush).

Mao, Stalin etc (I feel filthy even arguing that shitpile of an argument) all had in common that they steered atop a vehicle of ideology which quickly spun violently out of control because of the insane momentum.
That’s why oceans of blood always follow. (WW2, the persecution of heretics, china’s cultural revolution, thirty years’ war etc )
In an age of pure reason, clergy and guys like Hitler, who are siblings, have no chance.
That’s what we have to aim for.

58

[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
There is some evidence to suggest that evolution has hard-wired certain social behaviors, aka morality, into our brains. This is seen in other animals that form herds, packs, or are otherwise social. For instance, it is not the norm to see animals of the same species kill one another unless they are solitary, non-social animals. There are also several species that form lifelong bonds with their mates. Such behaviors are not unique to humans.[/quote]

This is like saying: There is some evidence that the moon revolves around the sun.

That IS morality. We can argue from a spiritistic/religous point of view if that is the divine way of expression, but in the first instance, it comes down to hard-wired brain chemistry.

Bash someone’s brain just the right way, and he won’t feel remorse for killing his child.

Again: that doesn’t mean morality cannot be expanded on that. But it’s a (real) starting point.
Contrary to religion, where for catholics, for instance, it’s even hard to vote against slavery or universal human rights. Their god made a point that he considers it pretty relative. Just ask the Midianites.
Oh right, you can’t…

59

[quote]AlisaV wrote:

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

Why does it exists?

Why do many people view atheists as morally inferior?[/quote]

Well, you don’t have it quite right - thinking atheists are “morally inferior” isn’t a phobia of atheists - dislike or disdain or lack of respect is not the equivalent of fear.

If you spend extended time with an atheist really drilling down into their core belief (irony alert), you learn that, usually, this person is not someone you would want shaping ideas or leading public policy.

At the end of it, atheists’ worldview is that Man is the End (the only End) unto himself, and that he serves nothing higher than himself (and his terrestrial desires and wants and appetites) - wisdom has taught that you allow this concept to be legitimately represented in politics at your civilization’s peril.[/quote]

Whether atheists are good or bad people, and whether atheism is good or bad for society, is an interesting question and I’m not sure you’re wrong. I think religion does a lot of bad things for politics (encourages tribalism, hierarchy, guilt, belligerence, credulity.) But there are a lot of people who are motivated by faith to hold themselves to a higher moral standard than the rest of us – so much so, that sometimes I wonder if you’re right, and that our society would lose something if everyone were an atheist.

But here’s the thing. The way you’re setting up the issue shows that you’re not really interested in truth vs. falsehood. You’re talking about whether atheists are bad people – not whether they’re correct.

That’s not necessarily a bad thing. You remind me of my grandmother, who once told my mom “I don’t care what religion you raise your kids, but make sure they believe something.” Granny was a good person, and her religion motivated her to go above and beyond in helping others, and she just wanted to share her values. But if you actually look at that sentence – and observe that different religions conflict theologically – you see that Granny didn’t really care about whether the tenets of religion were factually true. She just wanted her grandkids to be raised with an ethical framework. It’s a perfectly good way to see the world, but it’s not about truth.

For better or for worse, I do care about what’s factually true and what isn’t. I can’t “believe” something that isn’t believable, I can’t “believe” something if the evidence goes the other way, even if it would be better for me if I believed it. Even if it’s a belief that would benefit society. It makes me a little sick even to think of trying to fool myself. I’m not resigned enough yet, I guess, to do what Pascal did and try to induce belief, just because it gives me membership in a community and a set of principles and some comforting thoughts. Maybe it’s just that I’m young enough to be a little dumb and spunky, but I actually don’t want to do things that my reason rejects.

There are other people who are built like me. I’d ask you to give them a chance. Some of them are really all right, and not amoral and hedonistic. And there are times when a person who cares about the truth is really handy to have around.[/quote]

This post just oozes logic and intelligence. Especially this part:

You remind me of my grandmother, who once told my mom “I don’t care what religion you raise your kids, but make sure they believe something.” Granny was a good person, and her religion motivated her to go above and beyond in helping others, and she just wanted to share her values. But if you actually look at that sentence – and observe that different religions conflict theologically – you see that Granny didn’t really care about whether the tenets of religion were factually true. She just wanted her grandkids to be raised with an ethical framework. It’s a perfectly good way to see the world, but it’s not about truth.

Reminds me of a quote from Ricky Gervais about how his mother used Jesus as a sort of unpaid babysitter. She told him that if he did something bad, Jesus would see it and dispense punishment accordingly.

It’s a bit sad that some people need to fear the wrath of a Sky Wizard in order to act morally. This indicates a very low level of emotional development, IMO. But I agree that some people would act immorally if not for fear of punishment from the Sky Wizard. Hell, some people act immorally despite a belief in the Sky Wizard. Example: Catholic pedophile priests (again).

60

Okay, I just felt the need to comment on Hitler. Hitler had his own belief structure that he made up. There were bits and pieces of Christianity, the occult, German myth, and so on. However, what took place in Germany had little to nothing to do with any real heart felt spiritual beliefs. Hitler used spiritual beliefs as a method of control and motivation for the masses, nothing more.