Atheists - why?

Post Reply New Topic

well, it was self deprecating. I'm not satirizing the Bible, but rather what Christians have been known to claim about us, so I think it is a-okay!

Ok, sure.


It depends on the context. Against people who do not seem reasonable, or positions that seem unreasonable, the best response to make to the faithful often is ridicule, as the belief may actually be ridiculous.


It depends on your conception of God, and what you label science, and so on.

1) If history is a social science, then Biblical studies(a branch of history) could be argued as disproving mainstream Christian theologies.

2) Depending on one's view of God's nature and what would be rational for such a being, the dysteleological perspective given to us by evolutionary theory really is not reconcilable with God. (Note: Some argue it is, but I don't think that it is reasonable to believe that a perfect being would use pointlessly slow methods, to create a highly imperfect result, especially when these methods really don't provide a good sign of the existence of such a being)

3) The framing "disproof" is also questionable, but science could finally be argued to severely undercut theism by showing the lack of necessity of God for features of the world to work. If we use occam's razor, this tends to tell us that we should reject the existence of God.


I don't know who you are talking to. I use different arguments and methods based upon the direction of the conversation. I might actually make fun of you, but I will usually also do other things.


I don't know why some of the people you talk to can't have a civilized conversation about religion. I don't know if you would identify me as being in this category, but I do consider myself pretty well-versed in the entire discourse, and I try to show that.

ok, like forgive me. I have been a closet atheist for half my life and I just can't do it any more.
If you want to believe in a higher power, fine, cool, go ahead.
From my point of view belief in god is an out date and lame perspective and I hate that everything centers around these beliefs. Like religious people are better than everyone else, like every move is directed by god, good, bad, whatever Christians have all the answers if only you just 'believe'. I made a post for a lost cat and received response of 'I will pray he will be found'. Pauleese. I do something nice for a stranger and I get, "with god's help we can all be blessed." Paulesse, gimmia a break. Why do believers feel attacked by non-believers? Hell for centuries, if you were not christian you were persecuted, so atheist hid their feelings and did not speak of these things. Now they are finding their voice and it seems Christians (et. el.) can't even handle one decade of being contradicted.
I am not saying that religion is obsolete yet. It has produced some very valuable guidelines for living, beautiful art and poetry, fascinating history, tradition, archeology, and myths. It has helped many people cope with the destructive and well as awe inspiring beauty of life, when people have no where else to turn or no other explanation. I am just so sick of having rammed down my throat when I am perfectly comfortable in accepting life, the world and unknown just as it is.

Wow, can't believe I posted this and am actually coming out finally.

Firstly, cards on the tabble I am agnostic, I accept I am without knowledge one way or the other.

Down here in New Zealand we were colonised initially by citizens of the Brittish Isles, Scots dispossed by the highland clearances, Irish fleeing famine and oppression, English and Welsh poor. They fell basically into two camps Catholic and protestant. These two factions as I am sure many of you know have a history of disharmony. Somehow by mutual consent this disharmony was for the most part left behind in the old country along with the overwhelming obsession the Brittish have with class. An often spoken mutual agreement to not discuss religion or politics was essential for survival in these wild islands, neighbours needed to forget old disputes and rivalries in order to trust each other, to help each other. This state of affairs has been fading in many ways as we have become more comfortable, now we will discuss politics. Wer still however approach religion as a 'each to their own affair' and most people frown on evangelism or harrassment. In our own low key pragmatism we see no point in debating a subject that has no proofs one way or the other. Sure you can quible about the technicalities till the proverbial cows come home but whether there is or isn't a god, and if there is who's is the real one/s and who he/she loves is pointless, I guess many of us are by default agnostic.
I like it this way, I would rather discuss the prospects of the Mystics taking out the trans Tasman netball than argue about god as would most kiwi's. This doesn't mean we don't discuss 'deeper' things, you would be surprised at the 'spiritual' ponderings that can come up, you just won't find us getting hugely het up about it.

peace j

Last edited by RedHanrahan on 04 May 2011, 6:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Congrats, it's nice finally expressing what you believe I love how under the "status quo" atheists have to "come out". The one thing thing I noticed is the more embarrassed you are about your "atheism", the worse you are treated about your lack of faith. I got a lot of flack of teachers, and students at first, but the more support I had for my lack of belief, and the more I was comfortable the less BS I had to put up with

We may be - doubtless are - viewing different ends of the status quo elephant. Your status quo is the emerald isle. Mine the emerald city - the very gilded ivory tower of makinstream liberal academia.

For me, it is the Christian wo not without trepidation comes out. Atheism is the norm.

So I know the feeling.

Nonsense. The majority of people just give meaningless lip service to religion on christmas and easter.

I do not believe in ridiculing religion--I try to be tolerant towards it, although sometimes I do find aspects of it to be irritating.

However, I believe (and will stand by this) that there are certain aspects of religion that deserve ridicule. For example: homophobia, anti-science views, preachyness, trying to force their views into government policy and the education system, etc. Of course, not all (indeed, probably very few) religious people do those things, and in those who don't I will wonder why they believe in God but not try to convert them.

I from my earliest memory have been in and about the University. Several universities. All uniform in political stance and uniformly suspicious of the non-etnic religious.

You may say nonsense if you wish.

But you describe the North American public - who vote for Obama not knowing why and put up Christmas trees and plastic roof reindeer not knowing why.

I am talking about the people who know why it is right to vote for Obama and why to send Happy Holiday Unicef cards with pictures of penguins drawn by Pakistani children.

The people who - when I became believing and let my friends and colleagues know what had happened - made a point of keeping me away from classes and blocking promotion. Which sounds SOOOOO feeb paranoid, but they were glad when I left.

I say again:

I report what I have seen. It happened. If it seems to you nonsense, it is because you did not experience it.

I do you the courtesy of assuming you accurately report what you have seen.

There is no better or safer place for that than right here in PPR!

1. Science has nothing to do with "proof"- the notion is antithetical to the very foundation of the method. You believe in, and many theists devote their lives to and take the lives of others for, a concept which not a shred of analytical or empirical EVIDENCE exists.

2. Why would Atheists need to "disprove" (see above) the concept of god? Atheists lack belief in god. They do not make the additional assertion that god does not and cannot exist (some do, but that is a very specific type of Atheism). You're misinformed.

This is the "debate", summarized:
1. "Poisonous apples and talking snakes and rib women and zombies and alchemy and powerful cloud men with waggling beards!"
2. "ROFL!"

If someone told you the pixies on their shoulder guided them through life and if they didn't do what the pixies told them, they'd be eternally drowned in glittery pixie dust, you'd ridicule them. Or if not, feel sorry for them, or maybe frightened of the capabilities of someone who believes intangible invisible beings are telling them what to do.

What you most certainly NOT do is think their belief worth any sort of consideration whatsoever.

The Christian god means about as much to me as a "flying spaghetti monster" might mean to a Christian. The "mockery" a Christian perceives in that parody is simply a reflection of the farce an atheist might sense in the Christian concept of god.

An atheist might argue that any power involved in your recovery came from within you.

But whatever keeps you functional is OK by me.

Whom?

It is not ridicule to point out where your faith fails; nor is it ridicule to ask for valid evidence to support your faith-based claims.

The burden of proof is on the person making the positive claim, and that person is anyone who claims that God exists.

This is a classic example of "Argument From Ignorance", which is to assert that a claim must be true because it has not been proven false

Appeals to Emotion are also irrelevant.

Good. Now, apply your faith to the regeneration of my missing fingertip, because if your faith is even as small as a mustard seed, you can move mountains, right?

You belief proves nothing. Furthermore, while I accept the fact that you want to share your religion, unless you apply your faith to a valid demonstration of its power, then I will have no other choice than to believe that you have no faith at all.

Because no civilized conversation includes anyone complaining that a request for valid evidence to prove a claim is ridicule.

Your faith is either valid - in which case, you can move mountains - or it is not - in which case, your whole premise is a sham.

You cannot show it necessary, since addiction recovery following religious conversion and religious faith is evidence of nothing except a psychological mechanism at work.

logic - or the lack thereof - depending on the side you are on.

on another note: it is probably true that much is ridiculed... but most of it is probably perceived as ridicule by you...




see the headlines every single day. every single hour. than you will probably know.
read every single book about the history of the past few thousand years. then you will probably know.

you probably won't find much about atheists that totally isolated from any religion, influenced, changed and/or impacted the modern civilization... as opposed to religious people did - and still do, in the name of their faith and/or god(s).

to use civilized and religion in one sentence is a stretch.