Thread: Athiest vs religion? sorta

Yep, I strongly believe there's no floating man in the sky, how militant of me.

There are some atheists out there . . .

Note that this was not directed at all atheists. I'm an agnostic atheist myself. I've just observed this trend of militant atheism around. There are some hardcore atheists who seek to convert others to their point of view with the same zeal as some Christians. It's a minority, as I believe it to be in Christianity, that does this, but it's the vocal minority.

EDIT: Just realised I didn't even put "some" in my original post, but the point still holds true: I did assert in there that was not referring to all atheists.

Kiza, I"d like to respond to your point. I've been guilty at times of posting atheist rants. But I only do it in response to religious rants posted by others. I used to feel like "to each their own" and "let sleeping dogs lie" etc, and not feel any need to respond when people post religious ideas.

But after a while it became clear to me... if we (atheists) just sit back and turn the other cheek and let religious posts go up all over the place without posting an alternative viewpoint, then we're letting religious views dominate. Young people who haven't formed a viewpoint yet could see all these religious posts without any balancing alternatives, and just simply accept the populist religious viewpoint. It's not that I think that would be the worst thing that could happen... I have nothing against religion or religious people unless they're extremists or fundies... I just think it's important for voices to be heard on both sides.

Originally Posted by Darkmatters

Kiza, I"d like to respond to your point. I've been guilty at times of posting atheist rants. But I only do it in response to religious rants posted by others. I used to feel like "to each their own" and "let sleeping dogs lie" etc, and not feel any need to respond when people post religious ideas.

But after a while it became clear to me... if we (atheists) just sit back and turn the other cheek and let religious posts go up all over the place without posting an alternative viewpoint, then we're letting religious views dominate. Young people who haven't formed a viewpoint yet could see all these religious posts without any balancing alternatives, and just simply accept the populist religious viewpoint. It's not that I think that would be the worst thing that could happen... I have nothing against religion or religious people unless they're extremists or fundies... I just think it's important for voices to be heard on both sides.

Trust me, there is no danger of kids in public schools becoming religious, except maybe in elementary school. It's looked down upon to believe in God, and all the teachers and students scoff at anyone who does.. at least where I am.. might be different over there in the US.

But even so, what IS the danger? People find a purpose to their life and start living by a moral code, oh no! It's not like they're going to go on a crusade man.

Originally Posted by Tarsier

Trust me, there is no danger of kids in public schools becoming religious, except maybe in elementary school. It's looked down upon to believe in God, and all the teachers and students scoff at anyone who does.. at least where I am.. might be different over there in the US.

But even so, what IS the danger? People find a purpose to their life and start living by a moral code, oh no! It's not like they're going to go on a crusade man.

And that is why I believe religion is a positive thing AT THIS TIME PERIOD.

It keeps people moral and does other good, though I don't believe in it.

Originally Posted by Tarsier

Trust me, there is no danger of kids in public schools becoming religious, except maybe in elementary school. It's looked down upon to believe in God, and all the teachers and students scoff at anyone who does.. at least where I am.. might be different over there in the US.

But even so, what IS the danger? People find a purpose to their life and start living by a moral code, oh no! It's not like they're going to go on a crusade man.

Start living by a moral code? So then you assume that atheists are immoral people. Purpose? I asked in another thread (or maybe it was thins one?)... what is this purpose that only christians apparently have? I make my own purpose in life. I give my life meaning through art and animation... to entertain people and grow as an artist and human being in the process. I ask once again, what is the purpose christians are always speaking of?

Message to all people criticizing atheists: If you saw a child, say, spelling a word wrong, would you correct it? Probably yes. That's what the atheist mindset is. Correct the mistake so many people still make. I can't say for everyone, but most atheists I know find religion extremely detrimental. I won't even get started on the list of bad things promoted by religion - let's save that for another thread.

Also, "atheism" means "not theist", which means lacking the belief in a god. It's become a synonym to irreligious.

Also, yes, we do need a name for it. We need a name because it's a very distinctive and cohesive group. Just like there are colors of hair and baldness, there are religions and atheism.

Saying atheism is a religion is like saying bald is a hair color.

Before you criticize, you should take some time to learn the opposing perspective better. Aka, what atheists think of religion.

Finally, just so you know, atheists tend to gang up, and tend to be inflammatory towards believers, because they are a minority. Just like gays or jews or blacks. You with me?

kro is right...but I do have one question for you, when you say religion do you really just mean the judeo-christian islamic tradition as far as detrimental? because I see very little detrimental coming out of say buddism or hinduism.

Originally Posted by Kromoh

Message to all people criticizing atheists: If you saw a child, say, spelling a word wrong, would you correct it? Probably yes. That's what the atheist mindset is. Correct the mistake so many people still make. I can say for everyone, but most atheists I know find religion extremely detrimental. I won't even get started on the list of bad things promoted by religion - let's save that for another thread.

That's fine, you're absolutely free to do that, but any atheist who does do that cannot criticise a Christian for trying to convert people. Well, they could, but they'd be being a hypocrite.

Also, "atheism" means "not theist", which means lacking the belief in a god. It's become a synonym to irreligious.

Also, yes, we do need a name for it. We need a name because it's a very distinctive and cohesive group. Just like there are colors of hair and baldness, there are religions and atheism.

Saying atheism is a religion is like saying bald is a hair color.

I agree with all of this. Atheism by definition cannot be a religion. I'd just like it recognised that those atheists who seek to convert others are just as bad as any Christian (or for that matter, any member of any religion) who tries to convert others.

Before you criticize, you should take some time to learn the opposing perspective better. Aka, what atheists think of religion.

Do you do this yourself?

Finally, just so you know, atheists tend to gang up, and tend to be inflammatory towards believers, because they are a minority. Just like gays or jews or blacks. You with me?

Again, you are completely free to be inflammatory and gang up, but you can't later criticise Christians for those same tactics without being a hypocrite. Wouldn't it be better to not be inflammatory or gang up in the first place so you actually hold some basis to criticise others on? Call me idealistic, but would it not be better if we were all not inflammatory and push our beliefs on to others? If behaviour like that wasn't around, it'd sure solve a lot of problems. I can't see any rational reason why any one person would support being inflammatory or ganging up, so if we can agree that the world would be a better place without such behaviour, why not start with yourself? There's no way you can make others be like that, but you hold complete control over your own actions and you are completely capable of not being inflammatory; of not ganging up; of being tolerant of other's beliefs. It is very, very possible to debate without pushing your belief's on others, or being inflammatory.

I realise this may be futile to say this in the most inflammatory, awe-inspiringly insane part of this forum . . . but can't we all just along?

The dogs are not all sleeping. Some of them are barking very loudly and biting and voting against equal rights and blowing things up and chewing up the curtains.

Atheists attack religion on principle. Blind faith is a silly thing and it should be made aware the dangers of it. Also, religious extremism is the bloodiest historically...

Originally Posted by Darkmatters

Kiza, I"d like to respond to your point. I've been guilty at times of posting atheist rants. But I only do it in response to religious rants posted by others. I used to feel like "to each their own" and "let sleeping dogs lie" etc, and not feel any need to respond when people post religious ideas.

But after a while it became clear to me... if we (atheists) just sit back and turn the other cheek and let religious posts go up all over the place without posting an alternative viewpoint, then we're letting religious views dominate. Young people who haven't formed a viewpoint yet could see all these religious posts without any balancing alternatives, and just simply accept the populist religious viewpoint. It's not that I think that would be the worst thing that could happen... I have nothing against religion or religious people unless they're extremists or fundies... I just think it's important for voices to be heard on both sides.

I personally have no problem with that. Religious debate is fine by me, even if I do find it incredibly futile. I only object to those militants that actively seek to destroy Christian belief in God: they are the same as any other extremist. A man who attempts ardently to convert someone else to his way of thinking is just as bad as any others that do so, whether he is Christian or atheist or Buddhist or Hindu.

A majority of the 'militant atheist rants' you see are people who care about scientific truth explaining to a believer why their understanding of evolution/the big bang/any other scientific theory you care to point to is either incomplete or flat out wrong, which is why they are drawing their false conclusion from it.

It's just rather unfortunate that a lot of theists 'think' they understand what science can tell us about the big truths such as human and/or cosmological origins because they are projecting onto those theories the same doubts they ought to have about their own framework of the world.

Also the idea of a constantly updating world view is quite scary to some people, who prefer their lives to be static and unchanging. "First it was Newtons Laws then it was Einstein with Relativity and now they're trying to find a QUANTUM gravity?! Science doesn't know what it's on about, it keeps changing the story, making it up as they go along!"

Originally Posted by Alextanium

A majority of the 'militant atheist rants' you see are people who care about scientific truth explaining to a believer why their understanding of evolution/the big bang/any other scientific theory you care to point to is either incomplete or flat out wrong, which is why they are drawing their false conclusion from it.

Why do you assume that? A lot of the militant atheist rants I see are militant atheists actively seeking to destroy religious belief. Believe it or not, there are some religious believers out there who both believe in God and the scientific method. What's the difference between a non-believer trying to destroy a Christian belief in God, and a believer aggressively trying to convert an atheist into his way of thinking?

Originally Posted by Kiza

Believe it or not, there are some religious believers out there who both believe in God and the scientific method.

Wow... you win the prize for saying Believe the most times in one sentence!!

Speaking only for myself, I have no problem whatsoever with the kind of christians (or any religion) that you mentioned. If they do accept the scientific method, that means they apply critical thinking to their beliefs, and that means they can't be fundamentalists. In other words, they must believe that god works through what science calls natural laws... evolution, big bang etc. It also means they take the stories in the bible as METAPHOR. I truly believe that, when taken as metaphor, the bible is filled with great wisdom and some of the most profound of human thought. Mixed in with some pretty contradictory and messed-up stories. Written by PEOPLE... in fact by primitive people with little understanding about the world around them. As long as these facts are accepted for what they are, then I think the bible and religious meditation/ contemplation are excellent things.

I've been guilty of tearing apart the most glaringly obvious flaws of the bible, which is really just too easy and proves nothing, except that it might get through to some poor misguided soul who has been taught that every word of the bible must be taken absolutely literally. I consider THAT a dangerous situation... because a person who's capable of literally believing every word of the bible is a person who is ignorant and obedient to a fault and is willing to ignore their own critical thinking facilities. Mmmm... pretty much exactly the kind of person who would have made a perfect nazi. Ignore that little voice inside that says "Wait a minute... this isn't right....", and just do your duty!