[quote]pookie wrote:
Sloth wrote:
As a believer, I agree! Atheism, including atheism backed by an atheist/secular state, is not a religion. In another thread I brought up brutality and oppression committed in the name of State Atheism against religious folk. These excesses of atheism were explained away as being of a religious nature. An atheistic regime was suddenly a “quasi-religious” regime. All to avoid acknowledging instances of atheistic extremism. And, effectively, somehow placing the blame on the religious, if you think about it. It just dishonest. Atheism, even when holding control of the state, is not a religion.
Thank you.
Although, I have to admit that I don’t get the point of those “believers/non-believers have killed more throughout history” debates.
What is answering that question supposed to settle?
Flat-Eathers, at this point, probably have killed less people than us Round-Earthers, but that doesn’t make the Earth flat.
[/quote]
I agree. I hate those debates as they prove nothing. Both argue from outrage, which establishes nothing philosophically.
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
I don’t think so. More than likely they will blame their backwardness on a lack of adherence to Islamic principles, just like they do now. Sayyid Qutb (read him), blamed the backwardness of Islamdom on the amount of “jahiliyyah” (pre-Islamic darkness) creeping back into their society.[/quote]
We’ve got a chicken-and-egg problem. They have powerful religious figures leading them because it’s easy for religious leaders to usurp power when people are poor, hungry and downtrodden. And they are poor, hungry and downtrodden to begin with because their chosen leaders keep them in the dark ages through religion and reject any modern, secular systems because Muhammad didn’t know about them when he wrote the Koran.
If they had an honest choice about it, I think they would go for the peaceful option. I don’t think the situation they find themselves in is exactly ideal to establish that.
I have a real hard time accepting that parents, any parents, want to see their children suffer and die.
[quote]There’s a difference between “influencing” and intervening directly. China is powerful enough that we can’t push them around. That might be why their 1.3 billion inhabitants don’t all hate our guts and prefer to trade with us rather than try and kill us.
You’re forgetting the Boxer rebellion and all the other crap the West did to China not too long ago. They’re not out waging jihad as a result. Might the lack of divine mandates to wage jihad against the kuffar be part of the Chinese’ ability to move on?[/quote]
Dealing with mostly economic factors, and not religious ones, probably helps.
But that is making my point: That creeping atheism is, in the long run, better for mankind than pervasive religion.
You’re confusing the Saudi Royal family with the inhabitants of Saudi Arabia. The common Saudi Arab has zero influence on you.
Very difficult. Unless you want to outlaw foreign investments in your businesses.
My main point was that we can’t claim that the West hasn’t been involved, often very directly, in their political situations.
[quote]Regardless of why their family members or friends died, I was simply pointing out that educating someone is no guarantee against them hating us.
Right. Neither will prosperity. We must take them at their word: they hate us for our unbelief.[/quote]
Wouldn’t prosperity of the people, not just the leaders, have them mellow out a bit? You think that if they could enjoy a lifestyle similar to ours, they’d give up peace, stability and prosperity to go to war with us just to convert us?
[quote]Dealing with mostly economic factors, and not religious ones, probably helps.
But that is making my point: That creeping atheism is, in the long run, better for mankind than pervasive religion. [/quote]
Atheism is not what’s growing in China. Christianity and Falun Gong are. 10% of the Chinese population is involved in an underground church in China. Atheism is growing in the West.
Ok, when I see pictures of Palestinian babies wearing “martyrdom vests” and Hamas and Fatah headbands, I don’t give them the benefit of the doubt.
Probably not, but common Saudi Arabs are who attacked us on 9/11.
I don’t know. In the case of Turkey, net foreign investment has created a middle class that is decidedly Islamist and is moving Turkey away from the secularism instituted by Ataturk. Ergodan is an Islamist.
[quote]lixy wrote:
I’ll take Asimovism any day of the week.[/quote]
Knock yourself out. Asimov was an atheist. In fact, it’s one of his argument that has me labeling myself an atheist and not just an agnostic.
[quote]You don’t know Muslim societies like I do. Most women wouldn’t trade places with your wife or daughter for all the diamonds in Africa.
Whether it stems from independent thinking or just brainwashing is yet to be established.[/quote]
I’ll grant you better knowledge of muslim societies; but I’ll wonder about what muslim women really know of western woman.
Isn’t being free to pursue the life you want better than to be assigned a particular station in life?
It doesn’t make sense for an omniscient being to “test” anything. He already knows.
We have political rifts plenty. Instead of religion, we debate whether Quebec will soon start thinking about maybe deciding if it wants - or not - to possibly consider becoming eventually somewhat independent - but still good friend and partner - of that not really so bad neighbor, Canada.
[quote]pookie wrote:
pat wrote:
It is a belief system and a religious one at that.
Really? And to think that all those years, no one ever told me.
You wouldn’t have a list of atheist dogmas or commandments that I must follow, by any chance? Do we have religious rites to be followed or can I see my boss and ask for days off during our religious holidays?
You have made a choice and that choice guides every facet of your behavior and thought process. Therefore it is a belief and a guide as to how you are to behave and interact with the world around you.
I think you’re confusing “being an atheist” with “being alive.”
If you look into a crowded hall containing 1000 random people, there should be around 100 atheists. Do you think you can pick them out by simple observation?
Since “every facet of their behavior” will be dictated by their “atheist religion,” you should have no trouble rounding them up, right?
[/quote]
They didn’t teach you this at Flamel’s school for atheistic and agnostic dogma?
You assume that because I say you made a religious decision, that comes with rules, boundaries, and rituals and it does not. There are many theists who subscribe to no religious tradition at all. But you did make a religious choice. When ever you are questioning the existence of God you are dealing with a religious question so the answer, pro or con is a religious one.
Also, once you have made a choice it becomes the back drop for all the decisions you make from there on out. You decide on a value system and a set of core beliefs that everything else you do is based on.
Faith and worship are not the same things. It just means you assume things to be a certain way and based on that you make plans. For instance: you believe the laws of physics will apply tomorrow as they do today. You believe the store will have food in it when you go, etc. Any thing you do based on things you cannot be absolutely certain about is an act of faith. My examples may not be good, but I think you understand what I mean.
No I am not, but you’ll have to take my word on it. I am not up for a dissertation on how I derived where I am at today. However, today’s “Strong Words” pretty much sum me up how I got to where I am today. I doubt everything first. I am the ultimate skeptic. Well maybe not the ultimate, but a skeptic.
The whole the thing was a giant social program. For what’s it’s worth it worked for 73 years. Besides, religion was flat illegal and it survived.
Some of both. My brain is just not working right today. Damn daylight saving time fucks me up every year.
Should I write speeches for Obama? I disagree, but I won’t belabor the point.
I think you paint all theists with the same brush, as kooky sheep who just follow mindlessly with out rhyme or reason. That God is the answer to everything and that we are just passing time until we can jump over to the next life.
You either read very little of what I write, or you’re using your “atheist religion” brush.
[/quote]
No, I actually like discussions with atheists. I find that they tend to think through things more often than the average theist. I find their lack of consideration often irritating as it is just lazy and easily shaken. They lose quickly in arguments and make the whole lot look stupid.
I am glad that you find us useful. Like toilet paper…
pat wrote:
It is a belief system and a religious one at that.
Pookie:
Really? And to think that all those years, no one ever told me.
You wouldn’t have a list of atheist dogmas or commandments that I must follow, by any chance? Do we have religious rites to be followed or can I see my boss and ask for days off during our religious holidays?
As a believer, I agree! Atheism, including atheism backed by an atheist/secular state, is not a religion. In another thread I brought up brutality and oppression committed in the name of State Atheism against religious folk. These excesses of atheism were explained away as being of a religious nature. An atheistic regime was suddenly a “quasi-religious” regime. All to avoid acknowledging instances of atheistic extremism. And, effectively, somehow placing the blame on the religious, if you think about it. It just dishonest. Atheism, even when holding control of the state, is not a religion.
[/quote]
Not a religion, belief or disbelief in God is a religious question therefore so is the answer. There are plenty of theists who also subscribe to no religion, but their choice to believe, is too, a religious decision. For something to be a religion requires more than than having a common answer to a religious question.
[quote]pat wrote:
But you did make a religious choice. When ever you are questioning the existence of God you are dealing with a religious question so the answer, pro or con is a religious one. [/quote]
Please explain how your life has been affected since you’ve discovered than Santa Claus does not, in fact, exist.
In the sense that I feel entirely free to make up my mind about how I want to live my life, you’re right.
But if you’re saying that beliefs I hold are “forced” upon me because I’m an atheist, I’d like to know which ones? I feel free to change my mind about anything, provided I have a good enough reason to do so.
Religions are much less amenable.
Your examples suck, and I’ll tell you why: I can wait a day and verify that the laws of Physics still apply, or I can go to the store and check for myself.
Basically, that “faith” is based on past experience and easily verifiable, should I decide to want to do so.
The religious faith, on the other hand, is unverifiable by any means. It is simply belief in something that was told to you by others who believe it because they were told by others… it has no verifiable foundation.
Doubting is good, but that’s not enough to make a skeptic. You also need a certain threshold of evidence before you accept something and let go of the doubt.
You see you know how to doubt something, you just don’t know how to HOLD the doubt and that’s really the most important part of the doubt, the holding. Anybody can just doubt everything.
Sure it did. Because the giant social program was a colossal failure from the start. The USSR was basically a big third world nation that we had to take seriously because they had nukes. I’m sure religion secretly thrived during those years.
How quickly am I losing this one?
I didn’t say that I personally found believers to be useful to me. I said that I can see how believing can be useful to the believer.
Is it the arguments the atheists lose quickly, or interest in the discussion because you’re arguing non sequiturs every three paragraphs?
[quote]lixy wrote:
rainjack wrote:
Bullshit. It’s your word against his.
Err…no it ain’t. Look it up.[/quote]
Not my job - you’re the one crying cause he kicking the living shit out of you. Prove it.
For someone who supposedly knows so much about the religion of death - you seem to like to sit down and throw a titty fit at the first sign of opposition.
You don’t know what you are talking about, and it is obvious.
pat wrote:
It is a belief system and a religious one at that.
Pookie:
Really? And to think that all those years, no one ever told me.
You wouldn’t have a list of atheist dogmas or commandments that I must follow, by any chance? Do we have religious rites to be followed or can I see my boss and ask for days off during our religious holidays?
As a believer, I agree! Atheism, including atheism backed by an atheist/secular state, is not a religion. In another thread I brought up brutality and oppression committed in the name of State Atheism against religious folk. These excesses of atheism were explained away as being of a religious nature. An atheistic regime was suddenly a “quasi-religious” regime. All to avoid acknowledging instances of atheistic extremism. And, effectively, somehow placing the blame on the religious, if you think about it. It just dishonest. Atheism, even when holding control of the state, is not a religion.
[/quote]
The “quasi-religious” thing comes from trying to force ones beliefs onto others. That’s the CORE of most atheists beliefs. Even the militant Atheists like Dawkins don’t really give a shit about religious folk as long as they acknowledge that what they believe is based in faith.
Stalin was not an “extremist” atheist. He did not believe he was “ridding the world of evil religion.” He just viewed the Church as an authoritative competitor with the state, and thus, had it removed.
To reiterate, as long as you God people acknowledge you’re taking everything on faith and don’t put your shit into my life, I’m ok with you having imaginary friends and believing you’re immortal.
pat wrote:
It is a belief system and a religious one at that.
Pookie:
Really? And to think that all those years, no one ever told me.
You wouldn’t have a list of atheist dogmas or commandments that I must follow, by any chance? Do we have religious rites to be followed or can I see my boss and ask for days off during our religious holidays?
As a believer, I agree! Atheism, including atheism backed by an atheist/secular state, is not a religion. In another thread I brought up brutality and oppression committed in the name of State Atheism against religious folk. These excesses of atheism were explained away as being of a religious nature. An atheistic regime was suddenly a “quasi-religious” regime. All to avoid acknowledging instances of atheistic extremism. And, effectively, somehow placing the blame on the religious, if you think about it. It just dishonest. Atheism, even when holding control of the state, is not a religion.
The “quasi-religious” thing comes from trying to force ones beliefs onto others. That’s the CORE of most atheists beliefs. Even the militant Atheists like Dawkins don’t really give a shit about religious folk as long as they acknowledge that what they believe is based in faith.
Stalin was not an “extremist” atheist. He did not believe he was “ridding the world of evil religion.” He just viewed the Church as an authoritative competitor with the state, and thus, had it removed.
To reiterate, as long as you God people acknowledge you’re taking everything on faith and don’t put your shit into my life, I’m ok with you having imaginary friends and believing you’re immortal. [/quote]
Ok. Hey, I understand. I’m still saddened by the fact that the Church has acted quasi-atheist in the past. Ha!
Please explain how your life has been affected since you’ve discovered than Santa Claus does not, in fact, exist.
[/quote]
Come on! We are not talking about something trivial as fucking Santa Claus and you know it. You have a question, “Does God exist?” The answer you give will have a profound effect on how you interact with the world. Like it or not, it is an important question.
I never intimated that anything you believe is force upon you. You choose your influences.
Sometimes. If you look at it as a set of rules and laws it can be a very restricted life.
Yeah my examples sucked. But religious faith is as verifiable. I could find out in the next few seconds. All I have to do is die. Once that happens we will know whether you or I are right. So it is verifiable. But if I were to off myself. I couldn’t come back and let you know what I found. OR maybe I could, I could haunt you I suppose.
Besides, the decision to be an atheist is an act of faith because it is equally unverifiable. Of course, you to could find out by offing yourself. the fact is in life you just have to trust that certain things you believe are true at least until the point of verification.
Faith doesn’t stand for a belief in things that are not true. It’s basically taking a chance on something being true that you cannot prove beyond the shadow of a doubt. If you really think about it, there isn’t much that is provable beyond a shadow of a doubt.
Hold your roll there sparky. You are drawing some large conclusions about me. Doubt is the essential component of skepticism. Skeptics question everything. Hold the doubt? What the hell are you talking about? Stubbornness? That’s just a sign of stupidity. Being stubborn beyond convincing evidence.
Thrived? I don’t know, but it survived. Besides, we had to take them seriously before they had nukes. The were our allies after all.
LOL! You thought I was being a smart ass? I was actually being complimentary…I find that atheists generally don’t come to that conclusion lightly, as some theists don’t ever bother to think about what they believe and why they believe it.
Beyond that, the stuff we are discussing isn’t win or lose, it’s just discussion, trying to understand each other…At least that’s how I took it. I think you misunderstood what I wrote.
It we really wanted to do battle, it would take some serious time. I could bring a lot to the table and so could you, but it would take pages and pages of various arguments breaking things down to their core elements and use those to make other points. I really don’t have time for that I an bet you don’t either. So we will have to keep it superficial.
I can’t speak for lixy, but all the Muslims I’ve ever known are ‘his kind of Muslim’. …
His kind of Muslim is in favor of the methods used by Islamic terrorists including the bombing of markets. He is also in favor of rape of young girls, murder of homosexuals and a litany of other crimes.
I hope you are saying this in ignorance of lixy’s posting history.
[/quote]
I meant that in the context Schwarzfahrer used it, hence the ‘’. As in, they would not interpret the passage the way most people in this thread are interpreting it. And I think you understood what I meant, but I’m not sure if you meant that as an attack on Muslims or lixy specifically.