The Religion of Atheism

[Alisa]

Clearly you missed the parts where he explained that was a scientist, and a very thorough one at that, and that he had proven his point to his own satisfaction. If you were going to go introducing evidence you should have done so before he decided that the case was closed.

Oops my mistake

 

[Thales750]

There will be times in your life, where you question this behavior.

Peace.

 

[Pauldohert]

I don't find that there is much difference between the major religions. They all follow their own novels (aka "scriptures"). They all believe that they are right and everyone else is wrong. They all instruct their followers to do nonsensical things in the name of their god, to put faith and belief ahead of reason and morality. The fact that the followers of Islam seem to be causing a bit more damage at the moment is inconsequential to me - at different times in history, it has been the followers of other religions that have caused the most damage. The root cause is the same regardless.

And you do not beleive you are right and everyone else is wrong?

The root of the cause is perfectly ebodied in yourself - ignorance but opiniated anyhow!

Ecumenism (in the widest sense) is far more tolerant of other opinion than yourself.

Rather than use the tired religious misdeeds of history - can you name me a significant positive athiest one?

 

[Alc]

There will be times in your life, where you question this behavior.

I'm questioning it now, but you don't seem to want to answer.

 

[Alc]

Rather than use the tired religious misdeeds of history - can you name me a significant positive athiest one?

A significant positive misdeed? Assuming you just want something positive that was done by people who aren't religious, what about showing that the earth revolves around the sun?

 

[speakers_86]

1. I have never met an atheist that claimed that complex life forms appeared out of thin air.

Because they didnt.

2. I have never met an atheist who claimed that "evolution holds all the truths".

Because it doesn't. That doesn't make it wrong though. There are certainly some questions that evolution does not answer. There are some questions that special relativity does not answer (like the pioneer anomaly), does that make einstien wrong? No.

3. If you think there is no evidence for evolution, I can only guess that you were unfortunately subjected to a very poor education. You and Mike will get along just fine.

Hostile words.

 

[dan-cat]

Until religious folks can get it through their skulls that absence of belief is indeed completely different than belief, this conversation is about as pointless as argueing whether absence of sunlight is the same as sunlight, or absence of water is the same as water.

Is your car an atheist?

 

[Alisa]

And you do not beleive you are right and everyone else is wrong?

The root of the cause is perfectly ebodied in yourself - ignorance but opiniated anyhow!

Ecumenism (in the widest sense) is far more tolerant of other opinion than yourself.

Rather than use the tired religious misdeeds of history - can you name me a significant positive athiest one?

I am bracing myself for the onslaught of personal attacks you are certainly about to unleash on me, but I will respond against my better judgement.

Yes, I believe I am "right" in the sense that my position makes more sense. Should we also be tolerant of people that "believe" in killing others? What about people who "believe" in robbery? We all make judgements about what is reasonable and moral to believe. I simply do not understand why religious belief gets a pass, whereas any other type of imoral belief is deemed mental illness. Not believing in imaginary things vs. believing in imaginary things is not simply a different of opinion. Not believing in imaginary things is logical behaviour. Believing in imaginary things is like being schizophrenic and hearing voices.

Atheism is simply the absense of theism, so the positive traits of atheism are the absence of the negative traits of religion.

 

[Rabbie]

Is your car an atheist?

My car is an inanimate object and does not think. So it is not religious or atheist. Your question is, to put it kindly, bizarre.

 

[Alisa]

Hostile words.

Maybe. If someone claimed that the sun goes round the earth, I would also call them uneducated, wouldn't you? How can any educated person not be aware of the fossil record?

 

[Rabbie]

If there was no evidence for evolution it would never have become accepted in main stream scientific thinking.

If there was significant evidence that evolution was wrong the Creationists would have trumpeted it from the rooftops instead of their usual ineffective arguments.

 

[Pauldohert]

A significant positive misdeed? Assuming you just want something positive that was done by people who aren't religious, what about showing that the earth revolves around the sun?

They were religious though.

 

[Alc]

They were religious though.

Based on what? The fact that if they said they weren't, they'd have been killed? If my life was in danger, I'd say whatever it took to get away.

They gave us advances in science which, had they actually been religious, they would never have come out with, as it contradicted everything the religious community believed.

You'll be telling me next that Darwin recanted his theory on his deathbed, in spite of the fact that that myth was disproved as religious propaganda some time back.

 

[Rabbie]

Einstein certainly wasn't religious in the conventional sense. He certainly made a lot of contributions to scientific thought.

 

[Pauldohert]

Were they atheists though?

 

[Rabbie]

Were they atheists though?

Who knows? They couldn't come out and say so as that would have meant an unpleasant death.

 

[Alc]

Were they atheists though?

Einstein, it could be argued, may not have been. For all I know, yes, the others were. At best, they were agnostics.

 

[Alisa]

Who knows? They couldn't come out and say so as that would have meant an unpleasant death.

Didn't copernicus say something about god putting the sun in the center of universe because it was perfect . . . . or was that a myth my science teacher told me?

 

[dan-cat]

My car is an inanimate object and does not think. So it is not religious or atheist. Your question is, to put it kindly, bizarre.

It really isn't when compared to some definitions of atheism seen here.

If atheism is an absence of something and nothing more then why can a car not be an atheist? It conforms to the criteria does it not?

It only becomes bizarre when the required criteria is to actually entertain the belief in a deity as plausible and then dismiss it.

 

[Pauldohert]

Einstein, it could be argued, may not have been. For all I know, yes, the others were. At best, they were agnostics.

You can't put agnostics on one side or the other then.