Why do you engage in the atheist / believer debates?

Post Reply New Topic

Okay, time to put this one down again. Atheists do not commit crimes in the name of atheism. Atheism is not a philosophy or a belief system. Atheists have nothing in common with one another except disbelief/nonbelief in deities. Atheist can be religious, nonreligious, friendly, mean, liberal, conservative... anything. Being an atheist means nothing about the rest of your being. If someone is claiming to do something in the name of atheism, they are doing it for their philosophy. Their philosophy just encompasses atheism.

Perhaps I can illustrate this better with an example. Bigfoot. Some people believe in Bigfoot. Others don't. Being an abigfootist means nothing about who you are, or what you believe. One's opinion on the existence of Bigfoot does not determine anything else about them.

Atheism by itself tells you nothing about a persons beliefs, except that deities are not among them. There is no one moral code or philosophy of atheists.

Killing people in the name of 'progress' is not atheism. It's a philosophy, one which I find disgusting. Attack the philosophy, not atheism, as atheism is rather irrelevant to such a thing.

N ot to offend anyone, most of my expiernces come from Yahoo answears. It's fun because it seems many lack critical thinking, reason or logic on both sides. Atheists that I seen there have many of their arguments on destroying a literal view of the Judism/Christian/Muslim, texts. The problem as I see it is that not everyone takes the passages as this is the way it is, but more like...Aesops fabels, where it is the message that is convayed not that an animal actally spoke. And even if they can dicredit it, There are many belief systems. Not all human centric, some even having humans coming from other animals. I call this the cat is not in the house arguemnt. The house is spiritality, a room is a belief, the cat is a deity. You can't say there is no cat in the house, just beacuse after a thourough look in the living room has sown no cat. What of the dining room? Like wise, many of the Believer argumnts were against eveolution, bringing up eyes, wings , and flounders as exapmples of something that only works in its perfect form, although all three have had examples shown haow small changes from a simple structure can increase their usefullnes to an orgasnism. Ive also seen why arnt all fish then humans now? I call this the headline extrapulation problem. It's like looking at the headline and only the headline and trying to get from it the hole story, or taking one sysmester of pshcholgoy and then opening your own practice. To trully argue your case, you need to trully understand what you are fighting against as well as you understand your own beliefs. Only then can you critially attack it. If you don't the other side will just see you have no idea what you are talking about so will never be moved.

Agreed. However, why is it that alot of radical atheists massively generalise religion? That itself is blind and f**king ignorant. They can't see the benefits of religion for some people, nor accept that their repeated arguments have NEVER outright disproven God, nor have theists outright proven Him/Her/It. I'm sorry, but thinking that you can ever change hearts and minds by being intolerant and hostile towards all religion is just stupid. You'll have to "spread rational inquiry by the sword" if you want any change of convictions that way.

I've always thought it bizarre that christian churches emphasize Jesus's manner of death and show him on the cross. Crucifixion was another manner of execution, the use of which didn't make anyone special. Will there be a religion 1000 years from now that worships a guy in an electric chair?

To exchange knowledge, understand other opinions and ideas, and to share my own.
I am a theist, specifically Christian. I'm fairly strict with my beliefs, in some sense, yet have an open mind to other ways of thinking.

I concur. I think there's just a lot of anger for many atheists, because being an atheist in the US is very difficult. I can't speak to other countries, as I have experience only where I live, I only have second hand information for other countries.

I don't care what other people believe. It urks me when people refuse to believe the demonstrable truth, like evolution, and other bits of science that the Church likes to discard, but whatever. If it doesn't affect me, I don't care too much. If it is a boon to the religious individual, more power to them. Really, whatever works for them.

Intolerance on both sides is wrong. I don't think we need to spread anything by the sword. Civil debates are good for exploring ideas, but I don't have a need to 'win converts.' But then again, I can speak only for myself.

It's not so much America... as it is Iowa. I grew up around pre-psychotic Baptists and not one of them would challenge me on issues of truth. Either the parts of the USA I don't live in are deeply screwed up or atheists are whiners.

Well, that study from the University of Minnesota shows that atheists are trusted less than illegal immigrants and gays. It's always better on the coasts and in big cities, though.

sits back,
eats some popcorn,
drinks some soda.

I'm a Christian and it is my duty to defend my faith and et others know the God i worship though my posts.

Hillsong as in hillsong church in Australia?

Why? I mean, great, you're a Christian, but Christianity doesn't need a whole lot of defending. It's doing great. Unless you're here to sort out the discrepancies and inaccuracies, then go ahead. But if you're here to win converts, all you'll win is scorn. Sorry, but it's true.