View Full Version : Politics and Atheism
catherine
10-12-15, 5:40pm
OK, this really surprised me. We have had some talk on these boards about discrimination and atheism (I think UltraAngler made some specific comments about how atheists are discriminated against).
I had a very hard time believing that. I am absolutely not atheist, I'm not really even an agnostic although my beliefs do transcend most dogma. But not believing in God is fine with me.
Anyway, to get to the point, I was interested in reading this article that's really about why Bernie Sanders will never be president and that's because he is a Democratic Socialist, and the Washington Post talked about how "socialist" is a very polarizing word, and how it's almost impossible to gain traction as a politician if you say you are one.
Then they showed this chart as evidence, and what surprised me was not the reaction to people's reluctance to vote for a socialist, but their reluctance to vote for an atheist.
https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/files/2015/10/6bdstjdogu2cb2zu35rrmw-3.png
I admit it, I don't get it.
I myself am quite reluctant to vote for anyone who claims to believe in various primitive tribal sky gods.
ApatheticNoMore
10-12-15, 5:54pm
Sanders could have just as well have labeled himself a Democrat (in the tradition of FDR and LBJ - not talking about Vietnam there but Medicare and so on). Yes I know that's not how Dems behave now but that's another conversation. I thought he might have held office at some point as a Socialist party ticket, but he never even has as far as I can tell, which in part makes his self-chosen socialist label all the more odd than if he had. He was always an Independent (until running Dem for president). So whether the labeling helps or hurts, I don't know. If it hurts he didn't have to choose that labeling although he may have long ago campaigning in Vermont.
I don't think Sanders is particularly supported by the actual socialist organizations as they don't consider him "pure" enough. I'm not sure his self-proclaimed socialist label will really hurt him much if at all since the people who tend to freak out the most about the socialist label wouldn't vote for him any more than they would anyone who wasn't both a conservative republican and member of an appropriate Christian denomination.
Voting for an atheist may as well be the same as voting for the devil himself. If the world is going to hell in a handbasket, atheists (and anyone who hasn't been 'saved') are leading the charge. I am surrounded by many people who are very seriously bothered by the idea that this country has "turned its back on God" so it doesn't surprise me at all that atheists would fare so badly in this poll. At least Muslims have some recognition of God, so they fare a bit better, despite being terrorists and anti-American. (Yes, I'm being a bit tongue-in-cheek here...I don't actually believe these negatives.)
rosarugosa
10-12-15, 6:59pm
I believe this anti-atheist bias in politics is a US thing, at least within the developed world. I've heard that other countries (Australia comes to mind) have no problem electing leaders who identify themselves as atheists. Although I'm sure the atheist candidate would not fare well in a Muslim country. Disappointing.
catherine
10-12-15, 7:01pm
I guess it surprises me that in this case the absence of something (no belief in God) is more threatening than the presence of it (a belief in someone else's God). In other words, I remember when JFK ran for president and people were afraid that he'd be running to the Pope for policy advice. And when Joe Lieberman ran for vice-president, people were afraid that he'd be off incommunicado on the Sabbath when the US was under attack.
So what exactly are people afraid of in an atheist president?
I'm actually surprised about the number of people who supported Romney, considering that he is a Mormon and many evangelical types don't consider Mormons to be true Christians, but I suppose since he was running against a 'Muslim' competitor, even a 'fake' Christian would be preferable.
A lot of people in the U.S. don't have any concern whatsoever about the concept of separation of church and state and want this nation to be ruled by God and God's laws, so voting for an atheist would be voting against that interest.
I'm actually surprised about the number of people who supported Romney, considering that he is a Mormon and many evangelical types don't consider Mormons to be true Christians, but I suppose since he was running against a 'Muslim' competitor, even a 'fake' Christian would be preferable.
A lot of people in the U.S. don't have any concern whatsoever about the concept of separation of church and state and want this nation to be ruled by God and God's laws, so voting for an atheist would be voting against that interest.
I disagree. I thought it was obvious in the Romney case that "evangelical types" overlooked his Mormon faith as being inconsequential for a secular office. It goes against stereotype but that just goes to show the value of stereotypes.
I also disagree about the claim that people have no concern about the concept of separation of church and state, wanting to be ruled by God's laws. I think it's more that people want to be able to live by their own faith without Government interference, preferring to not be ruled by anyone. That's a valid concern these days.
If I were to speculate on the public's aversion to atheists in high office, I'd say it's because they don't want their leaders using their positions to influence and affect them or their children. It's been my experience that people who publicly identify as atheists often feel compelled to convert as many as they can.
what are they afraid of? Here's my outspoken and most definitely not politically sensitive concept: God, as God appears to be defined by much of the world's religion, is a petulant and vengeful guy up there keeping score. Would you want to insult him by voting for someone he doesn't like?
I disagree. I thought it was obvious in the Romney case that "evangelical types" overlooked his Mormon faith as being inconsequential for a secular office. It goes against stereotype but that just goes to show the value of stereotypes.
I also disagree about the claim that people have no concern about the concept of separation of church and state, wanting to be ruled by God's laws. I think it's more that people want to be able to live by their own faith without Government interference, preferring to not be ruled by anyone. That's a valid concern these days.
Heh, you're definitely not around the same people I run into on a regular basis. :) I've literally heard this type of thing word for word from different people on numerous occasions. I live in the south though, so things can get pretty intense and wacky around here. It's probably more sane elsewhere, but it's difficult not to have such a bias when so heavily exposed.
Williamsmith
10-12-15, 8:20pm
Okay, maybe the way people answer anonymous survey questions is actually different than what they publicly pronounce. If I spoke with you in public but didn't know your tolerance to prejudice, I miight disguise my hatred of .....pick a category. But given the chance to answer anonymously.......bam.....this is what progress we have really made or lack thereof.
I was raised in an extremely fundamentalist Christian denomination....shock! I made a public declaration of my salvation and I got dunked under the water at the age of 14. I spent every Sunday in church from 9-12 and again from 7-9 at night. Wednesday evening prayer meeting was 7-? And we were on our knees praying each one taking turns out loud until everybody got done. Church camp in the mountains....you bet. Junior church meetings at leaders houses, of course. And special evangelism tent meetings when traveling missionaries and evangelists came through town. You don't just move on from their to adult life without certain ....should I say strong opinions about what is best. So yeah....an knew lots of people who could not have voted for any on that list except one.
Okay, maybe the way people answer anonymous survey questions is actually different than what they publicly pronounce. If I spoke with you in public but didn't know your tolerance to prejudice, I miight disguise my hatred of .....pick a category. But given the chance to answer anonymously.......bam.....this is what progress we have really made or lack thereof.
I typically don't argue politics and religion with people outside of the internet and usually just listen while they discuss such topics with each other. If things start getting too off-the-wall, I might make a comment or two to try to direct the conversation elsewhere to something more positive, but otherwise I won't dispute for the sake of disputing and make enemies of family, co-workers, and neighbors.
I was raised in an extremely fundamentalist Christian denomination....shock! I made a public declaration of my salvation and I got dunked under the water at the age of 14. I spent every Sunday in church from 9-12 and again from 7-9 at night. Wednesday evening prayer meeting was 7-? And we were on our knees praying each one taking turns out loud until everybody got done. Church camp in the mountains....you bet. Junior church meetings at leaders houses, of course. And special evangelism tent meetings when traveling missionaries and evangelists came through town. You don't just move on from their to adult life without certain ....should I say strong opinions about what is best. So yeah....an knew lots of people who could not have voted for any on that list except one.
I spent a number of my teenage/young adult years in a conservative Southern Baptist church, and while I still appreciate and still agree with some of the spiritual aspects of the denomination, it ultimately became too political for me. Nevertheless, I still remember the Wednesday night bible studies, the Sunday afternoon/evening teen program, church camps, etc. quite fondly.
My best estimate is that being some sort of Christian based religion represents not so much of a confidence in the religion itself, but represents a known value system that people can recognize and that generally agrees with their identification of good and bad or right and wrong. Not that I agree, but I think that might be the case. I think socialism is still identified with some sort of cold war communism or something.
rosarugosa
10-13-15, 4:51am
Rogar: That's an interesting perspective, and I'll bet that is true for a lot of people. Well reasoned as always.
I don't think those numbers necessarily reflect a deep-seated prejudice against atheists so much as the generally obnoxious image projected by our more pubic atheists like Richard Dawkins, Penn Jillette or Bill Maher. People tend not to vote for people they find to be nasty or supercilious, and sneering at their "flying spaghetti monsters" or "primitive sky gods" comes across as annoying enough to taint the brand.
If it were a matter of simple prejudice against faith minorities, surely we would see significantly lower numbers for some of the religious minorities listed.
There's an election happening in Canada right now and I don't know what the candidates for Prime Minister practice faithwise. I feel like I know the incumbent Prime Minister is a Protestant because there was a bit of a kerfuffle a couple years ago surrounding him taking communion by accident in a Catholic Church that he was at for a funeral. But other than that...I have no idea if they are Atheist, Agnostic, Protestant, Jewish, Catholic...whatever....
Maybe it is an American thing?
Here in Santa Fe, it seems like Bernie is the only person running for president. His bumper stickers are everywhere. I cannot imagine his not being elected president because he calls himself a socialist, but Santa Fe is far from middle America in some ways.
I'm surprised that evangelical Christians are as high on the list as they are. My brain usually dumps them in the same category as radical jihadists. I think the country would be more likely to vote for a Muslim candidate than for an evangelical candidate. I wonder if the word "atheist" is associated as the same kind of loose cannon "evangelical" connotes for me. If you replaced "atheist" with "humanist" I wonder if the ranking would tick up a few notches.
Just about everyone I know who professes faith in (a) God at some time plays a card that says, "its out of our hands and in God's". Not trying to lay that on anyone who doesn't deserve it, but at least that's true for the rather devout crowd I grew up with. People who have the option to surrender their personal responsibility in matters usually will. Atheism removes that option so what we're left with is essentially "you broke it, you fix it". I think Americans are much more comfortable with applying band-aids than we are at making real repairs so maybe its natural to avoid anyone who would push us in that direction.
The other side of atheism, and the reason I might be slow to consider such a candidate, is that absolute statements such as "there is no god" show a poverty of imagination that I don't see as beneficial in our leaders. A lot of our problems are serious enough that it will take some new approaches to even identify all the consequences of our actions let alone the solutions. Imagination, creative thinking and even (dare I say it) faith in certain new processes are going to be required to move forward. In short, an open mind. Professed atheism signals to me that the individual will draw a conclusion not from proof, but from an absence of proof which can open up a pretty wide margin of error.
Ultralight
10-13-15, 9:45am
I don't think those numbers necessarily reflect a deep-seated prejudice against atheists so much as the generally obnoxious image projected by our more pubic atheists like Richard Dawkins, Penn Jillette or Bill Maher. People tend not to vote for people they find to be nasty or supercilious, and sneering at their "flying spaghetti monsters" or "primitive sky gods" comes across as annoying enough to taint the brand.
If it were a matter of simple prejudice against faith minorities, surely we would see significantly lower numbers for some of the religious minorities listed.
Atheists, from a world perspective, are a persecuted minority. From a national perspective we are the victims of institutional prejudice.
When we talk about "flying spaghetti monsters" or "primitive sky gods" we do so in jest. The joking helps us emotionally deal with the fact that we live in a Christian nation that disregards the value of evidence on many truly important fronts.
And...! Atheist communities have both firebrands and diplomats. Sure, we have our Dawkins and Harris types out front. But on the local level especially we also have our diplomats who work alongside believers for common goals and such.
From a national perspective we are the victims of institutional prejudice.
How so?
catherine
10-13-15, 9:52am
Just about everyone I know who professes faith in (a) God at some time plays a card that says, "its out of our hands and in God's". Not trying to lay that on anyone who doesn't deserve it, but at least that's true for the rather devout crowd I grew up with. People who have the option to surrender their personal responsibility in matters usually will. Atheism removes that option so what we're left with is essentially "you broke it, you fix it". I think Americans are much more comfortable with applying band-aids than we are at making real repairs so maybe its natural to avoid anyone who would push us in that direction.
I think that may be partially true, but there are others who feel that you are not practicing your faith unless you get out there and do something for people. One of the things I value in my Catholic heritage is the Catholic social justice movement which is considerable: Catholic Charities and Dorothy Day's Catholic Worker movement, and liberation theology and Christian anarchism--none of the people who are part of those organizations and movements are spiritual couch potatoes.
In fact, all the saints have preached that once you're done praying you have to get up off your a$$ and do something. If you read Pope Francis's encyclical on the environment he calls us all to action in almost all areas of "you broke it, you fix it"--the planet, income inequality, etc.
ETA, Catholics are not alone in this: the Jews have a strong commitment to making contributions as a cornerstone of their faith; there's engaged Buddhism… I could go on and on, but the point is, religion practiced correctly is the opposite of the "oh, well, it's in God's hands" mindset.
I do think you make an interesting point about the black-and-white thinking of atheism, however.
Ultralight
10-13-15, 9:53am
The other side of atheism, and the reason I might be slow to consider such a candidate, is that absolute statements such as "there is no god" show a poverty of imagination that I don't see as beneficial in our leaders. A lot of our problems are serious enough that it will take some new approaches to even identify all the consequences of our actions let alone the solutions. Imagination, creative thinking and even (dare I say it) faith in certain new processes are going to be required to move forward. In short, an open mind. Professed atheism signals to me that the individual will draw a conclusion not from proof, but from an absence of proof which can open up a pretty wide margin of error.
Sure, I say: "There is no god"
But why? Because that is my opinion based on the lack of evidence.
I think it might be worthwhile to revisit the scientific method. Give it a google.
A hypothesis is often quite creative. Scientific advances that have zero to do with "faith" or superstition happen all the time. Probably literally all the time.
Professed atheism should signal to you the value of evidence. Because that is what my people value: Evidence! If there is none, we doubt and tend to disbelieve. If there is sufficient evidence, then we move forward on the issue.
Did that clarify things to you?
I have a Christian friend is who fond of this age-old, ill-informed maxim: "Some things you just have to take on faith."
The atheist retort is: "No, those are the very things you should reject for lack of evidence."
Ultralight
10-13-15, 9:58am
How so?
Many atheists in both public and private employment, for instance, can be subject to discrimination for their lack of belief.
Here is a key example. Let's say atheist Ultralite and a Christian colleague are up for a promotion at their soul-sucking job. The Christian colleague goes to church with the boss who does the hiring. Who do you think is more likely to get the promotion if the Christian colleague and I have similar qualifications?
Is the boss going to flip a coin? No.
Let's say I have just slightly more qualifications. Who is going to get the promotion? Me? Not likely.
Now, you probably think that the boss would be a person of honor and hire me because my qualifications are slightly better. But that, my friend, is not reality.
catherine
10-13-15, 10:10am
Many atheists in both public and private employment, for instance, can be subject to discrimination for their lack of belief.
Here is a key example. Let's say atheist Ultralite and a Christian colleague are up for a promotion at their soul-sucking job. The Christian colleague goes to church with the boss who does the hiring. Who do you think is more likely to get the promotion if the Christian colleague and I have similar qualifications?
Is the boss going to flip a coin? No.
Let's say I have just slightly more qualifications. Who is going to get the promotion? Me? Not likely.
Now, you probably think that the boss would be a person of honor and hire me because my qualifications are slightly better. But that, my friend, is not reality.
Isn't it against the law to ask prospective employees about their religious (or non-religious) practices? And, if you've been to any mainline Protestant churches these days, at least in my neck of the woods, you are not likely to see your boss sitting in any of them.
Ultralight
10-13-15, 10:13am
Isn't it against the law to ask prospective employees about their religious (or non-religious) practices? And, if you've been to any mainline Protestant churches these days, at least in my neck of the woods, you are not likely to see your boss sitting in any of them.
It is illegal to ask that in an interview. But there are other ways to find out who is and who is not religious.
"Hey Ultralite, what are you doing for Christmas?"
"I don't celebrate Christmas. I celebrate Festivus."
"Why?"
"I am not a Christian."
"What are you?"
"An atheist."
"Oh... uh... I have to get back to my cubicle... bye!"
Boom! Cat is out of the bag.
Many atheists in both public and private employment, for instance, can be subject to discrimination for their lack of belief.
Here is a key example. Let's say atheist Ultralite and a Christian colleague are up for a promotion at their soul-sucking job. The Christian colleague goes to church with the boss who does the hiring. Who do you think is more likely to get the promotion if the Christian colleague and I have similar qualifications?
Is the boss going to flip a coin? No.
Let's say I have just slightly more qualifications. Who is going to get the promotion? Me? Not likely.
Now, you probably think that the boss would be a person of honor and hire me because my qualifications are slightly better. But that, my friend, is not reality.
Substitute "bowling league" for "church" in the above, and you get the same result. Just because the boss doesn't like you as much, doesn't mean he cares about your philosophical position one way or the other.
I don't see much evidence of atheists as a persecuted minority. I do see plenty of elitist condescension toward the ignorant masses "clinging to their guns and religion". I think resentment of that attitude is a big factor in the numbers the OP posted.
In the absence of facts, hypotheticals are a poor substitute.
Ultralight
10-13-15, 10:25am
And another thing...
Last year I was looking for an apartment. I found this really great one on the bike trail. Cool place, very affordable.
The landlord was showing me the apartment. He asked how much money I made, what my credit was like, what I did for work, about my previous apartments, etc.
Then he asked: "You do drugs?"
Me: "No."
Him: "Drink much?"
Me: "Not at all."
Him: "Are you a god fearing man?"
Me: "Uh... I am a secular humanist."
Luckily, he did not know what that was. But he pressed me on the issue. I skirted around his questions enough to get out of there.
Imagine if he was a Muslim and he asked: "Are you Muslim like me?"
Ultralight
10-13-15, 10:26am
In the absence of facts, hypotheticals are a poor substitute.
Check your private messages. I just sent you two articles on this with facts.
And another thing...
Last year I was looking for an apartment. I found this really great one on the bike trail. Cool place, very affordable.
The landlord was showing me the apartment. He asked how much money I made, what my credit was like, what I did for work, about my previous apartments, etc.
Then he asked: "You do drugs?"
Me: "No."
Him: "Drink much?"
Me: "Not at all."
Him: "Are you a god fearing man?"
Me: "Uh... I am a secular humanist."
Luckily, he did not know what that was. But he pressed me on the issue. I skirted around his questions enough to get out of there.
Imagine if he was a Muslim and he asked: "Are you Muslim like me?"
Were you rejected for the apartment because of your lack of faith? If not, how does this back up your claim of discrimination against atheists?
Ultralight
10-13-15, 10:28am
Read these:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/07/12/1401480/-Five-Examples-of-Discrimination-Against-Atheists-in-America#
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/16/atheists-discrimination_n_4413593.html
I've always found religion to be a club of which I am not a member. But is "prejudiced against" and "neutral toward" the same thing? I accept that people who belong to the Rotary Club or the Optimist Club or a bowling league or are Big Fans of sports team X share a bond that I do not, and that this bond may facilitate their endeavors. Yes my boss might have promoted the woman in the next pew over ahead of me, but I think it's equally likely he'd have promoted his golf partner over me.
catherine
10-13-15, 11:22am
Read these:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/07/12/1401480/-Five-Examples-of-Discrimination-Against-Atheists-in-America#
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/16/atheists-discrimination_n_4413593.html
I started this thread because the Gallup poll suggests that there is prejudice against atheists, which is so surprising to me. I think the people here have raised good points as to why (not good reasons, but good points). We are such a big country and each region is like its own country, so it's hard for me to believe, living in NJ where I, a white Christian, am a minority, that attitudes towards atheists can extend to discrimination, but maybe it does.
I think for me the most salient point is the impact of the Bill Maher attitude on people's perceptions of atheists as people who take believers for fools, and people who try to take away cherished traditions. Just this week, my old high school friend who still lives in my old home town posted a Facebook article that Halloween parades had been banned in the schools. When that happens, people feel a sense of loss, a sense that the minority is dictating to the majority, and a long-held tradition has been taken away for no real good reason--certainly, in the case of Halloween, there is nothing religious about it, other than it's beginnings hundreds of years ago. I'm not saying anything specific is right or wrong, but atheists demanding that Christian traditions be eliminated is like PETA coming in and telling everyone that meat-eating should be outlawed.
JaneV2.0
10-13-15, 11:30am
People feel free to admit their prejudice towards atheists because they think they don't know any--just as they had an aversion to gay people before they were led to realize that some of their best friends--maybe literally--were.
Most of us don't go around announcing it to all and sundry, and around here it never comes up. So it appears atheists are a cranky minority that goes around lecturing believers about sky gods and spaghetti monsters, rather than just shrugging and positing that there's not enough evidence to declare for or against. (Man-made documents and absence of credible evidence more or less cancel each other out.)
I am comfortable with religious traditions even if I'm not participating on a spiritual level. Easter = chocolate, Christmas = gifts and cookies, Halloween = candy and costumes. I'll take what I like and leave the rest. I'd be fine having some tasty food for Ramadan and playing with a dreidel, too. I see no point in banning holiday traditions. The part that gets odious is when one religious tradition starts assuming that their norm is (and should be) everyone else's, and assumptions about "everyone's" beliefs start creeping into day to day activities. I Pledge Allegiance, to [One Nation, Under] God ... or not, thank you very much. The pledge is an assurance that we're all on the same team, and forcing me to say I'm with "God's Team" as if I'm auxiliary if I don't believe in God is both offensive and divisive.
Ultralight
10-13-15, 12:09pm
This whole thread has made me much less hopeful for the future of my people.
People feel free to admit their prejudice towards atheists because they think they don't know any--just as they had an aversion to gay people before they were led to realize that some of their best friends--maybe literally--were.
Most of us don't go around announcing it to all and sundry, and around here it never comes up. So it appears atheists are a cranky minority that goes around lecturing believers about sky gods and spaghetti monsters, rather than just shrugging and positing that there's not enough evidence to declare for or against. (Man-made documents and absence of credible evidence more or less cancel each other out.)
I'm not sure resentment is quite the same thing as prejudice. I see those hostile numbers as directed against a government/media elite constantly pushing to expand the public sphere against the private. One weapon in that fight is denigrating traditional belief systems and the people who hold them. I don't think the average person in flyover country cares all that much about what other people believe. They just dislike being told they are ignorant savages incapable of understanding the benefits on offer from their betters.
Ultralight
10-13-15, 2:13pm
Why, Ultralite?
I appreciate you asking. But I am honestly just tired -- real tired -- at the moment of explaining this stuff.
ToomuchStuff
10-13-15, 2:20pm
Were you rejected for the apartment because of your lack of faith? If not, how does this back up your claim of discrimination against atheists?
I appreciate you asking. But I am honestly just tired -- real tired -- at the moment of explaining this stuff.
So you need evidence to believe things and when asked for your evidence (not hypothetical), you want others to take it on faith?:laff:
I've seen my humor for the day.
ApatheticNoMore
10-13-15, 2:23pm
Really I think there's potential for discrimination against religion as well. What if you are an Orthodox Jew, how do you get a job in the modern world that requires 24/7 availability and keep the Sabbath? Technically I think non-belief is as much a protected category legally as belief (though some lawyer might have to chime in), but it doesn't mean there isn't discrimination, laws can only do so much. And there is discrimination on age, and preference on looks (better even in the job market to be tall if you are a man, beautiful if you are a woman etc.), and fat people earn less so there is fat discrimination, and there is discrimination on class and whether you know all the social niceties of a class that may be higher than one you were raised in etc.. But at that point your just down to: life is not fair. Yes and at best you ameliorate some of the unfairness.
Ultralight
10-13-15, 2:30pm
So you need evidence to believe things and when asked for your evidence (not hypothetical), you want others to take it on faith?:laff:
I've seen my humor for the day.
Laugh at these:
SAT JUL 11, 2015 AT 09:01 PM PDT
Five Examples of Discrimination Against Atheists in America (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/07/12/1401480/-Five-Examples-of-Discrimination-Against-Atheists-in-America)byTolerant Libertarian (http://www.dailykos.com/user/Tolerant%20Libertarian)Follow (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/07/12/1401480/-Five-Examples-of-Discrimination-Against-Atheists-in-America#?friend_id=1001681&is_stream=1)forN. Lee (http://www.dailykos.com/blog/Tolerant%20Libertarian)
510 Comments / 0 New (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/07/12/1401480/-Five-Examples-of-Discrimination-Against-Atheists-in-America#comments)
Since the legalization of same-sex marriage last week, advocates of civil rights have applauded this milestone in American history. However, another civil rights issue brought about from religious bigotry has been overlooked: discrimination against atheists.
I.
Nicole Smalkowski (http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=3164811&page=1&singlePage=true) was a cheerful, thirteen-year-old girl when she moved to an eighty-acre ranch in Oklahoma with her atheist family.
When she joined her high school's basketball team, everything changed. Her team and everyone in the audience — teachers, coaches, parents — all bowed their heads in prayer before every game.
I wouldn't do it because it's disrespectful to me. I think it's disrespectful to them. Why would they want an atheist in their circle saying the Lord's Prayer? I mean, if I was a Jew or a Muslim or Hindu, I would have had a problem with that prayer.When she came out as atheist to her classmates, her relationship with them flipped upside-down. They stared her down. They called her a devil-worshipper. She was referred to as the "dirty little trouble-making atheist." She even received harassment from one of her teachers, telling her: "This is a Christian country, and if you don't like it, get out."So much for Southern hospitality.
She didn't even do anything to stop her classmates from praying — but was still ostracized by her community, and even blamed for stealing (http://youtu.be/sTRDRP2n4Sk?t=7m15s) from one of her classmates.
After two years of bullying, her parents chose to homeschool her.
II.
Sixteen and the daughter of a firefighter and a nurse, Jessica Ahlquist won a lawsuit (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/27/us/rhode-island-city-enraged-over-school-prayer-lawsuit.html?_r=0) against her high school over an eight foot-tall Catholic prayer banner that hung in her public school's auditorium.
A federal judge ruled that this prayer's presence at the public school is un-Constitutional.
It seemed like it was saying, every time I saw it, "You don't belong here."Her heavily-Catholic town in Rhode Island treated her with hostility; she received death threats on social media, insults from her classmates, and was even called an "evil little thing" by her state representative. Three separate florists refused to deliver her roses sent from the Freedom From Religion foundation for "safety reasons." She even needed to be escorted to and from school because of threats against her life.III.
America's conservatives generally have a lot of respect for veterans; they believe that serving in the U.S. Military is the most patriotic and heroic thing that you can do.
But what if you're atheist?
At a Memorial Day parade in Pennsylvania, a group of veterans were sneered at and booed (http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2011/06/04/this-is-how-people-react-to-atheist-soldiers/)by their community. Why? Because they held an "Atheists in Foxholes" banner — in reference, ironically, to the title of a book arguing that atheists are cowards who will ask God for help when put in a life-or-death situation.
IV.
You wouldn't expect a gun-toting, animal-hunting, reality TV star like Phil Robertson to be a devout Christian. However, hypocrisy is a virtue to social conservatives.
At a National Prayer Breakfast in 2014, he fantasized (http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/phil-robertson-hypothesizes-about-atheist-family-getting-raped-and-killed) about an atheist family being viciously raped.
I'll make a bet with you. Two guys break into an atheist's home. He has a little atheist wife and two little atheist daughters. Two guys break into his home and tie him up in a chair and gag him, and then they take his two daughters in front of him and rape both of ‘em and then shoot him and say, "Isn't it great that I don't have to worry about being judged?" There's no right or wrong. And then you take a sharp knife and take his manhood and hold it in front of him and say, "Wouldn't it be something if [there] was something wrong with this?" But you're the one who says there's no God, there's no right, there's no wrong…so we're just having fun. We're sick in the head, have a nice day."Celebrities say stupid things all the time. But what's appalling about this is the amount of so-called "Christians" who stood up and defended Robertson's sadistic comments.V.
His name is Damon Fowler. A student at Bastrop High School in Louisiana, his public school was planning to have a school-sponsored prayer (http://www.alternet.org/story/151086/high_school_student_stands_up_against_prayer_at_pu blic_school_and_is_ostracized,_demeaned_and_threat ened) at his graduation. Being an atheist and an advocate of the U.S. Constitution, which protects, in the words of Thomas Jefferson, the "wall of separation between church and state," he objected to this school-sponsored prayer at his state-funded public school.
At first, the school didn't make a big deal of it and cancelled the prayer. Then his name was leaked, and he was scathed by his classmates and teachers, ostracized from his community, and even disowned by his family who threw everything he owned onto the porch and cut off his financial support. After being disowned, he was even told by one of his classmates: "Go cry to your mommy! Oh wait…you can't."
He even received death threats.
However, with help from the atheist community, he eventually received a scholarship and financial aid from the Freedom From Religion Foundation (https://ffrf.org/outreach/awards/student-activist-awards/item/11989-damon-fowler).
Regardless of what your religious beliefs are, the harsh reality of anti-atheist bigotry should trouble everyone who cares about civil rights. Stories like these are all too common in small towns across America, and atheists and theists alike need to unite and put a stop to religious zealotry wherever it exists.
Ultralight
10-13-15, 2:37pm
So you need evidence to believe things and when asked for your evidence (not hypothetical), you want others to take it on faith?:laff:
I've seen my humor for the day.
You also need to understand the chilling effect that comes with being asked by that landlord if I was god fearing.
Suppose a Jew wants to rent an apartment from a Muslim. The Muslim landlord says: "Are you a good Muslim?"
The Jew says: "No, I am a Jew."
Don't you think the Jew would then worry how the Muslim landlord might treat him over the course of the lease? And rightfully so even if the Muslim did rent the place to him? Maybe the Jew would be last in line for repairs when something breaks or less likely to have his phone calls answered.
I feel like a black dude explaining the "black tax" to white people here. Wow.
I am sure that many other minorities faced such ignorance that I am facing in this thread.
"No, Mitchell... you not getting partner in your firm had nothing to do with you being gay or black. They just don't like you as a person. You don't play golf with them or go to their church."
Come on people. Be real. I know you are not this naive.
ToomuchStuff
10-13-15, 2:40pm
I will be more then happy to laugh at those, as soon as YOU learn to answer a question about YOU, not about another person.
People were asking how YOU have personally been impacted, effected, NOT how OTHERS have. I am an Agnostic (don't know too many true Atheists, as most I have known, think there could be something more then we know, but their isn't evidence for it, that we know), but based on your answering, I should be able to answer for any of the Christian's, Witches, Satan worshiper, or cultists I have known.
I'll bet if you ever achieve the ability to respect other's beliefs, your feeling of victimization will fade.
Ultralight
10-13-15, 2:53pm
I will be more then happy to laugh at those, as soon as YOU learn to answer a question about YOU, not about another person.
People were asking how YOU have personally been impacted, effected, NOT how OTHERS have. I am an Agnostic (don't know too many true Atheists, as most I have known, think there could be something more then we know, but their isn't evidence for it, that we know), but based on your answering, I should be able to answer for any of the Christian's, Witches, Satan worshiper, or cultists I have known.
ToomuchStuff: If you read those and actually laugh at them I think you might be what is commonly known as "a really bad person."
As an atheist when I was at university and part of the student atheist group we'd go chalking. This is when a student organization writes things like: "Come to our meeting at 7pm Tuesday nights" or "Chess is awesome!" or "Speak French at the French Club because we're classy!" and other such slogans and things to get people to join your group or attend you meetings.
When we did this as an atheist group the school sent out custodians to immediately wash this off. They did not do this when Christian groups did the same thing.
Chalking was in the school rule book as totally fine as long as there was no profanity and the surfaces were horizontal (sidewalks, not walls for instance). We obeyed the rules. But our slogans got washed off.
And just because I did not lose a job or get passed up for a promotion does not mean that others haven't.
Ultralight
10-13-15, 2:54pm
I'll bet if you ever achieve the ability to respect other's beliefs, your feeling of victimization will fade.
Explain.
Explain.
Sure. Like you, I do not believe in a higher power. Unlike you, that doesn't define me. I do not belong to atheist groups and am not part of an atheist community. I do not try to influence anyone's religious views and can appreciate all the positive aspects of various faiths. I am not offended if someone prays in my presence and do not detest religious expression in a public space. I actually admire people who strive to live up to their faith based ideals, knowing that I don't have whatever it takes to find comfort and peace in something larger than me.
That said, I can honestly say that I've never been discriminated against because of my lack of faith. I may be discriminated against for being an obnoxious asshole, but I understand and appreciate the difference.
I don't see much comparison between being black to being an atheist, a baptist or a chiropractor in terms of discrimination.
I must have lived a charmed life. The only time I've ever been asked about my religious affiliation in any kind of official or commercial capacity was when they asked me what religion (if any) I wanted stamped on my dog tags.
The only time I've ever been asked about my religious affiliation in any kind of official or commercial capacity was when they asked me what religion (if any) I wanted stamped on my dog tags.
Forty Two years later, I still have mine. They say Southern Baptist.
Ultralight
10-13-15, 4:04pm
Sure. Like you, I do not believe in a higher power. Unlike you, that doesn't define me. I do not belong to atheist groups and am not part of an atheist community. I do not try to influence anyone's religious views and can appreciate all the positive aspects of various faiths. I am not offended if someone prays in my presence and do not detest religious expression in a public space. I actually admire people who strive to live up to their faith based ideals, knowing that I don't have whatever it takes to find comfort and peace in something larger than me.
That said, I can honestly say that I've never been discriminated against because of my lack of faith. I may be discriminated against for being an obnoxious asshole, but I understand and appreciate the difference.
Atheism defines me, along with minimalism, simple living, angling, frugality, cycling (as of late), and a handful of other things.
I am part of a community for many reasons. My fellow atheists and I share the same jokes, most of the same values, even a jargon. We help each other move, drop off and pick up each other from the airport, we support each other's aspirations and personal growth, and so on. We help take care of each other. We mourn the loss of loved ones together. We break bread. We are each other's people, not perfectly, but in genuine effort with positive results.
I am not offended when someone prays in my presence. Just don't do it on taxpayer money.
I am glad you have never (knowingly) been discriminated against for your lack of belief. That does not mean that others have not. You can dip a mug into a pond and hold it up to the light and see there are no fish in it. But you cannot use that mug of pond water to say that the pond does not have fish in it.
Your life experience is not everyone else's life experience.
For the record, I have attended several events at the UU church with my UU friends. I spend about one evening a week at the Methodist church with a community group I am part of. I get along just fine with these UUs and Methodists. We are quite cordial and friendly. Many of my friends in college were Muslims. They often invited me to break fasts with them during Ramadan. You'd be surprised in real life to see that I am far more diplomatic than you think.
When a debate comes up, we discuss things. When it is over, we're still cool.
I'll bet if you ever achieve the ability to respect other's beliefs,
"Respect" is a tricky word in this context. The word has several meanings.
People can believe whatever they want. That is their right, doesn't bother me one way or another, unless their belief somehow negatively impacts my freedoms. I "respect" (OED: "have due regard for the feelings, wishes, rights, or traditions of others") their beliefs, and "respect" (OED: "avoid harming or interfering with") their ability to hold their beliefs.
However, I generally don't "respect" (OED: "admire deeply") most religious belief systems.
If a fellow comes up to me and tells me he lives by a book written by A Creator Being that says "wearing fabrics made of mixed fibers is an abomination", I am not likely to especially admire his opinion, and the "due regard" I hold for his belief system will be consist of saying "well, that's nice!" while duly adjusting my assessment of his character. And if he comes to me and says "my Book requires this new law to be passed, we can't have spandex/poly blends sold in the stores or worn in public!" I'll not be supportive. And if he runs on a platform that incorporates "My Book Says!" planks, well, no vote or support from me.
"Respect" is a tricky word in this context.
Yes, I should have said "I'll bet if you ever achieve the ability to allow people to believe as they wish, without judgment or condemnation.....". Of course, "without harming others" was implied.
Williamsmith
10-13-15, 4:25pm
I think some people like to take advantage of the discrimination game to put blame on other people in society for their own shortcomings. And some use it as a tool to get what they want. I've been discriminated against and I took it as a personal affront and it inspired me to achievement. I personally believe there has never been a better time to achieve great things than now. My children have all been taught his and they have all done well despite the possiblity they were discriminated against.
Yes, I should have said "I'll bet if you ever achieve the ability to allow people to believe as they wish, without judgment or condemnation.....". Of course, "without harming others" was implied.
Well, while I basically agree with you, the "without judgment or condemnation" is problematic.
If someone tells me they believe 2+2 = 5, I will judge that they have some problems either in process or understanding. If they tell me that they believe that red-headed people are possessed by demons and must be slain to protect us all from their ginger wiles, I will condemn their belief and their proposed course of action.
Forty Two years later, I still have mine. They say Southern Baptist.
It's funny what you tend to hold on to, isn't it? I've got an old box with my dog tags, medals, ribbons and badges in it. I think it also contains my high school class ring, science fair ribbons, boy scout merit badges and the slide rule I inherited from my father.
ApatheticNoMore
10-13-15, 4:48pm
I think some people like to take advantage of the discrimination game to put blame on other people in society for their own shortcomings.
straight white males complaining about discrimination is kind of amusing (relax I don't hate all straight white males at all but ...really?), though I do realize class can be a significant factor. I suppose a lecture on intersectionalism to come.
The society versus personal shortcomings is the kind of dichotomy I don't take sides on because it's both-and.
Ultralight
10-13-15, 5:02pm
Contrary to popular belief, not all Atheists are straight white males.
At my last atheist get-together:
25% women.
There was a biracial guy, a Jew, a Syrian woman, a few gay men, and a lesbian.
I don't hate all straight white males at all but ...really?),
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBD_d9SZYnw
Williamsmith
10-13-15, 5:16pm
straight white males complaining about discrimination is kind of amusing (relax I don't hate all straight white males at all but ...really?), though I do realize class can be a significant factor. I suppose a lecture on intersectionalism to come.
The society versus personal shortcomings is the kind of dichotomy I don't take sides on because it's both-and.
At the time of my application for employment and consideration for entrance into the Pennsylvania State Police Academy, the department was operating under a court ordered consent decree which mandated that a certain percentage of cadets be of minority status, namely Asian, African American and female. Since then the order has been dissolved. Upon my appearance at a state testing facility I was met by an African American recruiting officer representing the department at which time he said to me and I quote, "Son, you are probably going to have to take this test nine times to even score high enough to get on the list." After which I said, "I will take the application, thanks."
At that point he signed a receipt that he did in fact provide an application to me. And then he invited the female applicant standing behind me into his office for some encouragement that she was just what they were looking for. I placed the receipt in my pocket and to this day some 32 years later I still have it.
It was indeed difficult for a straight white male to become a state trooper at that time, especially one that did not have 10 additional preference points due to military service. The major difficulty was that a separate list was kept of straight white males and then Asians and then African Americans and then females. A certain percentage was taken from each list as required irrespective of score.
i did take the test. I did score extremely well. And I did make the academy despite the challenges. Most of those challenges were due to politics. The suggestion that anyone straight white and male cannot know discrimination reflects plain ignorance.
Ultralight
10-13-15, 5:36pm
I will openly admit to my straight privilege, my white privilege, and my male privilege. I have the trifecta.
But! I do not have Christian privilege, which is quite valuable in this country.
Williamsmith
10-13-15, 5:55pm
I will openly admit to my straight privilege, my white privilege, and my male privilege. I have the trifecta.
But! I do not have Christian privilege, which is quite valuable in this country.
that trifecta will get you murdered in many urban areas of this country. You do realize that hatred is universal.
rosarugosa
10-13-15, 6:16pm
I appreciate the distinction Bae makes between respecting other people and their right to believe differently, and respecting the actual beliefs. I hope I adhere to the former, and I have no interest in the latter. I think I am fortunate because I have others in my close circle of family and friends who are atheists. While we're still in the minority among those I know, I feel sufficiently supported. I try not to get in peoples' faces about religious beliefs, but I do occasionally reach the limits of my tolerance (and I'm known to be pretty even-tempered) at the assumption that all right-thinking people are Christians. I do live in a liberal enough area that my difference in beliefs doesn't seem to cause me any great difficulty as a practical matter, but most of the people around me subscribe to some version of Christianity. I supervise a pretty diverse team at work, and one of my employees is a Jehovah's witness. I don't think it would be an exaggeration to say we love each other (we've worked together for a long time), and we certainly get along very well.
I don't say "there is no god." I say "I believe there is no god." I think that's an important distinction, and I only say this if asked. :)
I tend to view atheism as just another religion that some people practice. Since neither atheism or God can be proved using the scientific method, they are both faith-based. If other religious groups experience discrimination, then it would make sense for atheists to experience it as well.
It's interesting how some people here have gone for years without being asked about their religion. In fact, I was asked about it just this afternoon. :) (It was a pleasant conversation though, not a debate or argument.)
I tend to view atheism as just another religion that some people practice. Since neither atheism or God can be proved using the scientific method, they are both faith-based.)
What a curious perception of atheism. For me it's not that I have faith in a lack of god, but rather, because I don't accept things as true if they cannot be proven or logically explained. The idea that there's some sort of god that created the earth and everything on it just seems like a completely bizarre idea to me and I don't understand how anyone would still believe it given the advances that have been made by science in the period since the founding of the world's major religions. Faith doesn't enter into it for me at all. Perhaps people like UA do take it to some sort of 'religious' level, at least insofar as they have a need to gather with other like minded individuals. Personally I don't have any interest in doing that. My athiesm isn't so much a part of me. It's simply a lack of any sort of religious belief.
But at the same time, how can you accept something as true if you cannot prove that it is *not* also the case? That's where the faith part comes in. It's a decision that you made based on your belief that something doesn't make sense, so you just accept it out of faith because it doesn't need to be proven true or false for you.
Maybe we're all in a holographic RPG, and the programmer/designers are God. Since I have no preconceived notions about the limitations of the multiverse, I can't rule that out. I have trouble with True Believers in general--atheist or otherwise. There's always new data.
Ultralight
10-13-15, 9:05pm
I tend to view atheism as just another religion that some people practice. Since neither atheism or God can be proved using the scientific method, they are both faith-based. If other religious groups experience discrimination, then it would make sense for atheists to experience it as well.
It's interesting how some people here have gone for years without being asked about their religion. In fact, I was asked about it just this afternoon. :) (It was a pleasant conversation though, not a debate or argument.)
If Atheism is a faith then off is a channel on your TV.
Saying atheism requires faith is like saying pork chops have a square root. There is not square root of a pork chop and there is no faith in my atheism.
Ultralight
10-13-15, 9:06pm
What a curious perception of atheism. For me it's not that I have faith in a lack of god, but rather, because I don't accept things as true if they cannot be proven or logically explained. The idea that there's some sort of god that created the earth and everything on it just seems like a completely bizarre idea to me and I don't understand how anyone would still believe it given the advances that have been made by science in the period since the founding of the world's major religions. Faith doesn't enter into it for me at all. Perhaps people like UA do take it to some sort of 'religious' level, at least insofar as they have a need to gather with other like minded individuals. Personally I don't have any interest in doing that. My athiesm isn't so much a part of me. It's simply a lack of any sort of religious belief.
You're a "desperado atheist." ;)
Ultralight
10-13-15, 9:06pm
Maybe we're all in a holographic RPG, and the programmer/designers are God. Since I have no preconceived notions about the limitations of the multiverse, I can't rule that out. I have trouble with True Believers in general--atheist or otherwise. There's always new data.
We atheists are true non-believers, thank you very much!
But at the same time, how can you accept something as true if you cannot prove that it is *not* also the case? That's where the faith part comes in. It's a decision that you made based on your belief that something doesn't make sense, so you just accept it out of faith because it doesn't need to be proven true or false for you.
Both saying that there definitely is or that there definitely isn't requires a leap of faith - I don't think there's enough conclusive evidence to make either claim.
One thing this God/no God line of debating does do is reduce the scope of the argument to a question of the existence or not of a very particular god as if these were the only possibilities. It kind of makes that one god the only choice in the argument when there are thousands of deities through history throughout the world. Assuming that one's belief even includes the idea that we would have knowledge of such a deity "revealed" to us.
I'll choose infinite possibilities over just two - at least until it's proven otherwise.
Ultralight
10-13-15, 9:09pm
But at the same time, how can you accept something as true if you cannot prove that it is *not* also the case? That's where the faith part comes in. It's a decision that you made based on your belief that something doesn't make sense, so you just accept it out of faith because it doesn't need to be proven true or false for you.
What do you think atheists are accepting as true?
"...so you just accept it out of faith because it doesn't need to be proven true or false for you."
Uh... no.. you reject it for lack of evidence. That is what reality-based adults do.
Now, show me a faith healer who can grow back someone's severed foot. Do that and I will reassess the situation for evidence.
Ultralight
10-13-15, 9:13pm
Both saying that there definitely is or that there definitely isn't requires a leap of faith - I don't think there's enough conclusive evidence to make either claim.
One thing this God/no God line of debating does do is reduce the scope of the argument to a question of the existence or not of a very particular god as if these were the only possibilities. It kind of makes that one god the only choice in the argument when there are thousands of deities through history throughout the world. Assuming that one's belief even includes the idea that we would have knowledge of such a deity "revealed" to us.
I'll choose infinite possibilities over just two - at least until it's proven otherwise.
As an atheist when I say: "There is no god" is it just shorthand for "there is no evidence for the existence of god or any other supernatural phenomena."
Also, we generally just say: "There is no god" to each other or when provoked by a believer.
If you ask atheists, most (like me) will explain that agnosticism is our conclusion. Atheism is our opinion.
Dig this, as per Isaac Asimov:
“I am an atheist, out and out. It took me a long time to say it. I've been an atheist for years and years, but somehow I felt it was intellectually unrespectable to say one was an atheist, because it assumed knowledge that one didn't have. Somehow, it was better to say one was a humanist or an agnostic. I finally decided that I'm a creature of emotion as well as of reason. Emotionally, I am an atheist. I don't have the evidence to prove that God doesn't exist, but I so strongly suspect he doesn't that I don't want to waste my time.”
If you ask atheists, most (like me) will explain that agnosticism is our conclusion. Atheism is our opinion.
I like this statement. It's an expression of beliefs that doesn't try to state them as absolutes.
I've been working to get to a place where "I don't know" is a valid, acceptable answer to a question like this. Everyone is entitled to their opinion - but I don't think I have to have one.
bekkilyn
10-13-15, 10:34pm
As an atheist when I say: "There is no god" is it just shorthand for "there is no evidence for the existence of god or any other supernatural phenomena."
Also, we generally just say: "There is no god" to each other or when provoked by a believer.
If you ask atheists, most (like me) will explain that agnosticism is our conclusion. Atheism is our opinion.
Dig this, as per Isaac Asimov:
“I am an atheist, out and out. It took me a long time to say it. I've been an atheist for years and years, but somehow I felt it was intellectually unrespectable to say one was an atheist, because it assumed knowledge that one didn't have. Somehow, it was better to say one was a humanist or an agnostic. I finally decided that I'm a creature of emotion as well as of reason. Emotionally, I am an atheist. I don't have the evidence to prove that God doesn't exist, but I so strongly suspect he doesn't that I don't want to waste my time.”
Well that's basically the same thing that a believer of God ends up doing. There is no proven scientific evidence that God exists, but they strongly suspect that God does exist, so don't want to waste their time trying to prove it. That's a decision of faith just like Asimov's is a decision of faith concerning atheism.
There's no evidence that there is no God, that there is a God, that there are multiple Gods, or even an infinite amount of Gods, so whatever we end up believing is a decision of faith as it cannot be a decision of proven science.
But at the same time, how can you accept something as true if you cannot prove that it is *not* also the case? That's where the faith part comes in. It's a decision that you made based on your belief that something doesn't make sense, so you just accept it out of faith because it doesn't need to be proven true or false for you.
If one must have a religion (a concept I personally reject) and religion is faith in something then I guess my religion would be science, not atheism.
Dig this, as per Isaac Asimov:
"...I don't have the evidence to prove that God doesn't exist, but I so strongly suspect he doesn't that I don't want to waste my time.”
I would say that scientists do spend plenty of time proving he doesn't exist. Every time they further evolutionary theory or theories on how the universe was formed they doing so, proving the bible and other religious ideas more and more irrelevant and incorrect. Faith requires ignoring evidence that is contrary to one's belief. Unless one's faith is simply in the scientific method and wherever facts may lead.
rosarugosa
10-14-15, 4:48am
JP1: Don't you think you can say you have "confidence" in science rather than "faith?" I think that's a more accurate statement.
Ultralight
10-14-15, 7:22am
Well that's basically the same thing that a believer of God ends up doing. There is no proven scientific evidence that God exists, but they strongly suspect that God does exist, so don't want to waste their time trying to prove it. That's a decision of faith just like Asimov's is a decision of faith concerning atheism.
There's no evidence that there is no God, that there is a God, that there are multiple Gods, or even an infinite amount of Gods, so whatever we end up believing is a decision of faith as it cannot be a decision of proven science.
With all due respect, this is a fundamental misunderstanding of how evidence works.
The question is, do you value evidence?
If there is mountains of it, I bet you do.
Think about something like penicillin. When it was first put into circulation to treat bacterial infections there were lab results and patients that were living results of how well it worked. These results stacked up massively and rapidly. So you'd say, that is a lot of evidence! Penicillin works!
Now, if doctors gave patients with bacterial infections penicillin back in the day and they all died anyway and their infections went seemingly uninterrupted would you say: "Just take it on faith that penicillin will eventually work!"?
No, you'd say there is no evidence that penicillin works. Right?
That is valuing evidence. If you value its presence then you really ought to value its absence too. Anyway, this is what reality-based adults do.
I see no evidence of the existence of any gods or supernatural stuff. So I do not believe.
Again, my conclusion is agnosticism. My opinion is atheism.
Professed atheism signals to me that the individual will draw a conclusion not from proof, but from an absence of proof which can open up a pretty wide margin of error.
Sure, I say: "There is no god"
But why? Because that is my opinion based on the lack of evidence.
I think it might be worthwhile to revisit the scientific method. Give it a google.
In this context I think "absence of proof" and "lack of evidence" are pretty much interchangeable. The scientific method may work differently in your ivory tower than it does out here in the sitcks, but regarding the existence of God its a pretty well trodden path to a working hypothesis around here. The next step for us always involved an experiment then analyzing the results of it. If we try to prove there is a god the results tend to show that yes there is a possibility, but unless someone stumbles across a burning bush there is a lack of empirical evidence. If we try to prove there is not a god the results tend to show that yes there is a possibility, but even if you are able to uncover evidence that everything since is completely random there is still that pesky big bang thingy. The fall down point is when someone assumes that a lack of proof in one thing proves the opposite. It doesn't. Correlation and causation and all that rot. In the end there is little empirical evidence either way and whichever side you take is based on assumptions, beliefs, faith or other emotional responses that fall outside the pure application of the scientific method.
JP1: Don't you think you can say you have "confidence" in science rather than "faith?" I think that's a more accurate statement.
Absolutely. I like that much better and wish I'd thought of it myself.
Ultralight
10-14-15, 10:27am
There appears to be this issue that people have with Atheists saying: "There is no god."
Think of it as an expression of an opinion.
Like, "There is no team better than the Yankees."
catherine
10-14-15, 12:08pm
IMHO, all of us are either arrogant or naive if we claim to see the whole elephant
http://www.nature.com/ki/journal/v62/n5/images/4493262f1b.gif
To me, heaven would be getting the answer key from "God" or whomever could unlock it for us ignorant human beings--man would I love to know all these secrets! But I don't know if there is "heaven" beyond our ability to claim the present moment as heaven on earth. I am just a small, ignorant speck of life, yet a part of something miraculous.
Ultralight
10-14-15, 12:20pm
...when I look around I see God everywhere...
Do you see god in childhood cancer?
Ultralight
10-14-15, 12:47pm
Oh goodness, UA, do you really think that is a reasonable response to what I just said? Why can't you respect that others look at the world and draw different conclusions than you do?
Rodeo:
If you said "I see god everywhere except in childhood cancer" I would not have asked that follow-up question.
But my question still stands valid and awaits an answer. ;)
Ultralight
10-14-15, 12:48pm
And I do respect other's beliefs. Questioning someone's beliefs is not always a sign of disrespect.
catherine
10-14-15, 1:03pm
God is like pornography. You know it (he/she) when you see it. Ours is not to judge what's godly or what's not, but simply to experience God. Can God be experienced through a child with cancer, or in the sadness of the parents and loved ones? I say yes, it's possible. God doesn't run away from suffering--we do.
While I am agnostic and not involved in groups of agnostic people and generally don't say much about it -- I believe ultras question was valid and necessary.
I used to see God everywhere.
Then I read a lot of science and realized how harsh and competitive our existence is in this world that resulted from the survival of the most fit.
I no longer see the natural world as a perfect setting for humans. I see it as a ting that simply is, and humans finding ways to survive on it.
It's a completely different way of thinking. A paradigm shift.
Yes I still see beauty in the natural world. I just don't see friendliness or protection.
Oh goodness, UA, do you really think that is a reasonable response to what I just said?
Theodicy is a legitimate and quite important branch of religious inquiry.
catherine
10-14-15, 1:32pm
Theodicy is a legitimate and quite important branch of religious inquiry.
Diogenes Allen, Princeton Theological Seminary, wrote a great book on that topic.
catherine
10-14-15, 2:13pm
edited; being deliberately misrepresented is hurtful.
I'm done here, and blessings on all of you.
Truly sorry you feel that way. No hurt intended.
Williamsmith
10-14-15, 2:22pm
edited; being deliberately misrepresented is hurtful.
I'm done here, and blessings on all of you.
Your contributions were of value and no one can object to your being offended. Perhaps the timing of the question was off and certainly the follow up seemed flippant but you should continue to defend your position especially if it is important to you. There may be something good to come of this yet.
There were and still are many times when I have turned to a coworker or family member and said, "I don't understand this suffering and when I die the first question I am going to have of my maker is, Why did you allow this to happen?" It is a natural response. I sometimes get an answer. What appears to be a tragedy turns into a blessing in the fullness of time.
I have experienced some truly heartbreaking incidents and I have been asked the hard questions and sometimes I have had an answer, sometimes I have not and sometimes I have lied.
I know there is a God, and I not only believe it I believe that I can know God and all his attributes. I also believe that you can be so far apart from God that you are convinced God does not exist. My belief,is as simple as looking into the night sky for me. I guess I am lucky that way.
I would say say of the Atheist. You are a brave person because I do not enjoy being alone and facing hard times alone. I enjoy a loving, caring, Creator. It does give me meaning.
I can see why people see God everywhere; nature is very holy to me. If our multiverse is some kind of creation/hologram/mirage, it's a lovely one indeed.
Do you see god in childhood cancer?
You ask a valid question. Could a truly benevolent deity allow the existence of cancer, genocide or internet trolls?
One possible answer is that your intellect may simply be too limited to grasp the true scope of existence. In the greater sweep of eternity, the difference between a toddler dying of cancer or an old man dying comfortably in his sleep may be close to infinitesimal. It only seems important to comically arrogant mayflies like us, who aren't equipped to see or conceive of anything much beyond our immediate field of vision.
So why can't the answer, considered from a perspective of humility and intellectual honesty be "yes"?
Or maybe they've got it half right, and God is omniscient but not omnipotent, which would suck for God, or omnipotent but not omniscient, which would suck for humanity, or simply, as LDAHL says, some sort of force or Being that is so much bigger than people that concern for individuals would be like grieving for the individual cells of your body as they die in various acceptable or unpleasant ways. Personally I'm voting agnostic because I can see a possibility of no god, I can also see infinite possibilities for some sort of Greater that we've never come close to imagining. Wait and see!
Ultralight
10-14-15, 5:27pm
I would say say of the Atheist. You are a brave person because I do not enjoy being alone and facing hard times alone. I enjoy a loving, caring, Creator. It does give me meaning.
I appreciate the compliment about my bravery. But I am not all alone -- I have my dog, my sister, and my friends.
ApatheticNoMore
10-14-15, 5:28pm
I have my dog, my sister, and my friends.
the only one of those things I'd count on is the dog! :)
Williamsmith
10-14-15, 5:33pm
the only one of those things I'd count on is the dog! :)
How true...... You're my Buddy...my Pal...My Friend....
So how do you know the dog doesn't believe in God?
Ultralight
10-14-15, 5:35pm
the only one of those things I'd count on is the dog! :)
Amen to that!
Ultralight
10-14-15, 5:36pm
How true...... You're my Buddy...my Pal...My Friend....
So how do you know the dog doesn't believe in God?
I don't know that he believes in a god or not. I doubt he does, but I don't know.
d-o-g, g-o-d ? come on, coincidence? ;)
catherine
10-14-15, 5:43pm
d-o-g, g-o-d ? come on, coincidence? ;)
Thanks for bringing it up! One of my favorite YouTubes:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=H17edn_RZoY
If one must have a religion (a concept I personally reject) and religion is faith in something then I guess my religion would be science, not atheism.
In your case then, your "religion" wouldn't be faith-based, but instead based on the scientific method and would "worship" such things that can be proved by using that method.
rosarugosa
10-14-15, 7:39pm
I think it's a bit of a stretch to try to define all worldviews as religions. I believe in gravity and I believe there are no unicorns and I believe that winter is coming. I don't think any of those beliefs constitutes a religion.
I think it's a bit of a stretch to try to define all worldviews as religions. I believe in gravity and I believe there are no unicorns and I believe that winter is coming. I don't think any of those beliefs constitutes a religion.
Do your worldviews of gravity, no-unicorns, and winter include such events as the following: http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-21319945
rosarugosa
10-14-15, 8:16pm
An Atheist Church - that's just weird. I don't think I would ever go to such a place.
An Atheist Church - that's just weird. I don't think I would ever go to such a place.
Heh, I might given a good opportunity to visit a time or two, though not because I'm an atheist. I just enjoy studying various religions and philosophies and whatnot.
ApatheticNoMore
10-14-15, 8:54pm
That atheist church sounds awful. You need to believe in "wonder". But I hate being preached to feel something more than I hate being preached at by a street preacher.
And the signs say you must stop worrying (I expect a 3rd line to be added to that sign: "ask your doctor if Wellbutrin is right for you"). Or maybe "stop worrying and learn to love the bomb". Isn't there like plenty to worry about, God or no? Don't these sign makers read the news?
You need to read some guys 10 virtues, his MANifesto, as if there wasn't thousands of years of people contemplating the question of human virtue, religious or not. I'll read anyone at times, but some guy who thinks he invented virtues is going to be hard to tolerate .... and ridiculously presumptious in assuming to speak for all atheists. He should have just titled it "these are my values", regardless of how widespread or idiosyncratic the values, and discuss his values and his struggle to apply them to his life, and it might actually be an interesting and even inspiring read.
He argues for a new breed of secular therapists to take the place of the priesthood
That of course is obviously already the case, you can't throw a stone without hitting a psychotherapist or counselor or social worker, but how much good it has really done ...
Ultralight
10-14-15, 9:13pm
Atheists are a wide reaching group. Some of us would love to go to a "church" without God. Some of us are hardcore desperadoes who won't do anything even remotely church-like. There are all sorts of atheists in between. About once a month I go to a "small group fellowship" had at a former pastor's house. We talk atheism, our recovery from religion, and about finding meaning and joy in life after belief. I like it. Some atheists are repulsed by its church-like qualities.
Williamsmith
10-14-15, 9:45pm
Atheists are a wide reaching group. Some of us would love to go to a "church" without God. Some of us are hardcore desperadoes who won't do anything even remotely church-like. There are all sorts of atheists in between. About once a month I go to a "small group fellowship" had at a former pastor's house. We talk atheism, our recovery from religion, and about finding meaning and joy in life after belief. I like it. Some atheists are repulsed by its church-like qualities.
I can't wrap my mind around this. It would be like a bunch of alcoholics getting together and getting drunk and saying to each other how thankful they are they never went to an AA meeting.
no offense and with all due respect. I mean does a believer come to a meeting and get unsaved?
Ultralight
10-14-15, 10:18pm
I can't wrap my mind around this. It would be like a bunch of alcoholics getting together and getting drunk and saying to each other how thankful they are they never went to an AA meeting.
no offense and with all due respect. I mean does a believer come to a meeting and get unsaved?
Check this out: http://recoveringfromreligion.org/
The dynamic of the group is different each time. Sometimes people just come to be "out" for a while because they are otherwise pretending to be religious in their daily lives. Others come to get support in overcoming the PTSD they suffer from because they were members of a cult. Some folks attend because when they left religion all their friends and family shunned them.
I go there for support in being in a mixed relationship. But I think most any atheist in this country, whether they admit it or not, will always -- in a sense -- be in recovery simply because we live in a Christian nation. So some of us just go there for fellowship with our own people.
It's interesting reading this thread. My atheism seems to be very different from Ultralite's. Perhaps because we came at it from very different places. For me, I was raised an atheist by atheist parents. My mom had been raised in a religious household. My dad, not so much. Both had, by their mid teens, decided that they didn't believe in any version of organized Christianity. Mom was probably more agnostic. Dad was, as far as I ever knew, as much of a true atheist as I am. In my childhood we weren't 'indoctrinated' into atheism. We simply weren't shown any sort of religion whatsoever. If my sister or I asked about it, such as "what do so and so do at church every sunday?" we got a brief explanation that didn't go into detail. "Son, they go to church to worship god with other people who believe in god." Me: "oh. ok. Can I go out and play now?" Perhaps things would've been different if we'd lived in the bible belt, but it wasn't until I was a teen and the 'moral majority' became a thing that I started to view religion as a real issue that might affect me in some way. But as a kid it just wasn't something that was presented as important.
As a lifelong atheist I find Williamsmith's perception that I'm somehow brave for "facing life alone" fascinating. I don't feel brave. I don't feel terrified. It's just the way I have faced life for almost 48 years. I will continue to face life this way for as long as my body keeps functioning. I'm reminded of a catholic friend from college who, when I informed her that I was an atheist, responded with "what keeps you from committing suicide, knowing that there's no heaven to go to when you die?" I may have offended her when I told her that it sounded pretty depressing to view life on earth as only something to be endured with the hope of some sort of better life in the "hereafter". Personally I really enjoy life on earth and hope that I get to enjoy it for many more years. (and I was still a virgin at that point in my life... Goodness, how much more emphatic I would've been if she'd asked me today!)
Fast forward to today. I have no interest in belonging to an atheist group of any sort. Nor would I ever question a religious person about their concept that 'god is everywhere'. To me that would surely be just as annoying to a religious person as it is for me to have to respond to a religious person trying to convert me. And an equal waste of time. 99.9% of people aren't going to change their religious views in any direction.
ApatheticNoMore
10-15-15, 1:39am
Yea it's really all psychology - whether one finds life meaningful or dark or some combination without religion - that's about basic temperament (causes of basic temperament are an endless speculation but we all have one). That's why it's absurd to try to say people should subscribe to some generalized mood like "wonder". Whether one feels the need to fight against religion if they are not religious or are just "well if people want to believe or not it's their own business" are as well and I suspect the need to fight is sometimes fighting the parents.
catherine
10-15-15, 6:34am
This discussion reinforces my belief that you should never talk religion or politics..haha, jk
No, really, it does reinforce the extremely personal nature of spirituality. In the past I've joined forums on Beliefnet, or other religious-based forums, and I've come to the conclusion that there are as many "gods" as there are human beings. It's such a personal matter, that I have rarely gotten much out of discourse with other people. I do find certain spiritual leaders very instructive, such as Richard Rohr, Anthony deMello, Richard Foster, Thich Nhat Hanh, and I do read the Bible and the Bhagavad Gita.
I think we do all reflect our gods (in the broadest sense possible) in our own ways, and this thread definitely confirms that for me.
jp1, re your quote:
I'm reminded of a catholic friend from college who, when I informed her that I was an atheist, responded with "what keeps you from committing suicide, knowing that there's no heaven to go to when you die?" I may have offended her when I told her that it sounded pretty depressing to view life on earth as only something to be endured with the hope of some sort of better life in the "hereafter".
… not sure how other Catholics on this forum feel, but heaven does not motivate me, but I'm not a practicing Catholic in the sense of belonging to a church. It's just in my DNA.
Williamsmith
10-15-15, 7:10am
Regarding heaven as a motivation, agreed it doesn't motivate me per se but it certainly has a prominent spot in my belief system. It has always been perceive as a place where I will be reunited with loved ones I have been separated from by death. Now that is a cool concept that Atheism does not provide. And it has real benefits for living folks facing the transition of death.
ApatheticNoMore
10-15-15, 7:18am
I'm reminded of a catholic friend from college who, when I informed her that I was an atheist, responded with "what keeps you from committing suicide, knowing that there's no heaven to go to when you die?" I may have offended her when I told her that it sounded pretty depressing to view life on earth as only something to be endured with the hope of some sort of better life in the "hereafter".
suicide is also considered a sin in Catholicism, so the most probable interpretation of the statement is no afterlife is really depressing, but the alternative one is suicide being a sin has kept me alive.
What do I know, I was pretty much reading "The Denial of Death" as a teenager, yes life on earth is meaningless and the earth a giant graveyard he wrote while he was dying, he wrote the book while dying, turn toward religion however ridiculous ....
Ultralight
10-15-15, 7:21am
It's interesting reading this thread. My atheism seems to be very different from Ultralite's. Perhaps because we came at it from very different places. For me, I was raised an atheist by atheist parents. My mom had been raised in a religious household. My dad, not so much. Both had, by their mid teens, decided that they didn't believe in any version of organized Christianity. Mom was probably more agnostic. Dad was, as far as I ever knew, as much of a true atheist as I am. In my childhood we weren't 'indoctrinated' into atheism. We simply weren't shown any sort of religion whatsoever. If my sister or I asked about it, such as "what do so and so do at church every sunday?" we got a brief explanation that didn't go into detail. "Son, they go to church to worship god with other people who believe in god." Me: "oh. ok. Can I go out and play now?" Perhaps things would've been different if we'd lived in the bible belt, but it wasn't until I was a teen and the 'moral majority' became a thing that I started to view religion as a real issue that might affect me in some way. But as a kid it just wasn't something that was presented as important.
As a lifelong atheist I find Williamsmith's perception that I'm somehow brave for "facing life alone" fascinating. I don't feel brave. I don't feel terrified. It's just the way I have faced life for almost 48 years. I will continue to face life this way for as long as my body keeps functioning. I'm reminded of a catholic friend from college who, when I informed her that I was an atheist, responded with "what keeps you from committing suicide, knowing that there's no heaven to go to when you die?" I may have offended her when I told her that it sounded pretty depressing to view life on earth as only something to be endured with the hope of some sort of better life in the "hereafter". Personally I really enjoy life on earth and hope that I get to enjoy it for many more years. (and I was still a virgin at that point in my life... Goodness, how much more emphatic I would've been if she'd asked me today!)
Fast forward to today. I have no interest in belonging to an atheist group of any sort. Nor would I ever question a religious person about their concept that 'god is everywhere'. To me that would surely be just as annoying to a religious person as it is for me to have to respond to a religious person trying to convert me. And an equal waste of time. 99.9% of people aren't going to change their religious views in any direction.
I think that questioning things -- like "I see god in everything" -- is a hallmark of critical thinking. And we really need more critical thinking in this nation especially. If your buddy named Abraham said: "God told me to kill my son, Isaac. So I am going to go ahead and do that." would you say: "Alright, Abe. That is your religion. I won't question it. Kill away!"?
No. Of course you wouldn't. I know that analogy is hyperbolic, but it demonstrates the need to question what people believe in without evidence.
If we live in a society where it is taboo to question adults' beliefs -- or any ideas really -- then we stunt our intellects and cease to move forward in progress. Do you want that?
Ultralight
10-15-15, 7:25am
Regarding heaven as a motivation, agreed it doesn't motivate me per se but it certainly has a prominent spot in my belief system. It has always been perceive as a place where I will be reunited with loved ones I have been separated from by death. Now that is a cool concept that Atheism does not provide. And it has real benefits for living folks facing the transition of death.
There is no evidence for that "cool concept."
Santa Claus is a cool concept too. Be nice all year and a fat dude with a white beard in a red suit will bring you all the presents you want!
Does that make it real? No.
A person who believes in heaven cannot be a reality-based adult.
catherine
10-15-15, 7:28am
A person who believes in heaven cannot be a reality-based adult.
My personal belief is that 99% of the people here on earth have never truly experienced Reality.
Ultralight
10-15-15, 7:33am
suicide is also considered a sin in Catholicism, so the most probably interpretation of the statement is no afterlife is really depressing, but the alternative one is suicide being a sin has kept me alive.
Atheists have plenty of reasons to not kill themselves. And they are all reality-based! So... bonus!
Here are a few reasons I don't kill myself (despite being largely depressed since the summer of 1979).
- I got mouths to feed, okay, just Harlan's. But he eats a lot!
- Music!
- Peanut butter and jelly sandwiches
- Sex!
- Sex!
- Sex!
- Spring crappie season. :)
- My innate rebelliousness (Death be damned!)
- My sis would prefer I not be dead.
- My significant other would prefer I not be dead.
- My fellow atheists would prefer I not be dead.
- My friends would prefer I not be dead.
- Indian food
- Perrier
- Comedy
- Rainstorms
Really, I could go on longer... But I think you get the idea.
Ultralight
10-15-15, 7:35am
My personal belief is that 99% of the people here on earth have never truly experienced Reality.
I respect your right to believe that. Though I disagree.
I think that it is more of a question of shades. I certainly deal with some artifice. But I strive toward and make progress in being a more reality-based adult each day.
Williamsmith
10-15-15, 7:43am
There is no evidence for that "cool concept."
Santa Claus is a cool concept too. Be nice all year and a fat dude with a white beard in a red suit will bring you all the presents you want!
Does that make it real? No.
A person who believes in heaven cannot be a reality-based adult.
Disagree vehemently..... I also believe in Santa Claus, every year for fifty six years now on Christmas morning I see all kinds of evidence that he exists.
On a completely different level, who is to say, if I believe in Heaven.....it will not be there for me? I believe it, it makes it so.
Ultralight
10-15-15, 7:48am
Disagree vehemently..... I also believe in Santa Claus, every year for fifty six years now on Christmas morning I see all kinds of evidence that he exists.
On a completely different level, who is to say, if I believe in Heaven.....it will not be there for me? I believe it, it makes it so.
Scrutinize the "evidence" of Santa Clause. You will find it is easily debunked.
No, you believing something does not make it so.
flowerseverywhere
10-15-15, 7:58am
It's interesting reading this thread. My atheism seems to be very different from Ultralite's. Perhaps because we came at it from very different places. For me, I was raised an atheist by atheist parents. My mom had been raised in a religious household. My dad, not so much. Both had, by their mid teens, decided that they didn't believe in any version of organized Christianity. Mom was probably more agnostic. Dad was, as far as I ever knew, as much of a true atheist as I am. In my childhood we weren't 'indoctrinated' into atheism. We simply weren't shown any sort of religion whatsoever. If my sister or I asked about it, such as "what do so and so do at church every sunday?" we got a brief explanation that didn't go into detail. "Son, they go to church to worship god with other people who believe in god." Me: "oh. ok. Can I go out and play now?" Perhaps things would've been different if we'd lived in the bible belt, but it wasn't until I was a teen and the 'moral majority' became a thing that I started to view religion as a real issue that might affect me in some way. But as a kid it just wasn't something that was presented as important.
As a lifelong atheist I find Williamsmith's perception that I'm somehow brave for "facing life alone" fascinating. I don't feel brave. I don't feel terrified. It's just the way I have faced life for almost 48 years. I will continue to face life this way for as long as my body keeps functioning. I'm reminded of a catholic friend from college who, when I informed her that I was an atheist, responded with "what keeps you from committing suicide, knowing that there's no heaven to go to when you die?" I may have offended her when I told her that it sounded pretty depressing to view life on earth as only something to be endured with the hope of some sort of better life in the "hereafter". Personally I really enjoy life on earth and hope that I get to enjoy it for many more years. (and I was still a virgin at that point in my life... Goodness, how much more emphatic I would've been if she'd asked me today!)
Fast forward to today. I have no interest in belonging to an atheist group of any sort. Nor would I ever question a religious person about their concept that 'god is everywhere'. To me that would surely be just as annoying to a religious person as it is for me to have to respond to a religious person trying to convert me. And an equal waste of time. 99.9% of people aren't going to change their religious views in any direction.
love this post. I see a lot of confusion between what is God and what are man made rules frequently found in organized religion. It can take the focus off what is really important. If I don't eat meat on Friday, yet am complacent about the pediphiles that were knowingly transferred to a new set of victims am I serving my God? If I follow a Jim Baker blindly while money is lavishly spent instead of serving the needy am I serving my God? If I belong to a religion who will stone a woman to death if she is unfaithful am I serving my God?
It it is not about following a book like the bible which was written hundreds of years after Christ's death, it is about following your heart. Knowing right from wrong, knowing how to stand up for equality, justice and love (in the context of hatefulness against certain religions, race or sexual orientation.). It's about knowing you try to be a good father, mother, partner, citizen of your country and your planet. I don't need a set of rules written by men telling me I should not kill anyone. Or not to steal. Or to give a hand up to those less fortunate. It is the right thing to do regardless of which of the thousands of gods through time you choose to worship.
JaneV2.0
10-15-15, 10:19am
Oh, I think there are tantalizing glimpses into an afterlife. Most people who have spent any time with the dying have anecdotes. Of course, the cynic has a "logical" explanation for all of them. I like to keep my mind open.
iris lilies
10-15-15, 10:24am
I still,think it's possible that some people gave an afterlife, some don't, and what we think happens to us DOES happen to us. It's not the same for each person.
JaneV2.0
10-15-15, 10:31am
If we weren't living it, our lives would seem unimaginable. The complexity!
I think that questioning things -- like "I see god in everything" -- is a hallmark of critical thinking. And we really need more critical thinking in this nation especially.
I agree that we need more critical thinking. The demonization of science by significant segments of American Christians is maddening to be sure and I will continue to fight against anyone who tries to force their religion upon me or anyone else.
However, the basic premise of religion is having faith in it without having proof. Trying to inject critical thinking into a discussion about it is doomed to failure and frustration. Trying to use critical thinking in that discussion will only lead to frustration and annoyance on both sides and seems like a waste of time.
Ultralight
10-15-15, 12:33pm
...I see a lot of confusion between what is God and what are man made rules frequently found in organized religion.
Okay, so if you can differentiate between what god is and what made-made rules in religion are, please explain to me what god is.
Ultralight
10-15-15, 12:42pm
Oh, I think there are tantalizing glimpses into an afterlife. Most people who have spent any time with the dying have anecdotes. Of course, the cynic has a "logical" explanation for all of them. I like to keep my mind open.
Let me take this one piece at a time.
I think there are tantalizing glimpses into an afterlife.
Please tell me more about these. Can you show me a video or photograph of these glimpses into the afterlife?
anecdotes
Anecdotes are not always factual, and I doubt they are ever 100% factual. Lots of times, I would guess, they are fibs or partial fibs.
the cynic has a "logical" explanation for all of them
The cynic? What do you mean? The skeptic would want logical explanations and evidence and proof. The scientist would want to set up and experiment to test the phenomena. The gullible would merely accept such anecdotes.
I like to keep my mind open.
So do I! I am always open to more evidence and will change my actions accordingly. If mountains of evidence show that eating 5 servings of fresh veggies per day is actually really bad for me, then I would stop my struggle to eat more veggies. But right now, there are multiple mountains of evidence for fresh veggies being healthy for humans to eat, for example.
Ultralight
10-15-15, 12:44pm
I still,think it's possible that some people gave an afterlife, some don't, and what we think happens to us DOES happen to us. It's not the same for each person.
It is acceptable for you to think this, but just because it is a thought you have does not make it real.
What we think happens to us in the afterlife is what happens to us? Do you really think that? What did the 9/11 terrorists think would happen to them in their afterlife? Do you think that is indeed what happened to them?
Ultralight
10-15-15, 12:50pm
I agree that we need more critical thinking. The demonization of science by significant segments of American Christians is maddening to be sure and I will continue to fight against anyone who tries to force their religion upon me or anyone else.
However, the basic premise of religion is having faith in it without having proof. Trying to inject critical thinking into a discussion about it is doomed to failure and frustration. Trying to use critical thinking in that discussion will only lead to frustration and annoyance on both sides and seems like a waste of time.
My hope, fruitless as it may be, is to nudge some people into thinking about the things they believe and say.
When Rodeo said "I see god in everything" and I asked about childhood cancer it is highly likely she had this little, tiny thought for a split-second:
"Hmmm...never considered that..."
Then she promptly shut down intellectually, or so it seemed.
Now she may stay shut down. Or she might revisit the idea later and reconsider.
But had that idea of hers never been challenged then she'd go right on thinking it without any possibility of reexamination.
Also: These discussions help me to work through my own ideas and the ideas of others. I learn. I hone my critical thinking skills.
This is helpful in the pursuit of intellectual and human progress, tiny as the steps forward may be.
iris lilies
10-15-15, 12:57pm
It is acceptable for you to think this, but just because it is a thought you have does not make it real.
What we think happens to us in the afterlife is what happens to us? Do you really think that? What did the 9/11 terrorists think would happen to them in their afterlife? Do you think that is indeed what happened to them?
Re the terrorists: I don't WANT them to go to a heaven of 27 virgins, but if they did, wouldn't THAT be a kick in the pants!
I never said said there was logic or order to it. It may be inherently chaotic.
Ultralight
10-15-15, 12:59pm
Re the terrorists: I don't WANT them to go to a heaven of 27 virgins, but if they did, wouldn't THAT be a kick in the pants!
I never said said there was logic or order to it. It may be inherently chaotic.
Or morally reprehensible.
Ultralight
10-15-15, 1:00pm
And for the record you said:
what we think happens to us DOES happen to us
So in your view the terrorists of 9/11 got the afterlife they were looking for.
Sad.
Ultralight
10-15-15, 1:05pm
Here is what I think will happen to me when I pass away.
Death will be a totally unconscious state, like before I was born. My body will, in some fashion, decompose. I'd like to be buried at sea. Let the fish pick my bones.
iris lilies
10-15-15, 1:06pm
And for the record you said:
So in your view the terrorists of 9/11 got the afterlife they were looking for.
Sad.
I think you missed the word " possible " that may not be clear in my sentence.
But sure it's sad, lots of events in this world are sad.
Is that your only point that this terrorist scenario is "sad?" What's the larger point?
Ultralight
10-15-15, 1:17pm
Okay, throw "possible" in there. The omission was not purposeful on my part.
My larger point is that there is a difference between reality and just making stuff up.
For instance, I could say: "The multiverse was created by an invisible pink unicorn in a top hat that only I can see and talk to."
That does not make it real.
Now some would say: "But it is possible that the multiverse was created by an invisible pink unicorn in a top hat that only Ultralite can see and talk to."
But would anyone act upon this possibility? Would anyone reeeeeeally believe that? Seriously?
No.
Why?
No evidence.
But it is just as possible as all the other god/superstitious stuff out there that has no evidence to support it.
Ultralight
10-15-15, 1:26pm
And a sub-point I am making is that when someone says something like "I see god everywhere" that they cannot close their eyes to things like childhood cancer while selectively only seeing petunias and sunshine without being intellectually dishonest with themselves.
So when you or someone else says something like
what we think happens to us DOES happen to us ("possibly") then that does not just include yourself, your loved ones, and people you admire. It includes crazies, maniacs, and bad people.
ToomuchStuff
10-15-15, 1:52pm
You also need to understand the chilling effect that comes with being asked by that landlord if I was god fearing.
Don't understand the chilling point, as I wouldn't find that chilling. No, is such a simple word and No, I don't fear an "all loving god" could both be religious and atheist in response and without giving them more info, a very simple way to get around, whatever chills you. (you seem to have a low sense of fear)
ToomuchStuff: If you read those and actually laugh at them I think you might be what is commonly known as "a really bad person."
And just because I did not lose a job or get passed up for a promotion does not mean that others haven't.
Or for the shock factor, or because your not putting them in a context where they would be funny (thinking it was George Carlin who got on the subject of funny and merged clowns with rape).
But Allen in specific, asks questions to try to get you to keep asking what is the reason for that belief and is it valid. That is directed at you and not what has happened to others or could happen to others. You may feel empathic or sympathetic to them, but how does others what if's affect your views?
Atheism defines me, along with minimalism, simple living, angling, frugality, cycling (as of late), and a handful of other things.
Your life experience is not everyone else's life experience.
My interests don't define me, they are simply a part of me. The second line would good in reverse to where I was coming from (others life experiences are not yours).
Contrary to popular belief, not all Atheists are straight white males.
At my last atheist get-together:
25% women.
There was a biracial guy, a Jew, a Syrian woman, a few gay men, and a lesbian.
Uhm, so this wasn't strictly an atheist get together? (Jew is a religion, not a race, and not sure what sexual orientation has to do with religion).
What was the other race the guy was (never met someone that wasn't human before)?
Do you see god in childhood cancer?
Why wouldn't she? Along with abortion, etc. to get the kid up to "that good place", quicker?
Or maybe the life is precious thing, doesn't apply to cancer.
And I do respect other's beliefs. Questioning someone's beliefs is not always a sign of disrespect.
God is like pornography. You know it (he/she) when you see it. Ours is not to judge what's godly or what's not
If god is like pornography, then it is our job to judge it, as jurists, because it is a legal definition.
I think it's a bit of a stretch to try to define all worldviews as religions. I believe in gravity and I believe there are no unicorns and I believe that winter is coming. I don't think any of those beliefs constitutes a religion.
(rubbing hands, evil genius smiley), that is because I haven't gene spliced a narwhales dna with a horse yet (expect to loose the mother when the baby is born).
An Atheist Church - that's just weird. I don't think I would ever go to such a place.
Remember discussions about starting one some years back, due to tax implications of being a church. (seems to me to be one reason for it).
Scrutinize the "evidence" of Santa Clause. You will find it is easily debunked.
No, you believing something does not make it so.
The mythical being, yes. Based on some historical figure, or someone like Larry Stewart, then no.
Oh, I think there are tantalizing glimpses into an afterlife. Most people who have spent any time with the dying have anecdotes. Of course, the cynic has a "logical" explanation for all of them. I like to keep my mind open.
I've known some that have had NDE's. Without evidence, there is no proof. What I can say is out of the ones I have known that had them (or claimed to):
One died shortly there after (asking when brought back, why did you bring me back).
One became a happier person.
One, didn't seem to change much at all.
iris lilies
10-15-15, 1:56pm
And a sub-point I am making is that when someone says something like "I see god everywhere" that they cannot close their eyes to things like childhood cancer while selectively only seeing petunias and sunshine without being intellectually dishonest with themselves.
So when you or someone else says something like ("possibly") then that does not just include yourself, your loved ones, and people you admire. It includes crazies, maniacs, and bad people.
Well, they certainly CAN close their eyes to childhood cancer if that makes it easier for them to live in this world. I watch the tv show Justified but I close my eyes at the really violent parts, that allows me to watch Raylon Jenning's shenanigans and be entertained. Who are you again to tell those who "see god everywhere" how to live their lives? Are you asking for a statement that recognizes "yeah there is crap in the world and I choose not to look at it" and then will that make you happy and allow others to "see god everywhere?"
To address your 2nd paragraph above, sure, and again. The crazies and maniacs and bad people may get what they want/expect in an afterlife rather than what I think they deserve. That will happen regardless of my, your, or their belief system.
ApatheticNoMore
10-15-15, 2:05pm
You also need to understand the chilling effect that comes with being asked by that landlord if I was god fearing.
why not just lie, I lie all the time in unimportant social relationships or business relationships to smooth things over (tell the truth to your lover and your good friends if you want ... but to people who are nothing to you, lie). The landlord doesn't need to know my religion. The grocery store clerk doesn't need to know my sexual orientation. The boss doesn't' need to know my politics. Etc. As for the landlord finding out you are not Christian, my very name is non-Christian. Call the whambulance. I'm a victim with a capital V. rrrrr I realize things may be very different in the bible belt than here on the left coast, but your going to make this very liberal and understanding of discrimination etc. person, who ALSO happens to hate the Eagles and Don Henley with a passion!!!, put on Don Henley's "Get Over It!"
"Victim of this, victim of that
Your mamas too thin and your daddys too fat
Get over it!
Get over it!"
I would welcome a potential landlord's tipping his hand, personally. I'd be wary of someone who used the phrase "God fearing" with a straight face, and would scratch that rental off my list. And I'd have trouble not guffawing outright. I'm not so good at social dissembling.
ApatheticNoMore
10-15-15, 2:24pm
I would welcome a potential landlord's tipping his hand, personally. I'd be wary of someone who used the phrase "God fearing" with a straight face, and would scratch that rental off my list. And I'd have trouble not guffawing outright. I'm not so good at social dissembling.
he might be the type to go nuts if your brought over a lover, never even mind if it was multiple lovers or a same sex lover etc.. Yea better to find another rental.
ToomuchStuff
10-15-15, 2:31pm
I would welcome a potential landlord's tipping his hand, personally. I'd be wary of someone who used the phrase "God fearing" with a straight face, and would scratch that rental off my list. And I'd have trouble not guffawing outright. I'm not so good at social dissembling.
he might be the type to go nuts if your brought over a lover, never even mind if it was multiple lovers or a same sex lover etc.. Yea better to find another rental.
With today's prevalence of smart phones, (I am the exception, based on my group), it would be trivial to record it and file a HUD complaint/lawsuit.
Ultralight
10-15-15, 2:35pm
No hope...
No hope for my species can be found in this thread.
Exactly. And if I did entertain the idea of a god, s/he wouldn't be a smitey Old Testament type you'd have to fear.
Ultralight
10-15-15, 2:41pm
I feel utterly defeated, though -- interestingly -- not wrong.
Strange mix.
Ultra I'm on your side all the way. Just not so verbal cause I tired of arguing years ago . ..
I went to TAM in Vegas in 2014. Lots of fun. :)
Ultralight
10-15-15, 2:49pm
Ultra I'm on your side all the way. Just not so verbal cause I tired of arguing years ago . ..
I went to TAM in Vegas in 2014. Lots of fun. :)
I will follow your lead and quit arguing. You might be on to something! haha
You can feel despair (or disdain, more apparently), but I am not surprised there are a variety of considered opinions here. Yours is just one of many.
(And yes, I could see recording his question and reporting your potential landlord, though it would just make him more cautious, not more open-minded.)
Williamsmith
10-15-15, 3:42pm
Is there a reason why believers must prove God exists? Why shouldn't an atheist have the same burden of proof to provide evidence that God does not exist?
There are so many ways of looking at this issue, so many different ways of thinking about it. The place we run into trouble is ... I think it's fear. Fear that the sense of peace or protection our way of thinking affords us might be stripped away by someone with different thoughts "winning". I believe there are also people who simply want others to share in the joy or the clarity that their particular faith or lack of faith creates within them. But in the larger sense as well as in this discussion, I'm not sure why we need to convince anyone to look with more (or less) objectivity at their own beliefs, provided those beliefs are harmless to others. Religion is not logical, but that lack of logic does not in and of itself pose a threat. From laughter to love there are loads of things that aren't logical that are still a delight, i don't see why anyone needs to discard what they find good as long as they function ethically and logically in relation to other people.
Eta: I also have never followed the logic of, "if there is no afterlife why not commit suicide right now". What? That's like saying "that delicious cake is eventually going to be inedible, so why not throw it out now instead of eating it."
ApatheticNoMore
10-15-15, 4:27pm
Eta: I also have never followed the logic of, "if there is no afterlife why not commit suicide right now". What? That's like saying "that delicious cake is eventually going to be inedible, so why not throw it out now instead of eating it."
I pointed an alternative explanation, they had already been suicidal at some point (as a teenager maybe), belief that those who commit suicide go to h3ll or at any rate don't go to heaven (and my understanding is that is what catholic doctrine says), may have stopped it. I have heard a person say this once, though I hardly know they would have committed suicide otherwise. Why do people commit suicide? I don't know. I'm pretty sure it's because life to them is not a delicious cake though!
Some people can find the finiteness of life and what can feel like vast pointlessness and the inevitable progression to death (that road only leads in that direction) bleak. When I have gotten in that mood it was "the way to overcome our fears is to face them and go through them ... everyone knows that... the same with the fear of death ... I'm tired of waiting for it (death), tired of thinking about it, tired of it stalking me, I just want to face it, get it over with..."
Nope I'm not suicidal, I'm not even particularly depressed but have been at times.
Is there a reason why believers must prove God exists? Why shouldn't an atheist have the same burden of proof to provide evidence that God does not exist?
Or at least offer an alternative theory for existence?
No hope...
No hope for my species can be found in this thread.
What species is that?
Honestly, I don't know what your preferred outcome might be but I'm pretty sure that anytime you try to force your opinion on someone and refer to others as not rational or not critical thinkers, you're going to get a little backlash. Try allowing others the comfort of their own beliefs without feeling threatened by them, it will make you happier.
Williamsmith
10-15-15, 5:15pm
I have always found the doctrine of suicidal persons being excluded from heaven to be troublesome. Especially after being in so many places and investigating literally over several hundred such incidents. A small percentage actually write a letter of departure and many I have read express such unbearable pain at life and such thankfulness for the option of ending that pain. Though I know many who would have lived on happily had they been able to just get passed the pain with some type of help. Still to judge what is bearable and what is not, is not a place I want to put myself.
Ultralight
10-15-15, 7:05pm
“Sometimes people don't want to hear the truth because they don't want their illusions destroyed.”
― Friedrich Nietzsche (http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/1938.Friedrich_Nietzsche)
"Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth." ~ Marcus Aurelius
“Not everything that matters can be measured, and not everything that can be measured matters.” Albert Einstein
“The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious, it is the source of all true art and science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead: His eyes are closed.” Albert Einstein
You're proselytizing. Stop it.
In science, the burden of proof falls upon the claimant; and the more extraordinary a claim, the heavier is the burden of proof demanded. The true skeptic takes an agnostic position, one that says the claim is not proved rather than disproved. He asserts that the claimant has not borne the burden of proof and that science must continue to build its cognitive map of reality without incorporating the extraordinary claim as a new "fact". Since the true skeptic does not assert a claim, he has no burden to prove anything. He just goes on using the established theories of "conventional science" as usual. But if a critic asserts that there is evidence for disproof, that he has a negative hypothesis—saying, for instance, that a seeming psi result was actually due to an artifact—he is making a claim and therefore also has to bear a burden of proof.
— Marcello Truzzi, On Pseudo-Skepticism, Zetetic Scholar, 12/13, pp3-4, 1987
rosarugosa
10-15-15, 7:34pm
However, the basic premise of religion is having faith in it without having proof. Trying to inject critical thinking into a discussion about it is doomed to failure and frustration. Trying to use critical thinking in that discussion will only lead to frustration and annoyance on both sides and seems like a waste of time.
That pretty much nails why I try to avoid theological debates these days. Trying to have a logic-based discussion with someone who eschews logic is just an exercise in frustration.
I still,think it's possible that some people gave an afterlife, some don't, and what we think happens to us DOES happen to us. It's not the same for each person.
The idea that what happens to us after death is whatever we believe makes as much sense to me as the idea that a puppy who thinks it is a kitten will grow up to be a cat. Totally irrational.
Logic is useful in solving a math equation, designing a bridge, or acing an IQ test. Living a Spock-like life must be like living without color.
As I've related, logic has led me astray before, so for possibly life-altering situations, I try (habits are hard to break) to go with my instincts. I've proved my ability to reason to my satisfaction, whether others are convinced or not.
rosarugosa
10-15-15, 7:54pm
Is there a reason why believers must prove God exists? Why shouldn't an atheist have the same burden of proof to provide evidence that God does not exist?
I would respond with Russell's teapot:
"If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is an intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time."
(Bertrand Russell, "Is there a god?")
People had "evidence" a few centuries ago that we laugh about in our time. People a few centuries from our time are going to laugh similarly when it comes to our "evidence".
"For now we see in a mirror, dimly..." 1 Cor 14
"When we remember we are all mad, the mysteries disappear and life stands explained." -Mark Twain
"I am not young enough to know everything." -Oscar Wilde
"Come away, O human child!
To the waters and the wild
With a faery, hand in hand.
For the world's more full of weeping than you can understand." -W.B. Yeats
“The more I learn, the more I realize how much I don't know.” -Albert Einstein
Williamsmith
10-16-15, 6:45am
“Sometimes people don't want to hear the truth because they don't want their illusions destroyed.”
― Friedrich Nietzsche (http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/1938.Friedrich_Nietzsche)
Truth is not that far from illusion. Truth is constantly evolving. Truth at one place and time is another's illusion. Truth may not even be determined by our limited resources and perspective and it may often be more beneficial to society to operate on illusion rather than an ill described notion of truth. Truth is harder to maintain than a blob of liquid mercury in ones hand.
My tradition says and believes ,God is Love. I can show evidence of love. Where I find love, I find God. Therefore, God exists.
Ultralight
10-16-15, 7:25am
I really need to lower my expectations of adults when it comes to critical thinking.
Williamsmith
10-16-15, 7:46am
Another poor debate tactic.....attack the other person and not the topic. It must be frustrating trying to exchange ideas with people who are thoughtless and near imbeciles, you who have such supreme intellect.
catherine
10-16-15, 8:08am
I really need to lower my expectations of adults when it comes to critical thinking.
There are scores of intellectuals in the ranks of the believers. Including scientists. Try reading Pascal or Teilhard de Chardin.
For after all what is man in nature? A nothing in relation to infinity, all in relation to nothing, a central point between nothing and all and infinitely far from understanding either. The ends of things and their beginnings are impregnably concealed from him in an impenetrable secret. He is equally incapable of seeing the nothingness out of which he was drawn and the infinite in which he is engulfed.
Blaise Pascal, Pensées No. 72
Ultralight
10-16-15, 8:48am
Another poor debate tactic.....attack the other person and not the topic. It must be frustrating trying to exchange ideas with people who are thoughtless and near imbeciles, you who have such supreme intellect.
Uh... I was lamenting, not the people, but their unfortunate tendency think avoid critical thinking.
This is not critical thinking. I call this "making stuff up.":
"....God is Love. I can show evidence of love. Where I find love, I find God. Therefore, God exists."
And...
I do not have a supreme intellect! LOL
I try my best to think critically and be open to new evidence. Amongst my group of critical thinkers/secular humanists/atheists I am maybe toward the middle or the bottom in brightness. I learn much from those who are brighter than me!
I would not say you are an imbecile. So relax! I am only saying that you are not thinking critically.
catherine
10-16-15, 8:57am
This is not critical thinking. I call this "making stuff up.":
"....God is Love. I can show evidence of love. Where I find love, I find God. Therefore, God exists."
There are different ways of knowing. Critical thinking is just one of them. If you hang your hat on ONLY critical thinking, you may be missing out on a lot. I know/experience God the same way Williamsmith does.
I try my best to think critically and be open to new evidence. Amongst my group of critical thinkers/secular humanists/atheists I am maybe toward the middle or the bottom in brightness. I learn much from those who are brighter than me!
I'm trying to understand the function of this group you keep referring to. If it's a simple matter of "I see no acceptable evidence or argument for the existence of a god or gods, therefore there is no god", what need is there for confirmation or reinforcement from like-minded people? Surely "critical thinking" can't be a herd activity?
IshbelRobertson
10-16-15, 9:25am
Religion is not so 'in your face' here as it appears to be in many parts of the USA. It is considered a private matter and not readily an item of general conversation.
I am an agnostic, despite being a cradle Catholic.
I like my paraphrasing of an agnostic's prayer, written if I recall correctly, by an American.
'God, if there is one, save my soul, if I have one'.
Works for me.
Ultralight
10-16-15, 9:27am
I'm trying to understand the function of this group you keep referring to. If it's a simple matter of "I see no acceptable evidence or argument for the existence of a god or gods, therefore there is no god", what need is there for confirmation or reinforcement from like-minded people? Surely "critical thinking" can't be a herd activity?
The functions of the secular community I am part of vary greatly. We like to be around like-minded folks. We like to be able to be ourselves as "out" atheists amongst each other. We also commiserate and support each other in dealing with living in a religious society.
Some of us are activists. Some of us are more into it for the social aspect. For instance, if you were part of my secular community you could:
-Go to a happy hour
-Go canoeing
-Go hiking
-Have brunch
-Meditate
-Get dinner
-Join the book club
-Play board games
-Workshop your critical thinking with the Rationality crew
-Join a discussion group
-Do some small group therapy
-Go to concerts, movies, etc.
Every month we have more than 20 different activities going on!
What do you mean a "herd activity?"
I think I better understand the original poll cited now. People apparently feel similarly about Evangelical Christians and atheists, fearing that they'll be buttonholed. proselytized, and sneered at in a kind of spiritual beatdown by members of either sect.
The Socialists now, I don't understand, since Democratic Socialism is quite successful in Europe where six of the top ten happiest countries are located. I blame relentless propaganda for that ranking.
Like jp1, I don't give much thought day to day about my belief or lack thereof. Religion was never part of my life growing up, and I don't miss it. That doesn't mean I never consider the larger (unknowable) picture.
The functions of the secular community I am part of vary greatly. We like to be around like-minded folks. We like to be able to be ourselves as "out" atheists amongst each other. We also commiserate and support each other in dealing with living in a religious society.
Some of us are activists. Some of us are more into it for the social aspect. For instance, if you were part of my secular community you could:
-Go to a happy hour
-Go canoeing
-Go hiking
-Have brunch
-Meditate
-Get dinner
-Join the book club
-Play board games
-Workshop your critical thinking with the Rationality crew
-Join a discussion group
-Do some small group therapy
-Go to concerts, movies, etc.
Every month we have more than 20 different activities going on!
What do you mean a "herd activity?"
You could do all those things without being in an atheist group. Is it simply more interesting to socialize with people who validate your beliefs?
I think that people who believe in God often don't need 'proof'. It's more about feelings and awareness and instincts. so, when an atheist or agnostic or someone struggling with faith says 'show me the proof' people are unable (or unwilling too). They have no hard core scientific proof/facts/evidence but they have their feelings and instincts which they see in the world around them. So, it becomes a circle...the one says 'show me the proof' and the other says 'the proof is all around you' and the one says, 'I don't see anything' and then the other says, 'how can you not - it is in the beauty of everything'....
As well, I truly believe that there are many different kinds of atheists, just as there are many different kinds of Christians. My best friend is atheist and for her it all ends at "I don't believe in God". It goes no further than that. According to her she doesn't even give it much thought most days about why she believes this and why and what it means. It just is that. Then there are others, like my spouse, who is atheist but likes to discuss why he feels this way and what that means and how Religions have got everything backwards . He likes to discuss all this with other Atheists. I guess he likes the community of being around others that feel the same way as him (I personally think he would join an Atheist 'church' if there was one available to him). And there are other atheists I've met who are somewhere in the middle of these 2 extremes. So, what works for UA might not work for other atheists...just as what works for me as a-sort-of Christian wouldn't work for a Baptist.
UA, just because I can't offer you proof of a God (especially the kind of proof you are looking for) doesn't mean that it makes me believe any less in a Divine Being. Lack of proof doesn't change how I feel. Often, I wish other people who believe in God could admit this out loud. I think it would go a long way to building bridges between all kinds of people.
The functions of the secular community I am part of vary greatly. We like to be around like-minded folks. We like to be able to be ourselves as "out" atheists amongst each other. We also commiserate and support each other in dealing with living in a religious society.
Some of us are activists. Some of us are more into it for the social aspect. For instance, if you were part of my secular community you could:
-Go to a happy hour
-Go canoeing
-Go hiking
-Have brunch
-Meditate
-Get dinner
-Join the book club
-Play board games
-Workshop your critical thinking with the Rationality crew
-Join a discussion group
-Do some small group therapy
-Go to concerts, movies, etc.
Every month we have more than 20 different activities going on!
What do you mean a "herd activity?"
So it's more a social than an epistemological thing? I affiliate as a Catholic, a Republican and a Certified Public Accountant, but that doesn't mean I especially want to drink with Catholics, play board games with Republicans or go hiking with CPAs. Is it that you feel yourself to be part of an embattled minority who can only be comfortable among your own kind?
As far as the "herd activity" question, I was curious about the need to attend group workshops about thinking for oneself.
Ultralight
10-16-15, 11:35am
You could do all those things without being in an atheist group. Is it simply more interesting to socialize with people who validate your beliefs?
In part, but not wholly.
Ultralight
10-16-15, 11:36am
UA, just because I can't offer you proof of a God (especially the kind of proof you are looking for) doesn't mean that it makes me believe any less in a Divine Being. Lack of proof doesn't change how I feel. Often, I wish other people who believe in God could admit this out loud. I think it would go a long way to building bridges between all kinds of people.
This has frightening implications.
Ultralight
10-16-15, 11:36am
So it's more a social than an epistemological thing? I affiliate as a Catholic, a Republican and a Certified Public Accountant, but that doesn't mean I especially want to drink with Catholics, play board games with Republicans or go hiking with CPAs. Is it that you feel yourself to be part of an embattled minority who can only be comfortable among your own kind?
In part, probably.
ApatheticNoMore
10-16-15, 11:45am
Religion is not so 'in your face' here as it appears to be in many parts of the USA. It is considered a private matter and not readily an item of general conversation.
that is my experience, it's not a matter for general conversation really unless ... what xmas holidays? Uh that's really mostly materialism rather than Christianity of course. It's in your face, it's horrible, and I DO need a refuge from the xmas holidays so if it's mostly a support group for surviving that time of year, I get it! People wishing one a Merry Christmas on Christmas eve - well yea there is that, but that's hardly bad enough to require refuge ...
I don't think there's anything wrong with a social group, it's mostly not about religion probably but an atomized society where most people are when the truth is told lonely! There's a lot of data on the U.S. being a lonely society. Just honestly if I were to join any random social group except an explicitly religious one there would be bound to be a decent amount of non-believers. I do seem to have a problem with running into New Age people a lot, they are much more in your face than Christians who don't really talk about their beliefs much (New Agers do!). I'm not so sure it's a "New Age society" though, that's some California thing I think.
You could do all those things without being in an atheist group. Is it simply more interesting to socialize with people who validate your beliefs?
it's a lonely atomized society, we must take human company where we can find it. We can not always be picky even.
The thing about critical thinking is I don't think anyone really has a monopoly on it or that it's always found in one place. Like I watched that atheist film promo, I considered it propaganda (the promo as I did not see the film itself), based on a media analysis perspective. Why? Ha someone here pointed out: pretty pictures. And stirring music etc., these are things aimed at emotions not intellect and to very directly manipulate them in such a context.
The Socialists now, I don't understand, since Democratic Socialism is quite successful in Europe where six of the top ten happiest countries are located. I blame relentless propaganda for that ranking.
I think that for various reasons America (or at least a good part of it) is a more aspirational culture than Europe. When Europe claims "We report ourselves to be happier, we win." a sizeable segment of America responds "You're confusing happiness with complacency, it's really more about the striving than the result". It may be that American culture is somewhat more willing to accept a somewhat more ruthlessly competitive culture over a more comfortably regulated life and poll accordingly.
I suspect, though, that we may see more of a convergence over the course of the present century. America seems to be getting more comfortable with collectivist solutions, and some of Europe's governments are scaling back their welfare states to reflect material realities.
This has frightening implications.
But why? Because I can admit that I can't give you the proof you want or desire to see? My faith is not about proof. And I'm okay with that. I dunno how to explain that to you so you will understand it.
Or is it because you desire to convert me to atheism and because I am okay with not having/needing empirical evidence you will be unsuccessful and that makes you uncomfortable?
Or is it because you now think I'm easily led and gullible and believe whatever I'm told? (which I can firmly assert and assure you is not the case)
Ultralight
10-16-15, 12:28pm
But why? Because I can admit that I can't give you the proof you want or desire to see? My faith is not about proof. And I'm okay with that. I dunno how to explain that to you so you will understand it.
Or is it because you desire to convert me to atheism and because I am okay with not having/needing empirical evidence you will be unsuccessful and that makes you uncomfortable?
Or is it because you now think I'm easily led and gullible and believe whatever I'm told? (which I can firmly assert and assure you is not the case)
Because believing things without proof or evidence, or getting into the habit of not asking for proof or evidence, can create (or this case, maintain) a culture of ignorance.
ApatheticNoMore
10-16-15, 12:44pm
Because believing things without proof or evidence, or getting into the habit of not asking for proof or evidence, can create (or this case, maintain) a culture of ignorance.
in theory I suppose. Was Martin Luther King an ignorant man? He was a religious man. And so on.
Ultralight
10-16-15, 12:54pm
in theory I suppose. Was Martin Luther King an ignorant man? He was a religious man. And so on.
This is a convenient time to bring up compartmentalization. Unless you're already familiar with it. Are you?
iris lilies
10-16-15, 1:23pm
...The idea that what happens to us after death is whatever we believe makes as much sense to me as the idea that a puppy who thinks it is a kitten will grow up to be a cat. Totally irrational.
oh, I don't really think that. I just consider it as a theory that's far "out there" and explains why many of us are so convinced we know what happens to us after death.
I really think that there is nothingness after death for me and everyone else. I find that to be a peaceful concept.
Ultralight
10-16-15, 1:30pm
"Creationists make it sound as though a 'theory' is something you dreamed up after being drunk all night." -- Isaac Asimov
Astrology. I have acquaintances who firmly believe the motion of the planets and the stars in the heavens strongly influences their fate, and they attribute predictive power to their belief system. A striking percentage of Americans are into astrology. ( http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind14/index.cfm/chapter-7/c7s2.htm )
I would never vote for such a person for office.
Ultralight
10-16-15, 1:49pm
I am signing off this particular thread. You all have a good weekend!
Williamsmith
10-16-15, 2:30pm
I am signing off this particular thread. You all have a good weekend!
This is a rather disappointing development. I was looking forward to further discussion. Critical thinking must be exhausting. I wanted to ask if he was born an atheist or if he could pinpoint when he became an atheist.
This is a rather disappointing development. I was looking forward to further discussion. Critical thinking must be exhausting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jj4nJ1YEAp4
Critical thinking and religion. The story and writings of C.S. Lewis could be interesting for those interested in this topic. C.S. Lewis was an atheist turned Christian and I doubt many people could ever claim that he lacked critical thinking, whether or not they agreed with his views.
https://www.cslewis.com/blog/c-s-lewis-as-atheist-turned-apostle/
Lewis’s spiritual journey (like that of St. Paul and St. Augustine) was an unusually long one. At age seventeen, C. S. Lewis explained bluntly to a Christian friend he’d known since childhood, “I believe in no religion. There is absolutely no proof for any of them, and from a philosophical standpoint Christianity is not even the best.” Fifteen years later, he would write to the same friend on a very different note: “Christianity is God expressing Himself through what we call ‘real things,’ . . . namely the actual incarnation, crucifixion, and resurrection.” This turnabout did not reflect a “Damascus road” conversion; it took Lewis all of that fifteen years to change his mind.
Regarding heaven as a motivation, agreed it doesn't motivate me per se but it certainly has a prominent spot in my belief system. It has always been perceive as a place where I will be reunited with loved ones I have been separated from by death. Now that is a cool concept that Atheism does not provide. And it has real benefits for living folks facing the transition of death.
Except for one teeny tiny little fly in that ointment...The concept of heaven, as defined by most Christians, is in fact hell. Or rather should be, if you are really the loving person who won that coveted spot in the first place.
I mean, I'm guessing you know folks, friends or even family members who you just KNOW aren't going to heaven, right? So, if they aren't going to heaven, and will instead burn forever in the fires of hell...what about that exactly makes it heaven for you? Is part of the heavenly experience developing a sadistic pleasure in knowing a beloved friend or family member is suffering? Forever? Is that your idea of heaven? The 'exclusive country club' dynamics of heaven certainly appeals to natural human ego and arrogance, except for that whole 'tortured forever in the fires of hell' aspect. Perhaps once you enter those pearly gates you somehow just don't care any more what happens to anyone else, which again would seem to fly in the face of why you were supposedly chosen/deserving of the honor in the first place.
(and really, does an eternity of worshiping the jerk who put your beloved Uncle George in hell forever simply because he didn't think He existed seem like a good time to you?) (and really really, isn't condemning good people to hell kind of against what it's all supposed to be about anyway?) JMHO
In this context I think "absence of proof" and "lack of evidence" are pretty much interchangeable. The scientific method may work differently in your ivory tower than it does out here in the sitcks, but regarding the existence of God its a pretty well trodden path to a working hypothesis around here. The next step for us always involved an experiment then analyzing the results of it. If we try to prove there is a god the results tend to show that yes there is a possibility, but unless someone stumbles across a burning bush there is a lack of empirical evidence. If we try to prove there is not a god the results tend to show that yes there is a possibility, but even if you are able to uncover evidence that everything since is completely random there is still that pesky big bang thingy. The fall down point is when someone assumes that a lack of proof in one thing proves the opposite. It doesn't. Correlation and causation and all that rot. In the end there is little empirical evidence either way and whichever side you take is based on assumptions, beliefs, faith or other emotional responses that fall outside the pure application of the scientific method.
Not really. In the scientific world, it isn't on me to prove your invisible friend doesn't exist. It's on you to prove he does. That's how it works.
Except for one teeny tiny little fly in that ointment...The concept of heaven, as defined by most Christians, is in fact hell. Or rather should be, if you are really the loving person who won that coveted spot in the first place.
I'm open to different interpretations, but one of my favorite concepts of heaven is being in the presence of God and hell as a separation from God, and its our choice as to how we reside and develop our hearts accordingly. The final judgment is God looking into our hearts and determining these inner desires. I don't necessarily view heaven and hell as specific places, but potentially as states of being.
Not really. In the scientific world, it isn't on me to prove your invisible friend doesn't exist. It's on you to prove he does. That's how it works.
It could go both ways considering that science cannot prove either, or disprove either. (I'm also not convinced that we do, as an absolute, live in a scientific world, as much as I do love science.)
I really need to lower my expectations of adults when it comes to critical thinking. I know you said you're outtahere as far as this thread, but . . . hmm.
What I'm wondering is why you find it so bothersome that some people on this website choose to suspend critical thinking when it comes to religious or spiritual ideas. I think many people here, actual individuals that you've interacted with over the course of being at SLN, not some anonymous "them", have shown themselves to be smart, compassionate, funny, knowledgeable, objective, friendly, earnest in their desire to contribute and help, honest and a lot of other sterling qualities. I understand that, as Bae said, you might not vote them into office, there's a difference between nice and appropriate and people who hold beliefs I find illogical or disturbing aren't usually the ones I want making my decisions, but within the framework of day to day life, why is the idea of these friends having religious beliefs so troubling? You could miss some beautiful trees in your fear of the forest.
Maybe I'm the one proselytizing now, but do you really see it as so wrong to take what you like (about people) and leave the rest? Why?
I'm open to different interpretations, but one of my favorite concepts of heaven is being in the presence of God and hell as a separation from God, and its our choice as to how we reside and develop our hearts accordingly. The final judgment is God looking into our hearts and determining these inner desires. I don't necessarily view heaven and hell as specific places, but potentially as states of being.
What a gracious response to a rebarbative outburst. You might even call it Christian.
Except for one teeny tiny little fly in that ointment...The concept of heaven, as defined by most Christians, is in fact hell. Or rather should be, if you are really the loving person who won that coveted spot in the first place.
I mean, I'm guessing you know folks, friends or even family members who you just KNOW aren't going to heaven, right? So, if they aren't going to heaven, and will instead burn forever in the fires of hell...what about that exactly makes it heaven for you? Is part of the heavenly experience developing a sadistic pleasure in knowing a beloved friend or family member is suffering? Forever? Is that your idea of heaven? The 'exclusive country club' dynamics of heaven certainly appeals to natural human ego and arrogance, except for that whole 'tortured forever in the fires of hell' aspect. Perhaps once you enter those pearly gates you somehow just don't care any more what happens to anyone else, which again would seem to fly in the face of why you were supposedly chosen/deserving of the honor in the first place.
(and really, does an eternity of worshiping the jerk who put your beloved Uncle George in hell forever simply because he didn't think He existed seem like a good time to you?) (and really really, isn't condemning good people to hell kind of against what it's all supposed to be about anyway?) JMHO
Perhaps you've hit upon the reason that religious people sometimes feel the need to try and 'save' us heathens. And i can perhaps understand that when the heathen is a belived uncle, but if i'm just a random stranger, or in the context of this thread, a random citizen affected by their governmental actions, i wish they'd just leave me be.
Williamsmith
10-16-15, 8:00pm
Peggy,
The God I believe in is a God of love. A god who allows each person to exercise their own free will. Believe or not believe. Believers will be in Gods presence for eternity after death. Non believers will not at their own choosing. Descriptions of heaven and hell are a way to express that separation. In any event, as far as relatives, brothers, sisters, mothers and fathers are concerned......I have no way of determining what their relationship with God really is and so I leave it to an omnipotent being to have planned it all out perfectly.
Except for one teeny tiny little fly in that ointment...The concept of heaven, as defined by most Christians, is in fact hell. Or rather should be, if you are really the loving person who won that coveted spot in the first place.
I mean, I'm guessing you know folks, friends or even family members who you just KNOW aren't going to heaven, right? So, if they aren't going to heaven, and will instead burn forever in the fires of hell...what about that exactly makes it heaven for you? Is part of the heavenly experience developing a sadistic pleasure in knowing a beloved friend or family member is suffering? Forever? Is that your idea of heaven? The 'exclusive country club' dynamics of heaven certainly appeals to natural human ego and arrogance, except for that whole 'tortured forever in the fires of hell' aspect. Perhaps once you enter those pearly gates you somehow just don't care any more what happens to anyone else, which again would seem to fly in the face of why you were supposedly chosen/deserving of the honor in the first place.
(and really, does an eternity of worshiping the jerk who put your beloved Uncle George in hell forever simply because he didn't think He existed seem like a good time to you?) (and really really, isn't condemning good people to hell kind of against what it's all supposed to be about anyway?) JMHO
Didn't Christian Universalism (which eventually became the Universalism part of Unitarian Universalism?) address this line of reasoning? Catholics have purgatory for those who fall just a little short.
Personally I think if people really believed in Hell, they'd be working a lot harder to avoid it.
I had a conversation with a fellow atheist the other day. Sd, can you imagine this, then?
God: Mr. X will be dying shortly, all friends and relations please assemble for the greeting in the light at 8:00 HST (heaven standard time).
Mrs. X: Oh good grief, I have a meeting with Gabriel and then an appointment for Glorious Hair. Can it wait?
:~) sorry. I just have such a hard time with these oh-so-human descriptions of what happens after being any better than what happens now.
Williamsmith
10-16-15, 8:31pm
My particular understanding is that there is no amount of good works that qualify you, all you simply have to do is claim it. It is made possible for all through Gods grace. That's what I did at age 14 and for all my shortcomings since then, I have been forgiven because Gods son is a sacrifice for any condition of worthiness I fall short of.
Williamsmith
10-16-15, 8:33pm
Yes, I believe God is both three and one. cow-hi
What a gracious response to a rebarbative outburst. You might even call it Christian.
Rebarbative outburst? Really? My my...
So what makes my opinion so repulsive and any other not? Why was my opinion not 'gracious'?
I certainly didn't call anyone names, or deride anyone. I just gave my views of heaven. I can't imagine any place that didn't include my friends and family would be heaven. How is that not gracious'? Do you consider such a place heaven? I'm sorry for you if that is your definition of heaven. or rather, I'm sorry for your family and friends, or anyone who now considers you a friend who you secretly KNOW won't 'get in'.
Funny how when you don't have an answer you resort to derision. I believe my opinion on a hereafter is as valid as anyone else s.
to williamsmith: a sacrifice to whom, though? I have to admit I get tangled in the logic. God sent his son to earth to die for our sins. But to whom is God beholden that he can't simply forgive without that extra bit of torture? To Himself? That makes a part of God rather ... er ... unchristian.
Ok, well the problem with proof or lack of proof is that I can say there is a poodle in a tea cup circling the earth and answering prayers and granting wishes of really good people and it holds EXACTLY the same weight and validity as your god. Exactly the same. And unless you can show me proof it is your god rather than my poodle who is directing things here on earth (the beautiful trees, eye balls, complexity of everything) then we are on equal footing. Good enough, right?
OK, what if i start trying to direct laws, and governing according to my poodle's wishes (which, conveniently enough coincide with mine) ? What then?
See, I think this is where the problem lies. No one really cares what you believe. Not really. This is how we have managed to live together all these thousands of years. We are all on this path together, and whatever gets you through this world is great. Really.
But if you try to pull out your god, wave him/her in my face and dictate my life, then we have a problem. Abortion is legal. Get over it. Gay marriage is legal. Get over it. The majority of Americans want safe, legal abortions and gays to have equal rights. That's it. Period.
'Under God' was added in the 50's. it needs to come out. We are NOT all under God, as it turns out. If you want to be 'under god' then you can take a pen and write 'under god' on your money, (although I think equating god with money is kind of, well, you think about it...) But excuse me if i write 'under science' on the bill. or someone else writes 'under Allah' on the money. See, that's how it works in the US. Or at least how it's supposed to work. Maybe we should just leave that space blank for folks to write in whatever they want to be 'under'.
A person's religious belief used to be private. And personal. That's the way it should be. keep your religion in your church and I'll keep my beliefs in my home. And neither will try to dictate the behavior of the other.
to williamsmith: a sacrifice to whom, though? I have to admit I get tangled in the logic. God sent his son to earth to die for our sins. But who is God beholden to that he can't simply forgive without that extra bit of torture? To Himself? That makes a part of God rather ... er ... unchristian.
+1
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/c9/aa/16/c9aa16d5e745ab47d8ca393c72ef263c.jpg
Do Unto Others, Damn It.
rosarugosa
10-16-15, 10:14pm
Welcome back Peggy, and well said.
In my experience, it has typically been Christians interrogating me, asking me to defend my beliefs, prove there is no teapot in the sky, etc., when I was perhaps talking to them about the weather or something. So some of us atheists can get a bit defensive with good reason, even though aforementioned Christians were people who love me and were trying to save my immortal soul from the eternal fire. I used to get pretty pissed, but now I'm older and more mellow, and just ask if we can't go back to talking about the weather? Cause if I'm not worried about my soul, why do you need to worry? It's a totally no-win waste of breath.
Williamsmith
10-17-15, 8:52am
Ok, well the problem with proof or lack of proof is that I can say there is a poodle in a tea cup circling the earth and answering prayers and granting wishes of really good people and it holds EXACTLY the same weight and validity as your god. Exactly the same. And unless you can show me proof it is your god rather than my poodle who is directing things here on earth (the beautiful trees, eye balls, complexity of everything) then we are on equal footing. Good enough, right?
OK, what if i start trying to direct laws, and governing according to my poodle's wishes (which, conveniently enough coincide with mine) ? What then?
See, I think this is where the problem lies. No one really cares what you believe. Not really. This is how we have managed to live together all these thousands of years. We are all on this path together, and whatever gets you through this world is great. Really.
But if you try to pull out your god, wave him/her in my face and dictate my life, then we have a problem. Abortion is legal. Get over it. Gay marriage is legal. Get over it. The majority of Americans want safe, legal abortions and gays to have equal rights. That's it. Period.
'Under God' was added in the 50's. it needs to come out. We are NOT all under God, as it turns out. If you want to be 'under god' then you can take a pen and write 'under god' on your money, (although I think equating god with money is kind of, well, you think about it...) But excuse me if i write 'under science' on the bill. or someone else writes 'under Allah' on the money. See, that's how it works in the US. Or at least how it's supposed to work. Maybe we should just leave that space blank for folks to write in whatever they want to be 'under'.
A person's religious belief used to be private. And personal. That's the way it should be. keep your religion in your church and I'll keep my beliefs in my home. And neither will try to dictate the behavior of the other.
You have obviously been offended by someone or group other than myself. I have mentioned nothing about directing laws or governing based on my religious beliefs. I believe in separation of religion and state. And I dont view the United States as a Christian nation. Perhaps deist but certainly inclusive of poodle in a tea cup.
Abortion is legal. I am all for abortion, as long as it is not my own. We can have a discussion whether it is moral or not and we can both advocate for or against its current legal status. Our form of government does not have a "get over it" clause. That's a buzz phrase the news media has served up to divide and stir up hatred. Turning back the clock, women do not vote, blacks cannot be educated here, or remaining in the present , I can carry my rifle in public........"get over it".
In God We Trust........is a preposterous statement. And it is probably an offense to a God to have it printed on our money or perhaps he laughs about it.
There is no reason a persons belief system has to be private or kept in a closet. If I believed in a poodle in a tea cup....okay point made. But I am not embarrassed by my belief in God.
It appears convenient for you to make enemies with Christians...too convenient. Next will be Muslims.
JaneV2.0
10-17-15, 11:00am
I don't know why either side in this debate gets so all-fired self-righteous and judgy about it when we can't possibly know "the truth." I can't believe wars and persecution happen over a matter so completely inscrutable.
I don't know why either side in this debate gets so all-fired self-righteous and judgy about it when we can't possibly know "the truth." I can't believe wars and persecution happen over a matter so completely inscrutable.+1
WilliamSmith, I don't think anyone is blaming you personally for religious persecution, but that blurring of church and state is where it all gets murky, and murkier still for people who don't have a "church side". If I, as a member of a predominant group, told you that the laws of your country would now be created using 1. logic and fairness, and 2. extreme respect and veneration of tiny poodles and their perceived dictates, feelings and opinions, wouldn't that be bothersome to you?
-- re-reading, you've just said it would, sorry. The thing is, religious belief tends to creep into secular life, and the more passionate people are about the belief, the more it happens. I don't personally care if someone worships in a closet or shouts their religious beliefs from a mountaintop, but I don't want my life dictated by it.
I don't know why either side in this debate gets so all-fired self-righteous and judgy about it when we can't possibly know "the truth." I can't believe wars and persecution happen over a matter so completely inscrutable.
But if people didn't get all self righteous and judgy about religion half the wars in history wouldn't have happened. How would we keep kids busy in history classes without so many pointless wars to study?
bekkilyn
10-17-15, 12:12pm
I like tiny poodles.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/c9/aa/16/c9aa16d5e745ab47d8ca393c72ef263c.jpg
Do Unto Others, Damn It.
Now there's a deity I can get behind! or rather under as he sits on my lap, that cute little muppet puppy...:D
But if people didn't get all self righteous and judgy about religion half the wars in history wouldn't have happened. How would we keep kids busy in history classes without so many pointless wars to study?
Yeah. Not too many atheist flying planes into buildings screaming "Praise be Science!";)
I like tiny poodles.
Heretic!
The Creator made full-sized poodles, one of the finest hunting dogs ever to walk this Earth. And you blasphemers created abominations out of this proud breed.
You shall all perish in puddles of drool!
http://www.royalstandardpoodles.com/images/fergystandardpoodlehunt2012b.jpg
+1
WilliamSmith, I don't think anyone is blaming you personally for religious persecution, but that blurring of church and state is where it all gets murky, and murkier still for people who don't have a "church side". If I, as a member of a predominant group, told you that the laws of your country would now be created using 1. logic and fairness, and 2. extreme respect and veneration of tiny poodles and their perceived dictates, feelings and opinions, wouldn't that be bothersome to you?
-- re-reading, you've just said it would, sorry. The thing is, religious belief tends to creep into secular life, and the more passionate people are about the belief, the more it happens. I don't personally care if someone worships in a closet or shouts their religious beliefs from a mountaintop, but I don't want my life dictated by it.
+1
My point was that we shouldn't be preoccupied with each others religions, except...Christians seem to be pushing it in our faces everyday. And they are feeling a bit of push back. No, we don't want your religious display on the state capitol grounds. keep it on your church lawn where it belongs. No, you shouldn't be able to dictate medical care for your employees unless you are a church (which Hobby Lobby definitely isn't) No, you can't pick and choose which part of your job you are 'willing' to do based on your god's laws. And you definitely shouldn't be able to ignore US labor laws/ anti-discrimination laws/ or any other US law because your god says so.
As kib says, this is where the problem is. If we can agree on all this, then well, worship on. Actually worship on anyway, cause that's also a US law, and one we all can respect. You can believe what you want. You can start the morning with prayers on your knees and continue all day if you wish (you can not, however try to lead the rest of us in prayer at school, business meetings, school board meetings, football games, etc..)
See, no one really cares what you believe. They really really don't. I don't. But do not mistake secular push back as persecution. It isn't.
And Williamsmith, not sure where you get the notion i was scarred or offended, or harmed by 'someone' in the past to hold the opinion I do. Your idea of heaven sounds nice, but you and I both know it isn't the typical 'exclusive' country club idea most US Christians hold. Most are ready and willing to let you know if you are 'getting in' or not. Most are pretty solid in their belief that 1) they are, of course, getting in and 2)you aren't.
I highly doubt there is a heaven (or god) but if there is, won't I be pleasantly surprised. It would be a nice bonus as I have had (and continue to have) a pretty good time here on earth.
I would also be pleased by a poodle.:)
Welcome back Peggy, and well said.
In my experience, it has typically been Christians interrogating me, asking me to defend my beliefs, prove there is no teapot in the sky, etc., when I was perhaps talking to them about the weather or something. So some of us atheists can get a bit defensive with good reason, even though aforementioned Christians were people who love me and were trying to save my immortal soul from the eternal fire. I used to get pretty pissed, but now I'm older and more mellow, and just ask if we can't go back to talking about the weather? Cause if I'm not worried about my soul, why do you need to worry? It's a totally no-win waste of breath.
+1
I think one of the challenges of this kind of discussion is that so many people who identify as Christians have so many WIDELY different beliefs, and of course that is what they are, beliefs.
So Peggy, I, who identify as a Christian, find your view of heaven, with people gloating over people who are not there, just as repulsive as you do. In fact, I find it so heartbreaking and wrong that I don't believe that exists. It's illogical. How could that exist with a God of love? That's not my belief about heaven, although I do believe in heaven. And I feel sorrow that anyone who has spoken to you that way and made you feel that way. And I feel sorrow for those people that they act that way, unlovingly. As the pastor of my Quaker church said last year, the people there in the room (I say that because he just speaks to us who have gathered, that are on the path that we have chosen,he was not speaking to anyone else, or proselyzing) need to remember that many, many people have been abused and victimized by religion. I've had it happen to me, too, in the different churches I have attended over the years.
I still struggle with the things that were done to me or said to me in the name of religion, but I still want to meet with others on my spiritual path, to learn and express the love of God that I experience, so I go to meeting.
So it's a wide world of beliefs, even in the Christian world, and anyone who says, "well, I see it this way," is just stating the way they see it, that is all.
But as a Christian, I don't gloat over the idea of anyone in hell, which is an incredibly unchristian idea, as LHDAL was saying--at least in my view of Christ.
I think as Christians, and as Atheists, we need to up our game a little and make sure that we are not hurting others with what we say, as how can that be an expression of the spirit?
Actually you are the one with the sweet view of heaven. Sorry. Your view is pleasant. Would that more held that view.
Williamsmith
10-18-15, 7:24am
+1
WilliamSmith, I don't think anyone is blaming you personally for religious persecution, but that blurring of church and state is where it all gets murky, and murkier still for people who don't have a "church side". If I, as a member of a predominant group, told you that the laws of your country would now be created using 1. logic and fairness, and 2. extreme respect and veneration of tiny poodles and their perceived dictates, feelings and opinions, wouldn't that be bothersome to you?
-- re-reading, you've just said it would, sorry. The thing is, religious belief tends to creep into secular life, and the more passionate people are about the belief, the more it happens. I don't personally care if someone worships in a closet or shouts their religious beliefs from a mountaintop, but I don't want my life dictated by it.
Kib,
There is an assumption made here that Christians and American Conservatives are one in the same group. I don't hold that to be true. Perhaps the beef is more against the conservative political faction that has identified itself as Christian than it is Christians per se.
Because of that perception, their hypocracy is all the more intolerable.
Much of the American Conservative agenda or political machine does not square with Christianity and its tenants.
If you have a question as to whether Christianity is driving an issue or American Conservatism is....apply this test. A Christian is commanded to do only two things:
Love God with all your heart, soul and mind. Love your neighbor as yourself. If it doesn't quack like this duck. It ain't a duck.
bekkilyn
10-18-15, 10:01am
Kib,
There is an assumption made here that Christians and American Conservatives are one in the same group. I don't hold that to be true. Perhaps the beef is more against the conservative political faction that has identified itself as Christian than it is Christians per se.
Because of that perception, their hypocracy is all the more intolerable.
Much of the American Conservative agenda or political machine does not square with Christianity and its tenants.
If you have a question as to whether Christianity is driving an issue or American Conservatism is....apply this test. A Christian is commanded to do only two things:
Love God with all your heart, soul and mind. Love your neighbor as yourself. If it doesn't quack like this duck. It ain't a duck.
+1
I read some discussion elsewhere a while ago where people were seriously claiming that it was absolutely impossible for a democrat (or anyone other than a republican) to be Christian. Actual Christ-like behavior is more often mocked by these modern-day Pharisees than otherwise. The American Conservative movement is very cult-like and not particularly representative of the tenants of any religion besides its own extreme right-wing philosophy.
JaneV2.0
10-18-15, 11:05am
And then there's this:
http://www.indystar.com/story/news/2014/10/05/lawsuit-state-trooper-preached-jesus-traffic-stop/16678275/
Proselytizing troopers. Oy vey. (What is it about separation of church and state don't you understand, officer?)
Kib,
There is an assumption made here that Christians and American Conservatives are one in the same group. I don't hold that to be true. Perhaps the beef is more against the conservative political faction that has identified itself as Christian than it is Christians per se.
Because of that perception, their hypocracy is all the more intolerable.
Much of the American Conservative agenda or political machine does not square with Christianity and its tenants.
If you have a question as to whether Christianity is driving an issue or American Conservatism is....apply this test. A Christian is commanded to do only two things:
Love God with all your heart, soul and mind. Love your neighbor as yourself. If it doesn't quack like this duck. It ain't a duck.
While you are indeed correct that much of American conservative behavior and goals are about as un-Christlike as one can get, the fact remains that the Republican Party has been actively and successfully courting conservative Christian votes from the days of Reagan on thanks to groups like the moral majority who successfully politicized religion. To ignore that is to ignore one of the major political undercurrents of the last 40 years.
Williamsmith
10-18-15, 1:43pm
While you are indeed correct that much of American conservative behavior and goals are about as un-Christlike as one can get, the fact remains that the Republican Party has been actively and successfully courting conservative Christian votes from the days of Reagan on thanks to groups like the moral majority who successfully politicized religion. To ignore that is to ignore one of the major political undercurrents of the last 40 years.
To say what you said above is a gross oversimplification of politics as it relates to conservatism, the Republican Party and the last forty years. The Republican Party hardly had a corner on the market of conservatism and groups like the Moral Majority. Have you forgotten the Evangelical Christian President of the United States , Jimmy Carter, a Democrat? Clearly, groups like the moral majority had made their impact by the 1990s and on the decline since then.
Politics completely aside.......Christians have done more good works and have advocated more for the poor, the forgotten, the disenfranchised than any group in the country or the world for that matter.
Christians can make a difference in politics. Martin Luther King Jr., ?
Williamsmith
10-18-15, 1:57pm
And then there's this:
http://www.indystar.com/story/news/2014/10/05/lawsuit-state-trooper-preached-jesus-traffic-stop/16678275/
Proselytizing troopers. Oy vey. (What is it about separation of church and state don't you understand, officer?)
so what's the point? Pick a profession.....I'll find you a proselytizer.
so what's the point? Pick a profession.....I'll find you a proselytizer.
The point is--as I suggested--that we have separation of church and state in this country, and Officer DoGood should do his proselytizing on his own time, and not subject captive audiences to religious interrogation.
To say what you said above is a gross oversimplification of politics as it relates to conservatism, the Republican Party and the last forty years. The Republican Party hardly had a corner on the market of conservatism and groups like the Moral Majority. Have you forgotten the Evangelical Christian President of the United States , Jimmy Carter, a Democrat? Clearly, groups like the moral majority had made their impact by the 1990s and on the decline since then.
Are you honestly trying to tell me that the religious right hasn't been a key component of the Republican party's voting base for the past 35 years?
Williamsmith
10-18-15, 4:52pm
The point is--as I suggested--that we have separation of church and state in this country, and Officer DoGood should do his proselytizing on his own time, and not subject captive audiences to religious interrogation.
A state employee has a right to free speech and freedom of religion just like any citizen unless their actions pose an undue burden and violate the Establishment Clause. I agree. Proselytizing may offend the very people you are sworn to serve and there is no part in state government for employees to proselytize because it does create an appearance of government sponsored religion. My point is, nurses, accountants, school teachers, you name it......have all been guilty of proselytizing. Singling out one police officer who was obviously misguided, uninformed and overzealous shouldn't be at all reflective of the profession as a whole. Especially , if you have to search back for a year it makes it appear you have something particular against police officers. It's been a year, what happened in the case?
I do have a follow up question? If a police officer were to wear a small silver cross on his shirt pocket while in uniform and on duty but spoke not a word about religion to anyone while on duty......Would it be proselytizing?
It would depend. Ordinarily, no. Wearing a cross says "I am a Christian", which I can take to mean whatever I want. That is not proselytizing. If it became understood that all police wearing a small silver cross on their left pockets were standing in religious alliance within the police force, guiding the actions of the force according to the laws of Christianity rather than the laws of the county, that probably wouldn't be proselytizing per se, but it would be inappropriate.
I do have a follow up question? If a police officer were to wear a small silver cross on his shirt pocket while in uniform and on duty but spoke not a word about religion to anyone while on duty......Would it be proselytizing?
Interesting question. My uniform has a cross of Saint Florian/Maltese cross incorporated into the logo/insignia. I don't know if anybody has ever complained about this.
The symbolism of the Maltese Cross:
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maltese_cross#cite_note-guidetomalta-3) The eight points also symbolize the eight obligations or aspirations of the knights:
to live in truth
to have faith
to repent one's sins
to give proof of humility
to love justice
to be merciful
to be sincere and wholehearted
to endure persecution
Are these the truths of your organization, as accepted by the members and the community you serve?
ETA: A more secular explanation of the symbolism of the cross, from the FDNY:
http://www.nyc.gov/html/fdny/html/history/maltese_cross.shtml
The Maltese Cross is your symbol of protection. It means that the firefighter who wears this cross is willing to lay down his life for you just as the crusaders sacrificed their lives for their fellow man so many years ago. The Maltese Cross is a firefighter's badge of honor, signifying that he works in courage - a ladder rung away from death.
It would seem to me that firefighters have taken the symbol and adapted its definition to what they wish it to mean, a definition wholly in keeping with the activities of the job. In which case, since they're saying LIKE the Crusaders, not AS Crusaders, it is no longer a religious symbol, within the context of firefighting.
Williamsmith
10-18-15, 5:14pm
Are you honestly trying to tell me that the religious right hasn't been a key component of the Republican party's voting base for the past 35 years?
The radical religious right is a small fringe group with extreme views on taking control of government as a way of ushering in a theocracy with deference to constitutionalism. They believe they have a religious mandate to make God and government one organ. They do not reflect the vast majority of Christians and their interest or more likely disinterest in government.
However, Christians are more closely associated with the religious right more so than the liberal left just because of their ideals and as such have been lumped unfairly with the right by the left. The left has steered itself away from Christians just as much as the right as courted them. Had the left paid any attention to trying to unite Christians rather than vilify and divide them, Bush the lesser would probably never have been elected and the Iraq War would never have happened.
However, Christians are more closely associated with the religious right more so than the liberal left just because of their ideals and as such have been lumped unfairly with the right by the left. The left has steered itself away from Christians just as much as the right as courted them. Had the left paid any attention to trying to unite Christians rather than vilify and divide them, Bush the lesser would probably never have been elected and the Iraq War would never have happened. Unbelievably, I think this comes down to one word that shouldn't be a part of political discourse at all: abortion. There is no way to court a group of people who believe one of the tenets of your platform is murder, and there is no way to stand against abortion and appease the bulk of your constituency who doesn't believe so.
The article came up in my newsfeed. I didn't go looking for it.
Police officers are given a lot of power, so it's easy for them to intimidate their fellow citizens. It sounds to me like that was what he was doing.
I would think his wearing a visible cross (or any other religious symbol) would be a violation of rules in most jurisdictions.
Concerning police officers and public employees, I found this:
The Fifth Circuit upheld a police rule against wearing religious or other pins onuniforms. “Visibly wearing a cross pin ... takes on an entirely different cast whenviewed in the context of a police uniform.” 205“A police officer’s uniform is not a forum for fostering public discourse orexpressing one’s personal beliefs,” they added. Daniels v. City of Arlington, #00-11191, 246 F.3d 500 (5th Cir.); cert. den. #01-187, 534 U.S. 951, 2001 U.S. Lexis9494 (2001).A different rule applies to civilian employees. A federal court in Kentucky upheldthe right of a library worker to wear a cross on her necklace. Draper v. LoganCounty, #1:02CV-13, 403 F.Supp.2d 608, 2003 U.S. Dist. Lexis 26835 (W.D. Ky.,2003).
http://www.aele.org/law/2007FPFEB/2007-02MLJ201.pdf
I thought that was the general rule; thanks Bekkilyn.
Williamsmith
10-18-15, 7:27pm
Unbelievably, I think this comes down to one word that shouldn't be a part of political discourse at all: abortion. There is no way to court a group of people who believe one of the tenets of your platform is murder, and there is no way to stand against abortion and appease the bulk of your constituency who doesn't believe so.
Id like to believe we are past that. I am. I trust each woman to make the right decision based on their own convictions. And I believe that a woman will strive to do the right thing and that if government can't pass a balanced budget why should it know any better what's right for a woman and her child. But then, I am just a dumb retired cop.
Id like to believe we are past that. I am. I trust each woman to make the right decision based on their own convictions. And I believe that a woman will strive to do the right thing and that if government can't pass a balanced budget why should it know any better what's right for a woman and her child. But then, I am just a dumb retired cop.
I wish were were past that too. But judging from how hard Republican party politicians flog the issue and are forever trying to chip away at abortion rights at the state level by eliminating clinics or requiring excessive waiting periods or unnecessary and invasive medical procedures and "investigating" Planned Parenthood at the federal level based on a video that had already been shown to be grossly dishonest I'd guess that either they're really out of touch with their voters, or a lot of people on the right haven't moved past it the way you have. And now that marriage equality is the law of the land and acceptance of gay marriage keeps going up and up and up, especially among younger voters of all political preferences, the war on women is more critical than ever to keep those voters energized and turning out.
Williamsmith
10-18-15, 8:36pm
Concerning police officers and public employees, I found this:
http://www.aele.org/law/2007FPFEB/2007-02MLJ201.pdf
yes, it is a general rule but not a hard fast line in the sand so to speak. In fact, in the same link you will see a rather in depth ruling by the fifth circuit of Western Pennsylvania ruling in favor of an assistant teacher in an intermediate unit who was fired for wearing a cross on a neckless. The Government facility had a written policy barring the wearing of crosses and the state policy also prohibited it. However, the court ruled in favor of the teacher and had her reinstated with back pay because a person does not give up their right to free speech and expression of religion just because they work for the government. What they do, say or wear must present an undue burden, create disruption, disturbance or be offensive to others in order for it to be a violation.
An unobtrusive cross displayed while one is in the employ of state government is not necessarily violation.
The teacher, along with the librarian, was considered under this statement: "A different rule applies to civilian employees." The police officer is not considered as a civilian employee. It would be more convincing to show evidence of courts ruling in favor of actual police officers allowed to wear religious jewelry. (I did see something about Sikh officers allowed to wear their beards and head coverings, but nothing about jewelry.) I'm sure it's not a universal rule and it's likely not always enforced when it is a rule, but it does appear to be more the exception than the rule that such jewelry is visibly allowed.
Nevertheless, I personally don't care what jewelry police officers, or other people wear, as I don't consider it to be proselytizing in and of itself. It's just expression of belief. I do have issues with police officers pulling people over and using their authority to question those people's religious (or political) beliefs. It's an abuse of power.
Id like to believe we are past that. I am. I trust each woman to make the right decision based on their own convictions. And I believe that a woman will strive to do the right thing and that if government can't pass a balanced budget why should it know any better what's right for a woman and her child. But then, I am just a dumb retired cop. I don't think it's the defining issue of the election the way it has been in the past, but if you're looking for a reason fundamentalist Christians weren't "wooed" by the democratic party for the last 20-30 years, and are still primarily republican, IMHO that's it.
I have a friend who's blog covers lots of topics on politics and atheism. Here's one post he wrote recently:
http://brucegerencser.net/2015/10/look-through-both-eyes-its-the-way-god-made-them/
When I read it I thought of this thread.
My friend was a fundamentalist pastor for a few decades and is now an atheist. He understands both world views and I enjoy his writing.
I have a friend who's blog covers lots of topics on politics and atheism. Here's one post he wrote recently:
http://brucegerencser.net/2015/10/look-through-both-eyes-its-the-way-god-made-them/
When I read it I thought of this thread.
My friend was a fundamentalist pastor for a few decades and is now an atheist. He understands both world views and I enjoy his writing.
I can actually relate. When extremely annoyed, I occasionally rant against this omnipotent man with a white beard floating in the sky who apparently hates me. How much worse if I'd actually invested any significant portion of my heart and mind believing in him. For me it's just silly catharsis, like ranting at the dishwasher, but for your friend I think it's the pain of betrayal; he sounds so hurt ... and like he doesn't really feel God doesn't exist, but thinks he intentionally turned his back.
... a couple of months ago I was cleaning out my car and banged my head on the door frame. I began my grousing toward a cruel God in earnest, and five feet away from the car, the shopvac suddenly roared to life. I'm sure it was just ... um ... the seismic vibration of rocking the car with my skull? waves of psychic irritation so strong they jiggled the on-button? but for a heathenish unbeliever, I sure came close to wetting my pants.
Ultralight
10-19-15, 10:05pm
As the old saying goes, "you win some and you lose some."
I definitely lost this one.
Dude, you got a 7 page discussion going. No loss here. :D
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.