Support NeoGAF

[super funk]

Benefits? You get to sleep in on Sunday. You don't reject any tasty food or valuable medical technique due to superstition. You don't have to live in fear of an all-knowing all-seeing big brother that will roast you for eternity if you break some arbitrary rule.

Here are my two biggest reasons why I find it difficult to respect an athiest the same way I do a religious person. Firstly, it seems to me that young people choose atheism not because they dont believe in God but because they find it more convenient to not have a religion with rules to have to follow. I dont know if its a correlation between the fact that both atheism and laziness are growing in young people, but most complaints about religion seem to me to stem from a distaste for having to follow rules than for there not being a God.

Secondly, there is the generalizations of all religions. The same religion that is known for not eating meat on Fridays (I assume thats what youre talking about there) is not the same religion that rejects traditional medicine. As far as I know, the sect(s) that reject medicine are very small in size and considered obscure by mainstream Christians. A lot of complaints about religion are about beliefs that are viewed as ridiculous even by religious people like myself. Just because some Muslims fly planes into buildings and some Christians run around like nutjobs on Sundays (see: Borat) doesnt mean that all religions are stupid. I think part of all this is because athiests dont fully understand the rationale of certain traditions and customs and assume its just superstition.

As I said that I dont like the generalization of religions by atheists, I dont want to be a hypocrite and generalize all atheists the same way. It is just that in the experiences I have had with atheists I know personally, they have either some or all of these characteristics Ive mentioned. Some are more respectful towards religion than others. The point is, I think religion is doing a very poor job of giving young people a reason why it should be relevant and thats why its getting such a bad rap, but that can be left for another time.

 

[gutter_trash]

you guys forget that many people who claim to be Catholic or whatever in those Census dont even go to church.

they just mark Catholic in the Census for cultural and traditional reasons because celebrating holidays and having wedding at churches is cool

many non-religious people categorize themselves as some sort of traditional relgiion that their parents were

the % of non-believers is if fact higher than that number

 

[msv]

I'll stick to the idea that people are responsible for their own actions thanks.

Yeah, they are. Don't understand your comment.

 

[da_wump]

Cultural relativism is bullshit. It's simply an enabler, provided by the moderates to the fundamentalists, to violate human rights.

Great argument you put forth there, buddy. Keep it up. Who says human rights really are rights? You? Just because you have more guns? I hate fundamentalists too, but you can only argue that your society is better and thats why you shouldnt treat women like shit. human rights were used a foreign policy tool to exercise power by the West. They need to be used as a form of diaologue on what societies can agree on.

 

[KHarvey16]

Here are my two biggest reasons why I find it difficult to respect an athiest the same way I do a religious person. Firstly, it seems to me that young people choose atheism not because they dont believe in God but because they find it more convenient to not have a religion with rules to have to follow. I dont know if its a correlation between the fact that both atheism and laziness are growing in young people, but most complaints about religion seem to me to stem from a distaste for having to follow rules than for there not being a God.

Oh please. Hey, it seems to me people are only religious because they're weak and can't face the reality that death is the end. Seem fair to you?

 

[Fusebox]

Firstly, it seems to me that young people choose atheism not because they dont believe in God but because they find it more convenient to not have a religion with rules to have to follow.

Matt. 7:1 "Do not judge, or you too will be judged."

 

[msv]

My answer: No. Recognize that your morals aren't absolute and open dialogue with different cultures to work together. But respect their way of doing things as well. You can only argue that your culture is more effective of a society and perhaps let the diffusion of information do its work.

I don't understand why you would uphold morals that you only selectively apply to people who have somewhat the same set of morals as you do. Just because they have different morals, your morals don't apply anymore?

 

[itsinmyveins]

Here are my two biggest reasons why I find it difficult to respect an athiest the same way I do a religious person. Firstly, it seems to me that young people choose atheism not because they dont believe in God but because they find it more convenient to not have a religion with rules to have to follow. I dont know if its a correlation between the fact that both atheism and laziness are growing in young people, but most complaints about religion seem to me to stem from a distaste for having to follow rules than for there not being a God.

But there are still rules, laws and ethics whether you believe in god or not. I don't think that many choose not to believe in god simply because it's bothersome to go to church on a sunday. And even if you do believe in god I don't think it'd be necessary to go to church.

 

[soul creator]

and a "distaste" for following rules isn't inherently a bad thing, especially if the primary reason for why someone should follow a rule is "I don't want an invisible being to send me to an invisible prison after I die"

Of course, I'm sure some will respond "not all people follow religious rules because they're scared of hell!" Which is true. But you can't overlook the fact that that reasoning is ultimately behind the religions which the vast majority of the world call themselves a member of. There are more "progressive" versions of these religions, no doubt, but the entire reason they're considered progressive is because they ignore those historical aspects of the big religions, and emphasize a more secular way of approaching morality.

 

[da_wump]

I don't understand why you would uphold morals that you only selectively apply to people who have somewhat the same set of morals as you do. Just because they have different morals, your morals don't apply anymore?

Yeah. How can my morals apply to people who don't accept them? Unless you think your morals are absolute, they can't. The only argument I can make is that my society is better for a variety of reasons because of these morals and thats why you should follow them.

 

[charlequin]

The "cult of personality" aspect around communist dictators is a pretty common trait.

Of course; not my point, someone else's. Still, if we're going to play the loose association of religion to unjust deaths, rather than attributing them to Monarchy or Communism or whatnot, even if you give all of Hitler's to Christianity, "Atheism" still wins.

Which serves to highlight only that such a poor correlation is meaningless anyway.

Yes. Exactly. Thank you JayDubya.

 

[super funk]

Oh please. Hey, it seems to me people are only religious because they're weak and can't face the reality that death is the end. Seem fair to you?

Haha, yes, it is fair, because its true. For too long religions like Catholicism made that the driving force behind why you should believe in God instead of rational reasons like it should have, and now the dwindling population that follow religion I believe is the result of that.

But in respect to what I said, thats just what I hear from my atheist friends. Religion is binding, eat whatever you want whenever you want, etc, but I never hear arguments about God. The point Im trying to make is, the complaints are based on the structure of religion, not the religion itself.

 

[soul creator]

Yeah. How can my morals apply to people who don't accept them? Unless you think your morals are absolute, they can't. The only argument I can make is that my society is better for a variety of reasons because of these morals and thats why you should follow them.

Then we generally try to make them accept it. There are nice ways of doing this (which I approve of), and there are oppressive ways of doing this (which I don't approve of). Then you live with the consequences of what happens, and go from there.

 

[da_wump]

Then we generally try to make them accept it. There are nice ways of doing this (which I approve of), and there are oppressive ways of doing this (which I don't approve of). Then you live with the consequences of what happens, and go from there.

Agreed. I prefer nice ways too. And yeah, we all live with the consequences. you won't catch me debating anything you said just now. I just want to stress that claims to a moral high ground that everyone from Bush to Obama make are usually misfounded.

 

[msv]

Yeah. How can my morals apply to people who don't accept them? Unless you think your morals are absolute, they can't. The only argument I can make is that my society is better for a variety of reasons because of these morals and thats why you should follow them.

If you don't think they're better, why do you have them in the first place?

 

[itsinmyveins]

But in respect to what I said, thats just what I hear from my atheist friends. Religion is binding, eat whatever you want whenever you want, etc, but I never hear arguments about God. The point Im trying to make is, the complaints are based on the structure of religion, not the religion itself.

But if they find the structure unlikable for whatever reason it doesn't mean it's got to have anything to do with being lazy, it could all be about questioning certain rules or traditions that seems nonsensical or etc.

 

[da_wump]

If you don't think they're better, why do you have them in the first place?

Are you not reading? I do think they're better in that they foster better societies. But I recognize that people of other cultures could resist these ideas. No, they arent better in an absolute sense, like that our society discovered some moral truth hidden in the universe.

 

[Fusebox]

Yes. Exactly. Thank you JayDubya.

Yes, exactly what?

That "Atheism" has murdered more people than religion?

I dispute that, look at the head-start you guys have...

You're over 2 million ahead before we even invented guns!

 

[teh_pwn]

But in respect to what I said, thats just what I hear from my atheist friends. Religion is binding, eat whatever you want whenever you want, etc, but I never hear arguments about God. The point Im trying to make is, the complaints are based on the structure of religion, not the religion itself.

Troll confirmed. Engaging in anti-trolling troll response.

"It doesn't matter, when I die I'll go to a better place"

"God made me this way"

"Why are you trying to extend your life by being healthy? When God takes it, it's your time. Just accept it"

 

[msv]

Are you not reading? I do think they're better in that they foster better societies. But I recognize that people of other cultures could resist these ideas. No, they arent better in an absolute sense, like that our society discovered some moral truth hidden in the universe.

I'm sorry I don't follow. You were saying we should respect their morals, but if you don't agree with those, what kind of respect are we talking about really?

 

[da_wump]

I'm sorry I don't follow. You were saying we should respect their morals, but if you don't agree with those, what kind of respect are we talking about really?

Though I don't agree with them, I recognize that were I raised in that culture, I would think my values were right to. And that the only thing to do is not to enforce my morality but to find what we have in common and engage in open dialogue. I respect their position as valid in some regards and make my argument not by saying that my morals are closer to some truth but that my society is better.

 

[JayDubya]

Yes, exactly what?

That "Atheism" has murdered more people than religion?

He was apparently agreeing with me that attributing all the unjust deaths from mandatory state atheist nations (Communist dictatorships) to the atheism itself is as meaningless as attributing all the unjust deaths from mandatory state Protestant or mandatory state Catholic nations to their respective religions.

Furthermore, one can't accurately statistically attribute any deaths to Yahweh or the first amongst his angels (forced retirement) anymore than we can attribute any lightning deaths to Zeus or Thor, so let's not.

 

[Stinkles]

I am not blinded by bipartisanship, sorry. I believe in a free market system tempered by Christian morals. Consumerism seems to be the only religion that modern day Americans adhere to.

Your post history is among the scariest on gaf.

 

[msv]

Though I don't agree with them, I recognize that were I raised in that culture, I would think my values were right to. And that the only thing to do is not to enforce my morality but to find what we have in common and engage in open dialogue. I respect their position as valid in some regards and make my argument not by saying that my morals are closer to some truth but that my society is better.

Agreed, although I do think that wether to choose between dialogue or actions really depends on the situation. For example, if I had the power to save people from being unjustly punished, like in the stonings of rape-victims and such, I would use that power. Though dialogue should always be a part, I believe educating ourselves and others should be one of our highest priorities.

 

[soul creator]

He was apparently agreeing with me that attributing all the unjust deaths from mandatory state atheist nations (Communist dictatorships) to the atheism itself is as meaningless as attributing all the unjust deaths from mandatory state Protestant or mandatory state Catholic nations to their respective religions.

Furthermore, one can't accurately statistically attribute any deaths to Yahweh or the first amongst his angels (forced retirement) anymore than we can attribute any lightning deaths to Zeus or Thor, so let's not.

but if, say, the "holy book" that said religion is based on says to do action X, Y, and Z, and actions X, Y, and Z lead to some sort of agreed upon harm, shouldn't it be possible to "blame" the religion then? At that point it seems like it would be no different then blaming some political party for it's policies and laws that it passes.

Religions tend to actually put forth specific actions and beliefs followers should go along with, so they seem fair game, just like political party platforms and all sorts of other philosophies should be fair game if following along with their "principles" lead to some agreed upon harm.

 

[speculawyer]

Here are my two biggest reasons why I find it difficult to respect an athiest the same way I do a religious person. Firstly, it seems to me that young people choose atheism not because they dont believe in God but because they find it more convenient to not have a religion with rules to have to follow. I dont know if its a correlation between the fact that both atheism and laziness are growing in young people, but most complaints about religion seem to me to stem from a distaste for having to follow rules than for there not being a God.

Secondly, there is the generalizations of all religions. The same religion that is known for not eating meat on Fridays (I assume thats what youre talking about there) is not the same religion that rejects traditional medicine. As far as I know, the sect(s) that reject medicine are very small in size and considered obscure by mainstream Christians. A lot of complaints about religion are about beliefs that are viewed as ridiculous even by religious people like myself. Just because some Muslims fly planes into buildings and some Christians run around like nutjobs on Sundays (see: Borat) doesnt mean that all religions are stupid. I think part of all this is because athiests dont fully understand the rationale of certain traditions and customs and assume its just superstition.

As I said that I dont like the generalization of religions by atheists, I dont want to be a hypocrite and generalize all atheists the same way. It is just that in the experiences I have had with atheists I know personally, they have either some or all of these characteristics Ive mentioned. Some are more respectful towards religion than others. The point is, I think religion is doing a very poor job of giving young people a reason why it should be relevant and thats why its getting such a bad rap, but that can be left for another time.

First, I put a smilie behind the sleep-in. Clearly it was just a joke. And as far as generalizing, the question was the benefit of atheism in general, not the benefit of atheism over (pick your favorite liberal Christian group). So the question allowed me to be free in giving benefits over any religion. But I do know there are lots of random dietary restrictions in random religons no beef for hindus, no pork for jews & muslims, the bible says seafood is an abomination, etc.

And the reason why religion does a poor job of giving people reason why it is relevant is because there really are no good reasons why it is relevant. If you like it, then go for it. But I really don't see any reasons why it is relevant to my life.

 

[speculawyer]

Y

You're over 2 million ahead before we even invented guns!

:lol I've never seen that image before. That is pretty funny. Man, if Satan was so bad, you'd think he would have killed a lot more people. :lol

 

[JayDubya]

:lol I've never seen that image before. That is pretty funny. Man, if Satan was so bad, you'd think he would have killed a lot more people. :lol

All 10 of those dead were from the story (myth) of Job. If you recall that story, God specifically empowered Ha-Satan / Morning Star (Jewish / Christianity) to do harm to Job (it's a pretty dick move, I'll grant you).

Those are the only examples of Satan killing anyone directly because Satan is not allowed to harm anyone directly. In Judaism, there is no "devil." In Christianity, Morning Star was banished to Hell and cannot directly do harm on the mortal coil (this type of villain is reused very frequently in other myths and fantasy).

 

[SoulPlaya]

First, I put a smilie behind the sleep-in. Clearly it was just a joke. And as far as generalizing, the question was the benefit of atheism in general, not the benefit of atheism over (pick your favorite liberal Christian group). So the question allowed me to be free in giving benefits over any religion. But I do know there are lots of random dietary restrictions in random religons no beef for hindus, no pork for jews & muslims, the bible says seafood is an abomination, etc.

And the reason why religion does a poor job of giving people reason why it is relevant is because there really are no good reasons why it is relevant. If you like it, then go for it. But I really don't see any reasons why it is relevant to my life.

A little funny considering that Jesus helped his followers fish, and fed them fish.

 

[MrHicks]

:lol I've never seen that image before. That is pretty funny. Man, if Satan was so bad, you'd think he would have killed a lot more people. :lol

its funny cause its true:lol

 

[JayDubya]

its funny cause its true:lol

Again, he can't. If you go by Judaism, he's still a loyal follower of God and thus cannot do anything without God's permission.

If you go by Christianity, he's locked up and can't directly influence things. In this account, however, he was once Lucifer, highest amongst the Angels, and he fucking loathes humans. If he could kill us all, he would. As is, the character's motive is apparently to undermine creation as much as possible.

 

[onipex]

Nietzsche?


Also, I can't wait until everyone is on the same wavelength that nothing we do matters as ultimately we're all going to be eaten by maggots and the worlds reverts to a 70's like era of constant sex and endless weed smoking.

We will all have HIV and be high?

Religion can die , but faith will not.

 

[Panda Bear]

Again, he can't. If you go by Judaism, he's still a loyal follower of God and thus cannot do anything without God's permission.

If you go by Christianity, he's locked up and can't directly influence things. In this account, however, he was once Lucifer, highest amongst the Angels, and he fucking loathes humans. If he could kill us all, he would. As is, the character's motive is apparently to undermine creation as much as possible.

Stop ruining our fun man. We're making fun of religion here!

 

[JayDubya]

Stop ruining our fun man. We're making fun of religion here!

I dunno, I find mythology pretty fascinating.

I've actually been reading Paradise Lost on the wife's Kindle. It's entirely possible I'm blurring Milton and what's actually in the text of the Bible, but I'm okay with that. :lol

 

[neoanarch]

This one one part of the judeo-christian narrative I just can't get past. Humans are the only beings granted free will by god. So Lucifer is just an avatar for god ergo God hates humanity and wants to destroy them.

 

[JayDubya]

This one one part of the judeo-christian narrative I just can't get past. Humans are the only beings granted free will by god. So Lucifer is just an avatar for god ergo God hates humanity and wants to destroy them.

Well, the Abrahamic religions all have this character to some extent but he's vastly different, and the whole fallen angel thing is hardly even in the text and IIRC it requires a bit of artful interpretation anyway.

What am I getting at?

Well, I think the inference of angels lacking free will is both logically impossible within the confines of the narrative (since obviously some chose to follow Lucifer, war in heaven or no), and also not actually stated within the text. He would have to have had free will to make his play for the throne - but this notion gets a lot of play in derivative stories, and also gets played out through proxies, as well.

Jesus Christ Superstar is one good example of showing Judas as a puppet doing precisely what he had to do in order for things to play out the way they needed to - thus, are his actions really evil?

 

[Kinitari]

This one one part of the judeo-christian narrative I just can't get past. Humans are the only beings granted free will by god. So Lucifer is just an avatar for god ergo God hates humanity and wants to destroy them.

It seems to be that the devil was manufactured to give blame for all that is evil in the world - rather than place the blame on god. Good shit happening? Yay god! What, your mom fell down the stairs? Damn that devil.

Hell is an obvious enough construct - look at how big the religions that have hells are. "You stop believing in me and you'll burn forever" "Fuck that shit, I don't wanna burn" - etc. Generalization I know, but I wanna join in.

 

[JayDubya]

It seems to be that the devil was manufactured to give blame for all that is evil in the world - rather than place the blame on god. Good shit happening? Yay god! What, your mom fell down the stairs? Damn that devil.

Not really. Even within J/C mythology, the existence of evil is not the fault of the devil, but the fault of humans. Or are you talking more of the "Why do bad things happen to good people?" thing?

 

[Kinitari]

Not really. Even within J/C mythology, all evil doing is not the fault of the devil, but the fault of humans.

I was under the impression that the devil instilled temptation and greed into humans, or was he just bringing it out of them? I'm thinking of the talking snake here.

Or are you talking more of the "Why do bad things happen to good people?" thing?

That was more what I was leaning towards - the two answers I hear are "the devil" and "god's greater plan" - although I hear the devil more from Muslims and the greater plan thing for Christians.

 

[JayDubya]

I was under the impression that the devil instilled temptation and greed into humans, or was he just bringing it out of them? I'm thinking of the talking snake here.

Book of Genesis? Well, every fable has its moral, I suppose, though much fuss has been made about the moral of every story in that text.

Still, I thought it was pretty clear that while the serpent (presumed in Christianity to be an avatar of Lucifer) did tempt Eve to partake of the Fruit of Knowledge, that's kind of like, what he does, man. He can't make you bite the damn thing. But your own moral weakness can make you listen to him.

That was more what I was leaning towards - the two answers I hear are "the devil" and "god's greater plan" - although I hear the devil more from Muslims and the greater plan thing for Christians.

The Muslims' version of the devil is a whole other thing. For starters, I think he's a djinn instead of an angel, though clearly that would impact quite a few other things - for starters, one wouldn't imagine a "lake of fire" would be a fitting site for punishment for a djinn. :lol

 

[onipex]

It seems to be that the devil was manufactured to give blame for all that is evil in the world - rather than place the blame on god. Good shit happening? Yay god! What, your mom fell down the stairs? Damn that devil.

Hell is an obvious enough construct - look at how big the religions that have hells are. "You stop believing in me and you'll burn forever" "Fuck that shit, I don't wanna burn" - etc. Generalization I know, but I wanna join in.

In the Bible the devil has no power. All things good and bad are of God or man, because humans have to will to go against God. The devil can only tempt up us to do so, but he only has to tempt those that walk with God.

God doesn't make your mother fall down the steps and the devil didn't trip her. She just fell.

 

[Kinitari]

Book of Genesis? Well, every fable has its moral, I suppose, though much fuss has been made about the moral of every story in that text.

Still, I thought it was pretty clear that while the serpent (presumed in Christianity to be an avatar of Lucifer) did tempt Eve to partake of the Fruit of Knowledge, that's kind of like, what he does, man. He can't make you bite the damn thing. But your own moral weakness can make you listen to him.

Fair enough, I guess I give the devil too much power, I keep doing that.

The Muslim's version of the devil is a whole other thing. Isn't he actually a Djinn?

Yeah he is a Djinn. I know the Islamic side of things a bit better - the devil was basically jealous to shit of Adam and how all the angels were falling over themselves to talk about how awesome he was. So he was all "Fuck that noise, Adam is a punk" so then god got pissed and kicked him out. Now all he tries to do is get back at people because of all that drama that happened to him, by instilling evil thoughts into their hearts and minds. That's why it's common for Muslims to say a prayer before pretty much everything they do, to cast the devil out of their hearts and stay vigilant - or that's how my mom told it to me.

 

[KingGraham]

Here are my two biggest reasons why I find it difficult to respect an athiest the same way I do a religious person. Firstly, it seems to me that young people choose atheism not because they dont believe in God but because they find it more convenient to not have a religion with rules to have to follow.

You're acting as if religious belief is somehow the default. I was raised with no religion at all. None. Never even set foot in a church until I went with a girlfriend at age 16. I was never indoctrinated in to a religion at an age where I was impressionable and inclined to believe anything adults said. When I was old enough to wonder about religion I was also old enough to rationally evaluate religion's claims, which made it extremely easy to become an atheist.

When people turn away from religion it's not because it's more convenient--it's because the arbitrary strictures of religion are utterly irrelevant to modern life.

And for the record, I find it extremely difficult to respect a theist. Mainly because of the hypocrisy, cognitive dissonance, willful ignorance and total lack of rationality that is required to maintain such an absurd system of beliefs. As has been stated a million times before--religious beliefs have exactly the same validity as a belief in Santa Claus--None. There's no argument against that. At least, no argument that doesn't require cognitive dissonance, willful ignorance and a total lack of rationality.

I think part of all this is because athiests dont fully understand the rationale of certain traditions and customs and assume its just superstition.

So...what part of praying to and celebrating traditions/holidays that glorify a being that exists only in superstition not superstitious?

Some are more respectful towards religion than others.

Why does your religious belief deserve respect? The idea that religion is some untouchable part of people's existence that can't be questioned or criticized is precisely what Richard Dawkins rails against. All ideas should be open to criticism. If they can't stand up to scrutiny then the ideas should be abandoned. Religious people want their ideas to be shielded from all criticism precisely because they can't stand up to even a little bit of rational evaluation.

...I think religion is doing a very poor job of giving young people a reason why it should be relevant...

This is primarily because religion is not in any way relevant to anyone's life in a modern, secular society. Or, at least, it shouldn't be. For example: My gay friends should be able to get married. It should be possible for me to be elected to public office without having to lie about my beliefs. Attempts to have Intelligent Design taught in public schools should be laughed out of court without even wasting time hearing arguments. I shouldn't have to pledge my allegiance to "one nation, under God."

When religion stops interfering with people's secular lives, that's when atheists will stop caring what imaginary sky friend you believe in.

 

[onipex]

Book of Genesis? Well, every fable has its moral, I suppose, though much fuss has been made about the moral of every story in that text.

Still, I thought it was pretty clear that while the serpent (presumed in Christianity to be an avatar of Lucifer) did tempt Eve to partake of the Fruit of Knowledge, that's kind of like, what he does, man. He can't make you bite the damn thing. But your own moral weakness can make you listen to him.



The Muslims' version of the devil is a whole other thing. For starters, I think he's a djinn instead of an angel, though clearly that would impact quite a few other things - for starters, one wouldn't imagine a "lake of fire" would be a fitting site for punishment for a djinn. :lol

I thought he was a cherub as in the anointed cherub that protected the throne of God. That is what I interpret from Ezekiel 28:14, since a human cannot be a cherub.

 

[Kinitari]

You're acting as if religious belief is somehow the default. I was raised with no religion at all. None. Never even set foot in a church until I went with a girlfriend at age 16. I was never indoctrinated in to a religion at an age where I was impressionable and inclined to believe anything adults said. When I was old enough to wonder about religion I was also old enough to rationally evaluate religion's claims, which made it extremely easy to become an atheist.

When people turn away from religion it's not because it's more convenient--it's because the arbitrary strictures of religion are utterly irrelevant to modern life.

And for the record, I find it extremely difficult to respect a theist. Mainly because of the hypocrisy, cognitive dissonance, willful ignorance and total lack of rationality that is required to maintain such an absurd system of beliefs. As has been stated a million times before--religious beliefs have exactly the same validity as a belief in Santa Claus--None. There's no argument against that. At least, no argument that doesn't require cognitive dissonance, willful ignorance and a total lack of rationality.


So...what part of praying to and celebrating traditions/holidays that glorify a being that exists only in superstition not superstitious?


Why does your religious belief deserve respect? The idea that religion is some untouchable part of people's existence that can't be questioned or criticized is precisely what Richard Dawkins rails against. All ideas should be open to criticism. If they can't stand up to scrutiny then the ideas should be abandoned. Religious people want their ideas to be shielded from all criticism precisely because they can't stand up to even a little bit of rational evaluation.


This is primarily because religion is not in any way relevant to anyone's life in a modern, secular society. Or, at least, it shouldn't be. For example: My gay friends should be able to get married. It should be possible for me to be elected to public office without having to lie about my beliefs. Attempts to have Intelligent Design taught in public schools should be laughed out of court without even wasting time hearing arguments. I shouldn't have to pledge my allegiance to "one nation, under God."

When religion stops interfering with people's secular lives, that's when atheists will stop caring what imaginary sky friend you believe in.

You said everything I wanted to say - but much better than I would have. Except there is one thing I want to add.

To some kids it might be easier to turn away from religion, but for others - it is sooooo much easier to fake being religious than to vocalize their non-theistic beliefs. Have a Muslim kid tell their parents they don't want to go to Mosque because they don't believe in god... hooo dog.

 

[JayDubya]

I thought he was a cherub as in the anointed cherub that protected the throne of God. That is what I interpret from Ezekiel 28:14, since a human cannot be a cherub.

Right, but Ezekiel's not exactly in the Koran; like I said, and this is pretty self-evident, they have a totally different view on things.

 

[ZeoVGM]

Good. That's the way it should be.

Though I'm not fully against the idea of religion. I'm just against the idea of basing your life around fairy tales.

 

[Decado]

Only 15%?

 

[Kipz]

Why is religion put on such a higher standard than every other fable, tale and myth? Saying a woman came from a rib is as ridiculous as greek mythology or aboriginal dreamtime or unicorns etc. The fact is none of the modern religions make sense historically, lots of the people in the bible never existed according to historians, it doesn't hold up scientifically that's for fucking sure and it doesn't make sense morally as it condones bigotry against homosexuals even when homosexuality is a NATURAL thing in nature. I'm sure god is against gays, it's why he created so many gay animals. Fuck it doesn't make any sense, none of it. Let it go.

 

[TheGrayGhost]

Once again, I just have to recommend reading Huston Smith's The World's Religions. And if you can, take a course on the subject. Probably the most enriching class I've ever taken. I think religare, "the act of binding that which has been torn asunder," is of value to all.