Support NeoGAF

[Souldriver]

:lol @ the sea being the most religious?

It's the other way around....

 

[Extollere]

:lol @ the sea being the most religious?

Fimbulvetr
Don't read graphs
(Today, 06:07 PM)
Reply | Quote

 

[methos75]

You trying to tell me that the crusades had nothing to do with Christian control of Israel? Or with Conversion? Trade or not, there were still tens of thousands killed in God's name. That's my point. The fact that wars often try to hit 2 or more birds with one stone isn't.

That was the end product, as I said people were mislead into that action, but the causes of the crusades had nothing to do with religion at all. Jerusalem, Islam, etc were used as excuses to get what the Merchants really wanted.

 

[Asmodai]

That was the end product, as I said people were mislead into that action, but the causes of the crusades had nothing to do with religion at all. Jerusalem, Islam, etc were used as excuses to get what the Merchants really wanted.

Of course there are ulterior motives, of course the soldiers would like nothing more than some good pillaging, raping, etc, but you need an excuse for that.

And religion is historically the best excuse to start a war.

 

[Fimbulvetr]

Fimbulvetr
Don't read graphs
(Today, 06:07 PM)
Reply | Quote

Post edited.
My bad. :lol

Still, usually the ocean isn't the same color as something that appears on a map key. That and there were no words next to the map key.

 

[SoulPlaya]

I'll use my point again. Atheism is a terrible word. It implies a sort of unity, a 'group' of people as it were. The Atheists. Atheists are individuals who are completely self-motivated and driven. That's the beauty of it - there is no driving factor influencing all Atheists to disbelieve, or to carry things out in the name of disbelief. We just don't believe and do whatever we want. 'Atheism' can't be held responsible for any heinous acts - because Atheism isn't anything. It's nothing.

I know what Atheism is, but I want a clarification. Is Atheism the absence of religious beliefs or beliefs about God, or is it the absence of belief in anything? Because if it's the latter, it's not really possible outside of the theoretical world, and if it's the last, then it doesn't stop people from being extremist about other things. In the end, the onset of Atheism changes the world, but I don't if it necessarily makes the world all that better.

And I gotta say as just a general statement to GAF, please stop generalizing all religions. There actually differences in the beliefs and actions of Christians, Jews, Muslims, etc.

 

[Quazar]

Some good news! Still a long way to go though.

 

[Asmodai]

I know what Atheism is, but I want a clarification. Is Atheism the absence of religious beliefs or beliefs about God, or is it the absence of belief in anything?

Atheism has many, many definitions. They are called different things, sometimes agnostics, sometimes nontheists, etc.

Personally, I am what am usually defined as a "positive agnostic", which means that I admit that I do not know anything with regard to divine entities. I don't know whether they do or do not exist.

There are "strong atheists" who are convinced that there is NO god, similarly to how religious people are convinced that there IS a god, or several gods.

Wikipedia explains it decently enough. But all atheists and nontheists most definitely do not believe in the same things. What they have in common is the lack of a belief in a God, the lack of theism.

In the end, the onset of Atheism changes the world, but I don't if it necessarily makes the world all that better.

The Catholic Church was responsible for the Spanish Inquisition and a thousand other atrocities over its bloodied history, as well as dozens of child molestations in more recent times, aiding the spead of STDs by condemning contraceptives, etc.

Does that stop the Pope from sitting in his golden palace in Rome, or his flock from listening to whatever he says?

Blame accomplishes very little.

And I gotta say as just a general statement to GAF, please stop generalizing all religions. There actually differences in the beliefs and actions of Christians, Jews, Muslims, etc.

No doubt. Mostly irrelevant ones. Plenty of my friends are Christians, Muslims, Jews, even Mormons, and they're all intelligent and reasonable people. The question is not which religion you're part of, it's how fanatical about it are you. The fanatics of each religion are equally insane and equally dangerous in my eyes.

 

[Beer Monkey]

this article is relevant to this thread. I know it made my jaw drop.
New Jersey atheist couple forced to give up their adopted son because they dont believe in god.

Anybody who only has morals because they are afraid that God is going to come and kick their ass has NO VALUES AT ALL.

Die in a fire, Calvinists.

 

[kevm3]

Atheism has many, many definitions. They are called different things, sometimes agnostics, sometimes nontheists, etc.

Personally, I am what am usually defined as a "positive agnostic", which means that I admit that I do not know anything with regard to divine entities. I don't know whether they do or do not exist.

There are "strong atheists" who are convinced that there is NO god, similarly to how religious people are convinced that there IS a god, or several gods.

Wikipedia explains it decently enough.



The Catholic Church was responsible for the Spanish Inquisition and a thousand other atrocities over its bloodied history, as well as dozens of child molestations in more recent times, aiding the spead of STDs by condemning contraceptives, etc.

Does that stop the Pope from sitting in his golden palace in Rome, or his flock from listening to whatever he says?

Blame accomplishes very little.



No doubt. Mostly irrelevant ones. Plenty of my friends are Christians, Muslims, Jews, even Mormons, and they're all intelligent and reasonable people. The question is not which religion you're part of, it's how fanatical about it are you. The fanatics of each religion are equally insane and equally dangerous in my eyes.

I agree, except I would replace religion with any ideology. Anyone who elevates some sort of ideology above human compassion is capable of creating immense havoc.

 

[Fimbulvetr]

Anybody who only has morals because they are afraid that God is going to come and kick their ass has NO VALUES AT ALL.

Die in a fire, Calvinists.

Wow that judge was a self-serving asshole.

So will they say: "No Billy, you couldn't keep those loving parents of yours because they didn't believe in god."?

 

[soul creator]

I know what Atheism is, but I want a clarification. Is Atheism the absence of religious beliefs or beliefs about God, or is it the absence of belief in anything? Because if it's the latter, it's not really possible outside of the theoretical world, and if it's the last, then it doesn't stop people from being extremist about other things. In the end, the onset of Atheism changes the world, but I don't if it necessarily makes the world all that better.

And I gotta say as just a general statement to GAF, please stop generalizing all religions. There actually differences in the beliefs and actions of Christians, Jews, Muslims, etc.

some could say that all religions do seem to accept supernatural, mystical claims as an important part of their reasoning for why we should do various things, which is why I would find them all equally "bad". If there's a religion that doesn't place importance on supernatural, mystical claims, and simply considers them interesting stories, one could argue that it's no longer a religion. So it wouldn't be a "generalization" to say that religions promote supernatural thinking, but rather, religions promote supernatural thinking by definition

So for me, it's not even really a matter of "some Christians are bad people, therefore Christianity sucks!". It's more of a matter of "Christians (and every other religion) place a premium importance on unverifiable, mystical claims, therefore they are horrible ways to derive any sort of clear, consistent moral code that benefits people overall".

I'm sure some people will question my definition of religion, and round and round we go, lol. So as always, it comes down to how you define your terms. I honestly have a hard time imagining a religion that actually has zero supernatural claims that you're supposed to take seriously though. At that point, it would seem to then be like any generic philosophy, and not specifically a religion.

Now of course, as a practical matter, I'm sure there are plenty of individual Christian/Muslim/Jewish/etc. people that I may very well agree with 99% of the time on various moral precepts. But as a general rule, I think it's best to discourage arriving at those morals through "religion" because basing your behavior on supernatural mystical things has been shown to be highly unreliable throughout history

 

[Kinitari]

I know what Atheism is, but I want a clarification. Is Atheism the absence of religious beliefs or beliefs about God, or is it the absence of belief in anything? Because if it's the latter, it's not really possible outside of the theoretical world, and if it's the last, then it doesn't stop people from being extremist about other things. In the end, the onset of Atheism changes the world, but I don't if it necessarily makes the world all that better.

And I gotta say as just a general statement to GAF, please stop generalizing all religions. There actually differences in the beliefs and actions of Christians, Jews, Muslims, etc.

Uhhh... the lack of belief in anything is like... nihilism or something (well nihilism is close to that at least), or whatever the heck you want to call vandalvideo's ideology.

If it's the latter or the last? I think when you said the last, you meant the former, or first. I'll pretend that's what you meant, correct me if I am wrong.

It doesn't stop people from being extremist I guess... but I mean... secular extremism isn't exactly running rampant.

People will say things like "Well people will continue to do bad things even if religion no longer 'existed'" - I agree. I also believe that there would be much fewer incidents of heinous acts occurring if religion wasn't around, or at least not as mainstream.

If you want to argue that point, I'd be willing to hear it. My reasoning summarized - there are many religious justifications and inspirations to a lot of conflicts going on -currently- let alone in the past. Remove those, and some of those conflicts either cease to have meaning, or cease to exist all together.

As for your last point... can you clarify what you are trying to say, how are people generalizing religions? I don't quite know what you are trying to say.

 

[Sibylus]

I find very little of what Dawkins says to be incendiary anymore, people like Hitchens irritate me greatly though.

 

[SoulPlaya]

Well, then, if it's simply the absence of a belief in God, then why would it make the world any better? You have no proof in God, so you don't believe in the concept. Yet, you have no proof that an Atheist world would be any better, so why are you guys so adamant about it?

Just to be clear, doesn't being "anti-religious" mean that you aren't Atheist? Since, you have a negative belief about religions, it goes against the Atheist principle of no religious belief whatsoever? Shouldn't you just not care.

 

[Beer Monkey]

Regarding "please stop generalizing all religions"...

Which religions are not based on events that we can verify to any contemporary standard of evidence?

They all seem the same to me. Some old book of anecdotal evidence, written by somebody making claims that can't be validated in any respect.

If you are happy with your faith, good for you. Don't pretend your belief is based on something that anybody in 2009 could accept based on anything other than faith.

 

[SoulPlaya]

Regarding "please stop generalizing all religions"...

Which religions are not based on events that we can verify to any contemporary standard of evidence?

They all seem the same to me. Some old book of anecdotal evidence, written by somebody making claims that can't be validated in any respect.

If you are happy with your faith, good for you. Don't pretend your belief is based on something that anybody in 2009 could accept based on anything other than faith.

My point was that people always go, "religion is causing terrible crimes all over the world". Not all religions are.

 

[way more]

Just to be clear, doesn't being "anti-religious" mean that you aren't Atheist? Since, you have a negative belief about religions, it goes against the Atheist principle of no religious belief whatsoever? Shouldn't you just not care.

I think most atheists start out like that and then some piece of legislation makes them cold, bitter, bastards. Teach me to be abstinent!

 

[soul creator]

Well, then, if it's simply the absence of a belief in God, then why would it make the world any better? You have no proof in God, so you don't believe in the concept. Yet, you have no proof that an Atheist world would be any better, so why are you guys so adamant about it?

Just to be clear, doesn't being "anti-religious" mean that you aren't Atheist? Since, you have a negative belief about religions, go against the Atheist principle of no religious belief whatsoever? Shouldn't you just not care.

well in theory I wouldn't care, except for the idea that a lot of times people do and support various actions directly because of their religious belief. And just in general, whenever people make decisions based on flawed assumptions, there's a good chance it'd lead to flawed results. This has been shown time and time again throughout history.

Of course, people make flawed decisions for all sorts of reasons besides religion/god/etc. and we can always work on those as well. It just so happens that "religion" tends to be one of the strongest motivators for flawed reasoning, but largely gets off the hook for it. Why? Because we have to "respect" religion.

And it's not really even an "atheist" world that would be better, but rather a secular one. That said, a secular one would probably naturally lead to a more "atheist" one, almost by definition. If there's no strong social pressure to take faith-based thinking seriously, religion sort of inherently becomes less interesting (in the traditional sense of how religion has been seen). At that point you get kind of the "cute old tradition" version of religion, rather than the "what does god say we should do?" form of religion.

And as mentioned, there is evidence that lessening faith-based thinking leads to a "better" world, since a lot of progressive ideas that have taken hold, are pretty much the exact opposite of a large amount of religious beliefs. We didn't get democratic ideals from monotheistic religion, that's for sure.

 

[KHarvey16]

"The world would be better without religion" != "Without religion there would be nothing wrong in the world"

Also, being an atheist ONLY means you lack a belief in god. It says absolutely nothing about any other belief you may have, including any belief about religion.

 

[Kinitari]

Well, then, if it's simply the absence of a belief in God, then why would it make the world any better?

My examples were simple enough, but I will give you a direct example. Without religious belief, there would currently be no, or next to no homosexual persecution. Simple.

You have no proof in God, so you don't believe in the concept. Yet, you have no proof that an Atheist world would be any better, so why are you guys so adamant about it?

The concept of what? Of course I have no 'proof' that an Atheist world will be better, I am not a time traveler. But I mean.. just using basic reasoning, you can (using my previous example) see where removing religion would 'make the world better'.

Just to be clear, doesn't being "anti-religious" mean that you aren't Atheist? Since, you have a negative belief about religions, it goes against the Atheist principle of no religious belief whatsoever? Shouldn't you just not care.

What? No, you're thinking about it all wrong. There are no "Atheist principles". There is just disbelief. Are there any principles that you adhere to because you don't believe in Odin?

The "Anti-religious" sentiment is just that. Some people do not like religion, or do not like what comes with it at least. It doesn't mean like... I believe in a deity that commands me to be against religion - that would no longer make me Atheist. "Shouldn't you just not care" I think you are confusing Atheists with people who just don't give a shit.

 

[SoulPlaya]

well in theory I wouldn't care, except for the idea that a lot of times people do and support various actions directly because of their religious belief. And just in general, whenever people make decisions based on flawed assumptions, there's a good chance it'd lead to flawed results. This has been shown time and time again throughout history.

Of course, people make flawed decisions for all sorts of reasons besides religion/god/etc. and we can always work on those as well. It just so happens that "religion" tends to be one of the strongest motivators for flawed reasoning, but largely gets off the hook for it. Why? Because we have to "respect" religion.

And it's not really even an "atheist" world that would be better, but rather a secular one. That said, a secular one would probably naturally lead to a more "atheist" one, almost by definition. If there's no strong social pressure to take faith-based thinking seriously, religion sort of inherently becomes less interesting (in the traditional sense of how religion has been seen). At that point you get kind of the "cute old tradition" version of religion, rather than the "what does god say we should do?" form of religion.

And as mentioned, there is evidence that lessening faith-based thinking leads to a "better" world, since a lot of progressive ideas that have taken hold, are pretty much the exact opposite of a large amount of religious beliefs. We didn't get democratic ideals from monotheistic religion, that's for sure.

We got it because of Atheism?

 

[soul creator]

"The world would be better without religion" != "Without religion there would be nothing wrong in the world"

Also, being an atheist ONLY means you lack a belief in god. It says absolutely nothing about any other belief you may have, including any belief about religion.

By some people's logic, we should never try to discourage any ideology.

"Why try to discourage patriarchy? Men are gonna be dogs anyway."
"Why try to discourage the Republican party? All politicians suck anyway."
"Why try to discourage faith-based thinking? People will still do sucky things for other reasons anyway."

We got it because of Atheism?

No, we got it from not giving a damn about how authoritarian gods in holy books and religions say we should act. Which is technically not atheism, but atheism by definition does include the idea of "not taking god into account when making decisions", so they fit together relatively well. Of course, as I mentioned, individual atheist people could be authoritarian for all sorts of other reasons, but it wouldn't follow directly from "atheism", as it isn't a philosophy or moral code in and of itself.

 

[Asmodai]

Well, then, if it's simply the absence of a belief in God, then why would it make the world any better? You have no proof in God, so you don't believe in the concept. Yet, you have no proof that an Atheist world would be any better, so why are you guys so adamant about it?

Are you familiar with history?

If you were, you'd know that throughout history and throughout the world today, the more highly educated a society, the more wealthy a society, the less religious.

If you consider educated, wealthy societies to be superior to poverty stricken, ignorant societies, then yes, less religious belief would make the world a better place.

Just to be clear, doesn't being "anti-religious" mean that you aren't Atheist? Since, you have a negative belief about religions, it goes against the Atheist principle of no religious belief whatsoever? Shouldn't you just not care.

Nope. Read the definitions again. Many forms of atheism are considered an active rejection of theism. Given the many, many crimes that organized religion has been responsible for throughout history, it is only natural that people would be outraged.

 

[chubigans]

Are you familiar with history? Politics? Geography?

If you were, you'd know that throughout history and throughout the world today, the more highly educated a society, the more wealthy a society, the less religious.

If you consider educated, wealthy societies to be superior to poverty stricken, ignorant societies, then yes, less religious belief would make the world a better place.

Oh for crying out loud... :lol :lol :lol

 

[Asmodai]

Oh for crying out loud... :lol :lol :lol

If you're familiar with cases that defy my post, by all means, post them.

Somehow I doubt that you will.

 

[SoulPlaya]

My examples were simple enough, but I will give you a direct example. Without religious belief, there would currently be no, or next to no homosexual persecution. Simple.



The concept of what? Of course I have no 'proof' that an Atheist world will be better, I am not a time traveler. But I mean.. just using basic reasoning, you can (using my previous example) see where removing religion would 'make the world better'.



What? No, you're thinking about it all wrong. There are no "Atheist principles". There is just disbelief. Are there any principles that you adhere to because you don't believe in Odin?

The "Anti-religious" sentiment is just that. Some people do not like religion, or do not like what comes with it at least. It doesn't mean like... I believe in a deity that commands me to be against religion - that would no longer make me Atheist. "Shouldn't you just not care" I think you are confusing Atheists with people who just don't give a shit.

Isn't "disbelief" a principle? There are rules to Atheism, aren't there? It isn't an anything goes kind of thing, right? Isn't disbelief in God a principle of Atheism? My point is, if you were a truly ATheist person (at least from what I understand) you wouldn't care about religion, because you wouldn't have ANY belief about it.

How can you even prove that there would be no homosexual persecution in an Atheist world? How can you prove that religious people wouldn't be persecuted? How can you sound so sure of yourself?

 

[speculawyer]

We got it because of Atheism?

We got it from man thinking morals, ethics, and justice. No God needed but I wouldn't say it is 'because of atheism' . . . it just does not involve any god.

 

[KHarvey16]

Isn't "disbelief" a principle? There are rules to Atheism, aren't there? It isn't an anything goes kind of thing, right? Isn't disbelief in God a principle of Atheism? My point is, if you were a truly ATheist person (at least from what I understand) you wouldn't care about religion, because you wouldn't have ANY belief about it.

How can you even prove that there would be no homosexual persecution in an Atheist world? How can you prove that religious people wouldn't be persecuted? How can you sound so sure of yourself?

No, you're adding things to atheism. A - without, theism - belief in god. It is simply being without a belief in god. Nothing more. Anything beyond this you were thinking belongs, does not.

 

[Asmodai]

Isn't "disbelief" a principle? There are rules to Atheism, aren't there? It isn't an anything goes kind of thing, right? Isn't disbelief in God a principle of Atheism? My point is, if you were a truly ATheist person (at least from what I understand) you wouldn't care about religion, because you wouldn't have ANY belief about it.

Why would there be "rules" to atheism? Who would make these rules? Some arbitrary leader of atheism?

Religion influences the lives of atheists, just as it does everyone else. If I stop "believing" in a religious law that prevents evolution from being taught in schools, would that make it suddenly cease to exist?

How can you even provethat there would be no homosexual persecution in an Atheist world? How can you prove that religious people wouldn't be persecuted? How can you sound so sure of yourself?

In countries with less religious belief, there is significantly less persecution of homosexuals. Many religious texts openly condemn gays. Are you honestly surprised by this? The Bible is famous for its "stone the gays" proclamation.

Either you are ridiculously uninformed and ignorant of the world as a whole, or you're pretending to know basically nothing and trolling us.

 

[SoulPlaya]

Are you familiar with history?

If you were, you'd know that throughout history and throughout the world today, the more highly educated a society, the more wealthy a society, the less religious.

If you consider educated, wealthy societies to be superior to poverty stricken, ignorant societies, then yes, less religious belief would make the world a better place.

The richest societies are Atheist? take a trip to the Gulf oil states, and come tell me that again.

And, once again, correlation/= causal relationship.And if there is a definition of Atheism where you can actively reject religion, can't you also become extremist and start persecuting religious people. Couldn't that happen in a Atheist world? Unfortunately, going by some posts on NeoGAF, some people would have no problem with killing off all religious people.

 

[Atrus]

Well, then, if it's simply the absence of a belief in God, then why would it make the world any better? You have no proof in God, so you don't believe in the concept. Yet, you have no proof that an Atheist world would be any better, so why are you guys so adamant about it?

Just to be clear, doesn't being "anti-religious" mean that you aren't Atheist? Since, you have a negative belief about religions, go against the Atheist principle of no religious belief whatsoever? Shouldn't you just not care.

Atheism is merely the lack of a belief in God, so you're incorrect, Atheists are free to care or not care as much about religion as they please. The mere act of caring tends to be inextricably linked to the process of enlightenment, and Plato described as much in The Republic.

Lastly, a world with one less irrational foundation for human misanthropy is a world just slightly better than todays. Almost all forms of conflict exhibited by humans make sense in one way or another. You have genetic or social abberations, and then you have the competition for limited resources.

Where then does 'faith' and 'religion' come in? In what way does sacrificing children to Tlaloc help? In what way does crippling 50% of humanity help? In what way does the veneration of ancient books to the point of murder help?

For as advanced as some religions think they are, they really haven't advanced much beyond the rock worshipping, human sacrificing primitives they claim they aren't. Killing apostates, adulterers and gays, skinning the genitals of children, and worshipping the Wailing Wall, Foundation Stone or the Kaaba, are nothing more than elaborate takes on the same mindless and primitive actions.

 

[chubigans]

If you're familiar with cases that defy my post, by all means, post them.

Somehow I doubt that you will.

There are no poor, uneducated atheists, and there are no smart wealthy religious folk either in all of history eh?

Blanket statements like that are just dumb, that's all.

 

[SoulPlaya]

We got it from man thinking morals, ethics, and justice. No God needed but I wouldn't say it is 'because of atheism' . . . it just does not involve any god.

And that's secular thought, which I fully approve of.

No, you're adding things to atheism. A - without, theism - belief in god. It is simply being without a belief in god. Nothing more. Anything beyond this you were thinking belongs, does not.

"being without a belief in God" isn't a rule?

 

[speculawyer]

Isn't "disbelief" a principle?

I don't think so.

There are rules to Atheism, aren't there?

It isn't an anything goes kind of thing, right?

We are still bound the by the laws of the land. But other than that . . . yeah. We are free to eat what ever food we want. Free to where what ever we want. Free to have sex any consenting partner.

Isn't disbelief in God a principle of Atheism?
I don't like 'disbelief' . . . it is lack of belief. I don't know know if there is a god. And since I don't know and lack any evidence, I don't believe.

My point is, if you were a truly ATheist person (at least from what I understand) you wouldn't care about religion, because you wouldn't have ANY belief about it.

Well yeah . . . as long as they leave us alone. But when religious people pass laws that restrict our our freedoms due to their beliefs, we get upset. When they fly planes into buildings we get upset. When they invade countries because god told them to, we get upset.

How can you even prove that there would be no homosexual persecution in an Atheist world? How can you prove that religious people wouldn't be persecuted?

Both of these would still occur to some degree . . . we'd need to continue to fight against such persecution.

 

[SoulPlaya]

Atheism is merely the lack of a belief in God, so you're incorrect, Atheists are free to care or not care as much about religion as they please. The mere act of caring tends to be inextricably linked to the process of enlightenment, and Plato described as much in The Republic.

Lastly, a world with one less irrational foundation for human misanthropy is a world just slightly better than todays. Almost all forms of conflict exhibited by humans make sense in one way or another. You have genetic or social abberations, and then you have the competition for limited resources.

Where then does 'faith' and 'religion' come in? In what way does sacrificing children to Tlaloc help? In what way does crippling 50% of humanity help? In what way does the veneration of ancient books to the point of murder help?

For as advanced as some religions think they are, they really haven't advanced much beyond the rock worshipping, human sacrificing primitives they claim they aren't. Killing apostates, adulterers and gays, skinning the genitals of children, and worshipping the Wailing Wall, Foundation Stone or the Kaaba, are nothing more than elaborate takes on the same mindless and primitive actions.

You have faith, my man. The faith that an Atheist world would be better than a religious one. Since you have no proof of that, you are going simply off faith.

 

[Asmodai]

The richest societies are Atheist? take a trip to the Gulf oil states, and come tell me that again.

Are you honestly implying that countries like Saudi Arabia are richer than Western European states like Switzerland?

The darker purple the color, the higher the GDP per capita, the more prosperous the nation. Tell me if your Gulf oil states are the most prosperous. They aren't even close.

I almost can't believe how ignorant you are. That is not an insult, it is a fact. If anything you should be embarrassed to enter a discussion of which you know next to nothing about. For your own sake, educate yourself.

There are no poor, uneducated atheists, and there are no smart wealthy religious folk either in all of history eh?

Blanket statements like that are just dumb, that's all.

I gave you general trends, you wrongly assumed I was talking in absolutes. Your fault, not mine.

 

[Agent Ghost]

Its the age of information. Thank you internet. Religion is already circling the drain.

 

[KHarvey16]

"being without a belief in God" isn't a rule?

No more then being blue is a "rule" for being called blue. Atheist is a descriptor. An atheist will correctly be described as such unless he or she chooses to believe in god. Beyond that nothing they say or do would disqualify them.

 

[Kinitari]

Isn't "disbelief" a principle?

I don't think so? Maybe, but I mean... it's seems weird to call it that. It's just not believing.

There are rules to Atheism, aren't there?

No. It's just... nothing. Atheism shouldn't even be a word.

It isn't an anything goes kind of thing, right?

That's exactly what it is. It's nothing.

Isn't disbelief in God a principle of Atheism?

I guess if you wanted to word it like that you could. But I don't see why you would.

My point is, if you were a truly ATheist person (at least from what I understand) you wouldn't care about religion, because you wouldn't have ANY belief about it.

If you are truly Atheist you don't believe in any religions yes. But are you claiming that caring about religion is now also a tenant of Atheism? (ugh)

How can you even prove that there would be no homosexual persecution in an Atheist world? How can you prove that religious people wouldn't be persecuted? How can you sound so sure of yourself?

I specifically said that I cannot 'prove' anything that will ever happen in the future, as that is theoretically impossible. But I mean, why would homosexuals still be persecuted in a secular world?

 

[Extollere]

Are you familiar with history?

If you were, you'd know that throughout history and throughout the world today, the more highly educated a society, the more wealthy a society, the less religious.

wut. LMAO, I am on your side of the argument here, but even this statement makes no sense.

 

[speculawyer]

"being without a belief in God" isn't a rule?

It is not a 'rule', it is just a definition. You are free to believe in a god . . . there is no penalty for it. You just won't be an atheist anymore by definition.

 

[SoulPlaya]

Are you honestly implying that countries like Saudi Arabia are richer than Western European states like Switzerland?

The darker purple the color, the higher the GDP per capita, the more prosperous the nation. Tell me if your Gulf oil states are the most prosperous. They aren't even close.

I almost can't believe how ignorant you are. That is not an insult, it is a fact. If anything you should be embarrassed to enter a discussion of which you know next to nothing about. For your own sake, educate yourself.



I gave you general trends, you wrongly assumed I was talking in absolutes. Your fault, not mine.

No need for insults, of course the oil states have low GDP per capita, the vast majority of the people in those countries are poor foreign workers who receive no govt aid, and aren't allowed to become citizens of the land. The actual citizens of these oil states (you know, the RELIGIOUS ONES) are stinkin rich. Here let me give you PROOF.

"As of 2007, Kuwait's population was estimated to be 3 to 3.5 million people which included approximately 2 million non-nationals.[55] Kuwaiti citizens are therefore a minority of those who reside in Kuwait. The government rarely grants citizenship to foreigners to maintain status quo."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuwait#Demographics

So, I suggest you do your homework.

 

[blame space]

Honestly, fuck religion. We're at such a pivotal point in our human existence, that it would be so much more beneficial to take all of the energy put into religion and put it into actually bettering ourselves as a species.

The amount of judgement and disharmony caused by all of these different religions only helps those who feed on the weak and easily-swayed by their beliefs.

I know, nothing radical or anything, I just had to vent for a minute.

 

[DevelopmentArrested]

You have faith, my man. The faith that an Atheist world would be better than a religious one. Since you have no proof of that, you are going simply off faith.

I know that without Mormonism, Prop 8 would have passed; sounds like homosexuals are better off already! A religious person asking for evidence though, that's funny - I wonder what takes a bigger leap of faith.. believing in a made-up space deity or seeing the scorched earth destruction religion has done over the centuries + thinking the world would be better off without it. Your grouping of atheism into a set ideology or religion tells me you are not very educated on the subject.

 

[Sibylus]

"being without a belief in God" isn't a rule?

That's a better definition than the one you used previously (your use of "disbelief" was a bit fuzzy).

By definition, newborns are atheistic. It really should not be used as a pejorative term (talking to you, fundie evangelicals!).

 

[SoulPlaya]

I don't think so.



We are still bound the by the laws of the land. But other than that . . . yeah. We are free to eat what ever food we want. Free to where what ever we want. Free to have sex any consenting partner.

Isn't disbelief in God a principle of Atheism?
I don't like 'disbelief' . . . it is lack of belief. I don't know know if there is a god. And since I don't know and lack any evidence, I don't believe.


Well yeah . . . as long as they leave us alone. But when religious people pass laws that restrict our our freedoms due to their beliefs, we get upset. When they fly planes into buildings we get upset. When they invade countries because god told them to, we get upset.


Both of these would still occur to some degree . . . we'd need to continue to fight against such persecution.

Well, then, can you talk to Asmodai and clear him up, lol? But, of course, the ideal world would be a secular world where people left their beliefs to themselves.

 

[speculawyer]

The richest societies are Atheist? take a trip to the Gulf oil states, and come tell me that again.

Oh they are rich alright . . . they are rich because they are sitting on a zillion barrels of oil.

That is like a person winning the lottery . . . it doesn't really say much about that person except that they got lucky.

Unfortunately, going by some posts on NeoGAF, some people would have no problem with killing off all religious people.

Who ever says that is an asshole. Killing people is stupid . . . the only religious people that need to be killed are the far extremists that kill people not in their religion (which would include atheists that kill people).

 

[Asmodai]

The actual citizens of these oil states (you know, the RELIGIOUS ONES) are stinkin rich. Here let me give you PROOF.

"As of 2007, Kuwait's population was estimated to be 3 to 3.5 million people which included approximately 2 million non-nationals.[55] Kuwaiti citizens are therefore a minority of those who reside in Kuwait. The government rarely grants citizenship to foreigners to maintain status quo."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuwait#Demographics

So, I suggest you do your homework.

Yeah, the royal family of Saudi Arabia rolls in cash from oil money, so clearly it's the richest country on the planet, even if 90% of the population lives in abject poverty. :lol

I'm done wasting time with you. You don't make an effort to understand even the most rudimentary concept, instead asking misguided and irrelevant questions time and time again.

 

[BobsRevenge]

The concept of what? Of course I have no 'proof' that an Atheist world will be better, I am not a time traveler. But I mean.. just using basic reasoning, you can (using my previous example) see where removing religion would 'make the world better'.

You can also see where it'd make things worse.

I am an atheist, but I'm not against religion at all. The vast majority of religious people are extremely nice and not fanatical. People can get backed into a perceived corner in any ideology, including atheism. Communist leaders in Russia were atheist and they did all kinds of terrible things similarly to how religious people carried out terrible things.