It's been a good year for Atheists

[Synnical]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/leading_article/article3090488.ece

December 24, 2007
Man and God
How should faith respond to the onslaught of atheism?

It has been a good year for atheists. Richard Dawkins’s book The God Delusion has sold more than a million copies, and between April and June was Britain’s fourth best-selling title, beaten only by two Harry Potter books and Gordon Ramsay. Christopher Hitchens, whose God is Not Great also excoriates religion as poison, has been given free rein on television and in debating halls. The success of the film The Golden Compass has provoked anguish among Christians over what is perceived as the atheist message at the heart of Philip Pullman’s His Dark Materials. Authors such as Sam Harris and Daniel Dennett have found that atheism sells on both sides of the Atlantic. Among both Christians and Muslims, Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s impassioned denunciation of the restrictions of Islam in Somalia have stirred sympathy as well as anger. And the new leader of the Liberal Democratic Party has admitted something unsayable only a decade or two ago: that he does not believe in God.

Not since Victorian times has there been such an intense and sustained debate about religious belief.

. . .

There has also, however, been a more thoughtful and useful response, which admits the force of many of the atheists’ arguments and asks whether faith has been too arrogant or believers too naively narrow in their convictions. Among Christians, there is no doubt that confusion and disillusion are causing considerable anguish.

[riderinthestorm]

1. While I find the title a tad bit irritating, I embrace this discussion.

It's way overdue.

[Ishoutandscream2]

20. Absolutely. Debate is good.

It's refreshing to see other points of view. Dawkins' book was fabulous.

[Kucinich4America]

29. Didn't read the book, but I saw his South Park episode.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bsPlFTOX1OY

[Prophet 451]

43. Agreed

Personally, I'm a believer but an unexamined faith is a redundant faith.

[stevedeshazer]

2. Total bullcrap

<snip>

This, surely, is where the new militant atheism is wrong. It is totalitarian in its prescription for human happiness. It would deny as unscientific the spiritual dimension that is as truly Darwinian in its evolution and persistence as patterns of behaviour or genetics. This, surely, is where the new militant atheism is wrong. It is totalitarian in its prescription for human happiness. It would deny as unscientific the spiritual dimension that is as truly Darwinian in its evolution and persistence as patterns of behaviour or genetics.

</snip>

So we atheists are the militants? Please.

Nothing is more totalitarian as a man-created God who crushes truth by demanding faith.

Faith kills.

[Synnical]

3. The entire article is crap, I agree, but it has been a good year for atheists

:)

Way past due.

-Cindy

[stevedeshazer]

4. Yes, it has

[New Dawn]

113. "The Times" is owned by Rupert Murdoch!

That explains it.

[BoneDaddy]

25. I find some atheists to be as militant as fundamentalists

in fact more than some. I find many atheists are as certain of their certitude about the reality of life as the hard core religious are. Surely, they are spot on when it comes to dismantling the archaic religious arguments about G*D as defined by fundamentalistic, but they do no more in explaining the universe than the religious belief systems do. When physicists postulate up to possibly 10 dimensions and we have only scratched the surface of quantum theory and the power in the universe, I think it is a wee bit premature to claim certitude about anything.

[jgraz]

28. I know. All that insistence on science and data. The assholes!

Tomorrow morning, try starting your car with prayer. Then tell us how a scientific view is no more successful at explaining the universe than religion.

While you're at it, maybe you can point out the bible verses on General Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, the Standard Model of Particle Physics, Natural Selection or Molecular Biology. Or perhaps you could just tell us God's value for Pi (I Kings 7:23-26)?

[tavalon]

34. That is an irony I've noted before

I'm glad someone else noted it. Fundamentalists of any ilk are a bit off and atheist fundies are no different.

[genie_weenie]

39. You mean the ones killing people for the improper display

of No god and the not taking of No god's name in vain?

Please do not buy into the meme "atheist fundamentalists are as bad as religious ones", because it is untrue.

[gaspee]

45. thank you

I get so sick of the "militant atheist" meme. So, how many atheistic fundamentalists are out there assassinating people and or oppressing people in the name of their not-god? Yeah, thought so.

[roguevalley]

62. Mao. Stalin. Lenin. I could go on.

[cyborg_jim]

64. Go on then.

I need the laugh.

[and-justice-for-all]

69. Yeah me too..

Those are piss poor examples of Atheism.

[and-justice-for-all]

68. Those are not Atheist..

and it is not Atheism they displayed, but dictators who wanted to be god and that is what communism is..STATE WORSHIP where the ruler is the deity that is payed tribute too.

[crawfish]

111. In the same vein,

Those who use Christianity for evil are really not Christians but people looking to hijack and existing entity and insert themselves into the place of God.

Glad we've got that out of the way now.

[ZombieHorde]

114. Mao. Stalin. Lenin.

These folks did not kill in the name of No-God. They should not be compared to the religious fervor involved with the witch trials or suicide bombings.

[Zhade]

115. "Militant atheist" just means "non-sucker who won't shut up about it".

I admit to a certain relish in pointing out the utter lack of evidence to support the purported gods of humanity.

[FiveGoodMen]

60. "15000 atheists rioted today after a blank sheet of paper was found on a cartoonist's desk"

[eagler]

72. I'll buy into it and second it.

[OwnedByFerrets]

41. How many wars have been fought over "A" theism? nt

[eagler]

73. Many

[gaspee]

47. Oh please

I don't care how set someone is in their worldview or their arrogance in their certainty. What I care about is people oppressing their neighbors and or murdering people who don't believe in their chosen invisible friend or killing people for not following their 2000 year old laws made up for another time and culture.

Point out some actual militant atheists, like their counterparts who are murdering and or trying to govern based on their personal fantasy.

The "militant atheist" meme is bull.

[cyborg_jim]

49. Spoken like smeone who truly only sees the words and not the meaning

When physicists postulate up to possibly 10 dimensions and we have only scratched the surface of quantum theory and the power in the universe, I think it is a wee bit premature to claim certitude about anything.

You want certainty you need to live in a different reality. All science can offer you is that it promises not to try to be totally wrong all the time and that it will do better if it is.

If there's a "militancy" here it's getting people to understand this basic fact about the world we live in and why the old ideas are so thoroughly out of date AND MUST BE by the very nature of their construct.

[Goblinmonger]

51. You sound pretty certain

that it is premature to claim certitude about anything.

How about gravity as it affects us? You uncertain about that?

[Silent3]

55. "they do no more in explaining the universe"

Atheism is a lack of belief in deities. Why would you even expect a lack of belief to explain the universe? It's like complaining that people who don't believe in Santa Claus do absolutely nothing to explain where reindeer come from -- a complete non sequitur.

Are you somehow imagining that everyone is obligated to adopt a belief system that explains the universe to some unspecified degree (even if it's a silly and unverifiable explanation), and somehow atheists are falling behind on that imagined obligation?

Besides, the skepticism and scientific approach common to most atheists today (skepticism and scientific thinking are not inherent to atheism -- again, atheism is no more than a lack of belief in deities) has certainly done far, far more to explain the universe around us than thousands of years of religious myths ever did. That there still are (and probably always will be) unanswered questions somehow negates any advantage the scientific approach has shown?

And what's this "certitude about the reality of life" you speak of? Is my skepticism about somebody else's religious myth the "certitude" you're talking about?

A bank is robbed. No one knows who committed the crime yet. You pause to think for a moment, and then claim the Loch Ness Monster did it. Am I obligated to come up with an alternate suspect before I criticize your answer, or isn't it still valid to criticize your answer even though my only answer is "I don't know"?

[onager]

75. Thank, K4K! Mencken nailed that one pretty good.

"The fact that I have no remedy for all the sorrows of the world is no reason for my accepting yours.

It simply supports the strong probability that yours is a fake."

[sakabatou]

105. Militant atheism

Anything to scare people. Booga-booga!

[Beetwasher]

5. My Goodness, Where Are All These Militant Atheists?

And how do I subscribe to their newsletter?

[stevedeshazer]

7. This makes me want to start one

But I have no faith that anyone would read it, let alone donate large sums of tax-free dollars like the televangelists get.

[tavalon]

35. Ah, but if you are an atheist,

you do not require faith. Go for it!:evilgrin:

[stevedeshazer]

46. Pun intended

:P

[Swamp Rat]

11. At home burning bibles and eating fetuses.

[tavalon]

36. Hey, hey, hey!

The atheists aren't the ones eating babies, it's my group, the witches! Mmmmm, baby fat!:+

[Swamp Rat]

38. Witchsmeller: "You see, My Lord, how the Duck of Taunton lives within him!!!"

Woman 2: "Look at his hair!"

Woman 1: "His hair proves it!"





:D

[lastliberalintexas]

13. Here you go

http://www.secular.org/

Though I prefer uppity to militant. :P

[tavalon]

37. Oh my, color me embarassed

I always thought I was a secular humanist but I thought it meant something having to do with a strong belief that religion had no place in the public sector. Turns out I've been wrong all these years. What would a religious person (in my case, Wiccan) who has a strong belief that religion has no place in the public sector be called? I mean, besides human? Do creatures like me have a name?

[Synnical]

14. Why, there are many in the US!

American Atheists
Freedom From Religion Foundation
Atheist Alliance

Also,

People for the American Way- supporting the absolute separation of Church and State.

Just FYI - simple goggle search will send you to any of the sites, if you are really interested.

-Cindy in Fort Lauderdale

[Beetwasher]

50. Oh, I Consider Those

Regular run of the mill atheists. I want me some real militants! You know, the one's that propose forced abortions for everybody and complete elimination of the non-infidels! Can't nobody do it right?

[Synnical]

17. Great Online Secular Library

http://infidels.org/library/


Modern Library

Author Index

Church-State Separation
Debates
Faith & Reason
Life after Death
Mysticism & the Paranormal
Nontheism
Science & Religion
Theism


Historical Library

Author Index

Biographies & Archives
Church-State Separation
Faith & Reason
Life after Death
Miscellaneous
Mysticism & the Paranormal
Nontheism
Science & Religion
Theism

Columns
Kiosk
Magazines
Periodicals
Reference Desk
Retired Publications
Testimonials

[dmallind]

106. Heck keep your nose clean and in six months

You could make corporal in the atheist military! Oh militANT, sorry.....

[Swamp Rat]

6. "How should faith respond to the onslaught of atheism?" ... if given the opportunity:

[Beetwasher]

9. Indeed!

:thumbsup:

Where do they come up w/ this crap? The "onslaught" of atheism? Incredible...

[stevedeshazer]

10. Right on cue!

:)

[Swamp Rat]

12. Glad I could assist.

:D

[Pale Blue Dot]

8. Yes it has: They got me.

:D

The God Delusion and A Brief History of Everything gave me the insight to finally conquer my fear of death and evolve from an agnostic to an atheist. I see the entire world differently now.

[PassingFair]

15. Atheist/Agnostic...

A rose by any other name would reason as sweetly...

I took the "atheist" leap about 5 years ago myself,
when I realized it just meant "without theism".

[Pastiche423]

18. A question, if I may

Before five years ago, did you have any doubts or questions?

Several years ago on a different message board, someone asked me what it would take for me to believe. I took the question seriously and pondered a while before answering.

The only way I could believe, would be to have a different soul. (Soul, to me is the essense of a person.)

I din't wake up one day and decide I would be an agnostic/atheist. I came into this world a non-believer. I marveled at people that did believe, especially when I lived in a Presbyterian-run orphange.


Now, I simply try to stay away from them.

[PassingFair]

23. Well...

I've been a non-believer since I was 7.
Found out about Santa, and it was down-
hill for all omnipotent sky-daddies from there.

I had called myself agnostic for YEARS, then
somewhere I read that "agnostic" was just a
term meaning "an atheist with low self esteem"
or something to that effect. You either WORSHIP
something or you don't....


The following quote is good to post for those that wonder what it would take for you to "believe". (Other than proof :))

Do you believe in Zeus? Allah? Krishna? Thor? Ra?

"I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours
-Stephen Roberts

[Pastiche423]

24. lol @ Santa

Parents should never tell an insomniac child there is a Santa. It wasn't my fault I couldn't sleep and they were too loud being Santa.

Although I do not believe, I call myself an agnostic because it has seemed less antagonistic than atheist. Or IOW, it makes most believers shut up about their beliefs and/or ends the conversation quicker.

Thank you for your answer!

[PassingFair]

26. I usually use the word "secular" when I'm in public.

I'm a coward, and most people don't know what
"secular" means and they act like I just broke
wind and move away from me, or they or I change
the subject!

When they ask what church my family goes to, I
just say, "Oh, we're SECULAR".

On message boards, or in speaking with people I
KNOW, I use atheist. Agnostic just doesn't seem
to cut the mustard.

In MY feeble mind, EVERYONE is agnostic (without
knowledge of the "devine")not that they can't be
HOPEFUL!

I am without belief in a deity/deities.

[alfredo]

30. Do you know the secret handshake?

[PassingFair]

31. Psssssst. This one?

[alfredo]

32. Well, it's not a secret anymore.

[PassingFair]

33. Damn!

Fell for it AGAIN!!!

[alfredo]

57. We will have to make a news secret handshake at our next national

convention. It will be at the River Styx Hilton on Feb 30, 2008.

[PassingFair]

59. So much for the secret location.....n/t

[alfredo]

61. That's OK because one has to use the super secret handshake to get in.

[PassingFair]

63. We're back in business, then! n/t

[alfredo]

70. As long it isn't compromised like the secret handshake.

[dmallind]

107. May the absence of god bless you :-)

If more people realized, and internalized, that meaning we would have far more influence as we would spend much less time worrying about the "differences" between agnostics, humanists, atheists, "nonreligious" people etc. We would instead be a single bloc of non-believers which would be anywhere between 7 and 14% of the US depending on which poll you believe - five to ten times the number of Jews or Muslims.

Other than preferred label there are none. You either have a god belief or you don't. Not having one does not necessitate believing in the complete impossibility of a god of some kind. Just means you don't actually believe in any version you have yet encountered or considered. You lack theism. Geez what does that make you again?

[PassingFair]

112. I'm having a "blessed day"!

Thank you!

I already do my calculations that way when I see the polls.

In Europe, we actually OUTNUMBER believers in most countries.

I'm of Scottish heritage, so I was surprised to find out that
almost ALL of my relatives back in "the old country"(my Grandfather was the only one
of 8 children that immigrated to the US) are atheists.

I found out just by talking to them on a one-on-one basis.
It seemed so daring for me, and so MATTER OF FACT for them!

Then I read that upwards of 60 percent of the Scots consider
themselves "non-religious".

Guess it's genetic. :evilgrin:

(Or it might have something to do with being
pawns of the catholic church/anglican british tug-of-war)bullshit
that tore Scotland apart for centuries.....

[Synnical]

16. HI!!!

There is a forum on DU for Ags and atheists, if you're not aware. We're in the dark realms of DU, though. Cannot post anything there that will get on the latest or greatest page.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=263

With thought and reason,

Cindy in Fort Lauderdale

[Pale Blue Dot]

22. If you look carefully, you'll see I've been there.

:D

:hi:

[warren pease]

19. However, on this side of the pond...

A 2003 University of Michigan study concluded that the US "...remains one of the most religious nations in the world."

About 46 percent of American adults attend church at least once a week, not counting weddings, funerals and christenings, compared with 14 percent of adults in Great Britain, 8 percent in France, 7 percent in Sweden and 4 percent in Japan.

Moreover, 58 percent of Americans say that they often think about the meaning and purpose of life, compared with 25 percent of the British, 26 percent of the Japanese, and 31 percent of West Germans, the study says.

“While traditional religious belief and participation in organized religion have steadily declined in most advanced industrial nations, especially in Western Europe, this is not the case in the United States,” said Ronald F. Inglehart, a researcher at the U-M Institute for Social Research (ISR), and director of the ISR World Values Surveys, which were conducted in more than 80 nations between 1981 and 2001.

Some possible reasons cited for the results: Religious refugees set the tone long ago in America; religious people tend to have more children than non-religious groups; and the U.S. has a less comprehensive social welfare system, prompting people to look to religion for help.

In other words, gawd help you if you live in the US, because nobody else will. As to the alleged social benefits of religion, a 2005 study published in the Journal of Religion and Society concludes that a high level of religiosity doesn't correlate with a healthy society.

It is commonly held that religion makes people more just, compassionate, and moral, but a new study suggests that the data belie that assumption. In fact, at first glance it would seem, religion has the opposite effect. The extensive study, "Cross-National Correlations of Quantifiable Societal Health with Popular Religiosity and Secularism in the Prosperous Democracies," examines statistics from 18 of the most developed democratic nations. It reveals clear correlations between various indicators of social strife and religiosity, showing that whether religion causes social strife or not, it certainly does not prevent it.

The author of the study, Gregory S. Paul, writes that it is "...not an attempt to present a definitive study that establishes cause versus effect between religiosity, secularism and societal health." However, the study does show a direct correlation between religiosity and dysfunctionality, which if nothing else, disproves the widespread belief that religiosity is beneficial, that secularism is detrimental, and that widespread acceptance of evolution is harmful.

To this day, the belief that religiosity is socially beneficial is widespread in America, especially amongst politicians, as Paul notes: “The current House majority leader T. DeLay contends that high crime rates and tragedies like the Columbine assault will continue as long schools teach children 'that they are nothing but glorified apes who have evolutionized out of some primordial soup of mud.'"

Surveys show that many Americans agree "their church-going nation is an exceptional, God blessed, 'shining city on the hill' that stands as an impressive example for an increasingly skeptical world." This assumption flies in the face of the actual statistical evidence that Paul examined.

OK. So we're "blessed" with a high percentage of chowder-headed, gawd-groupie hypocrites. So what? Well, among other happy results...

All of the subsequent results that compare religiosity against dysfunctionality show a basic correlation between the two, though anomalies exist. Paul’s second figure (Figures 1 and 2 here) shows a positive correlation between religiosity and homicide rates.

The United States is a strong exception, experiencing far higher rates of homicide than even (strongly theistic) Portugal, while Portugal itself is beset by much more homicide than the secular developed democracies. Hardly a "shining city on a hill" to the rest of the world, Paul writes that, "The most theistic prosperous democracy, the U.S., is exceptional, but not in the manner predicted. The United States is almost always the most dysfunctional of the developed democracies, sometimes spectacularly so, and almost always scores poorly." This deviates immensely from what most Americans consider to be common wisdom: that religion is beneficial. "But in the other developed democracies religiosity continues to decline precipitously and avowed atheists often win high office, even as clergies warn about adverse societal consequences if a revival of creator belief does not occur."

The study goes on in the same general vein for a bit, but you get the idea. For the full report, click on that link in the first paragraph.


Oh, and gawd bless America.

wp

On edit: just a little copy editing

[tblue37]

66. And just as the most religious parts of the world are the least developed, in

the US, the most religious parts of the country are the least developed economically.

[Blue-Jay]

21. Here's what I'd consider to be a "good year for atheists"...

I'd like it if the "religionists" would make an attempt to stay out of my government and the public schools that I help to fund.

Aside from those two simple requests, I couldn't give a fuck less what anyone chooses to believe. Teach your kids whatever you want to teach them at home, but stay the fuck away from MY kids. Why is that so difficult?

[HowHasItComeToThis]

27. BINGO FOR YOU, REMEMBER THEY CREATED BUSH IN THEIR IMAGE

[Blue-Jay]

40. ALL CAPS!

[jpgray]

42. Yeah

[starroute]

44. Now can we just get rid of the word atheist -- please?

Saying you don't believe in God implies there's a God to not-believe in -- or at least that you've considered the possibility and decided against it.

I'd rather just say I don't do the belief thing.

I'm open to the mystery and wonder of the universe. But trying to put a label on mystery and call it "Joe" drains all the wonder out of it.

I respect the profound symbolic wisdom of myth. But confusing myth with fact only craps up both.

I value my own ignorance more than I could possibly value any form of belief. Belief doesn't help us grow. Belief doesn't connect us with the deepest processes of the cosmos. Belief doesn't offer new perspectives on who we are and what we might be.

Much as I hate labels in general, I could probably handle being labeled a non-believer. But the word "atheist" is just one more box to get stuck with, and I'm not about to jump into it.

[Kolesar]

48. ^ that was insightful

I can still stand at the rim of a canyon and be awe-struck by nature's majesty.

[NGinpa]

52. Agnostic

That is really the only appropriate description (IMHO) because there is just too much unknown for a mere mortal to ever say never!

[cosmik debris]

53. Agnostic has an entirely different meaning.

Agnostics lack knowledge, atheists lack belief. There is some overlap, but they are not entirely the same.

[varkam]

67. I generally think we're all agnostics...

and whether or not we admit it just depends on how honest we are with ourselves. Belief (theist / atheist) is another matter entirely.

[trotsky]

54. There are many things we can say "never" about.

There will never be a square circle, for instance.

[Silent3]

56. How dogmatic of you! Such limited linear thinking!

Believers like their words to be very slippery -- hence the "We don't know what God is, so how can you say God doesn't exist?" argument. The trick is to act as if words aren't defined by usage or formal definition, but that words are approximate labels grasping at ineffable "things out there" that exist on their own, and that whatever we don't know about these ineffable things should be construed, for some unexplained reason, as bolstering the position of the believer over the non-believer.

Someone is likely to show you a cylinder with a square cross section and act as if they've cleverly proved you wrong. In another forum long ago I remember someone presenting a pyramid, and doing so with a "Nyah, nyah! Gotcha!" attitude, to someone who'd said that there are no square triangles.

[FiveGoodMen]

65. Hope someone pointed out that that was four triangles and a square.

Silly thing to argue about, really, but an answer as dumb as the one you alluded to deserved to be slapped down anyway.

[dmallind]

109. So what were we before 1879?

I mean agnostic is a newly coined word and one where the origin was clearly explained by the originator. Huxley was merely responding to those people who felt certain of mystically revealed truth with no empirical support - the concept of "gnosis" is exactly aligned with this mystical revelation. It's an epistemological term not a belief system. It is only the searcxh for a "less offensive" word for atheist that has resulted in the false idea that agmosticism represents a central position on the continuum of belief.

[dmallind]

108. That's not the case though

atheist means without any god belief. It's not specific to the Christian big g God at all. When you say you "don't do the belief thing" you are saying you are atheistic. It is simply a religiop-crazy society that has made it seem like a negative thing or "bad word". Atheist does not imply any god exists and does not state it is impossible for any god to exist (with the rare indeed techincal exception of philosophical "strong atheism" - precisely two proponents of which I have encountered in many years of involvement in atheist groups) - it merely says you don't believe in any of the ideas that have been considered to describe such a putative being. It negates the belief not the entity. You'd have to come up with a word like "antitheist" to imply that there is any god in existence, and even then it would be a weak implication. Atheist has none.

[Evoman]

58. Atheism will get more popular because it's easy.

It's great not having to defend obvious bullshit and turn yourself inside out trying to be rational about irrationality. Religion is lame.

[skepticscott]

71. Not so sure about that

You're right on the one hand that being an atheist relieves you of the responsibility of having to justify all kinds of ridiculous crap, but a lot of people have simply trained themselves to turn their brain off when necessary. But for people who have comforted themselves with belief in an invisible friend for their whole lives, it can be very difficult to let go and to cope without it. Let's face it...atheism is not a warm and fuzzy worldview. It doesn't comfort you when someone you love dies the way that religion does. When your life is in the crapper, it doesn't tell you that just by praying and trusting in god that things will get better. It requires you to find a lot within yourself.

[eagler]

74. No more lame than not believing in something other than what you can see or measure.

I have no problems with atheism. I carried that label for years. But much of what I see here is pure bigotry and the anti-Christian rhetoric sure doesn't help the Democratic cause.

[heidler1]

76. Where's the proof? IMO the attack on Bush and his claim that he talks to God

along with Bush's poor record except for getting more money funneled to greedy Republicans has converted many people into being Democrats. Bush's legacy should be: He helped the Democrats in the long run and unintentionally torpedoed religion. Talking up the Bush legacy has helped.

The Evangelicals are so confused they don't even like Huckelbe.sp.

[eagler]

78. you need to make a distinction between "Right Wing Christians"

and Christians who don't attempt to force their religion and politics to be one.

[trotsky]

79. Ah yes, quite.

They are so different. :eyes:

[eagler]

81. What it boils down to is people being allowed to believe the way they want to believe without hassle

that's the only way this world can ever get along.

[trotsky]

83. The problem comes in what perceives as "hassle."

Some folks think that speaking even a mildly ill word about their religion qualifies. And then some other folks chime in about how "fundamentalist" or "militant" the first person was who dared say a negative thing about someone else's religion.

[heidler1]

89. If this has been a good year for Atheists our methods that we used

are then by default, working as intended. So get real we probably won't change until that no longer is true. Sure there are good Christians and my guess is they are very apt to the ones who dumped the Republicans and for the very same reason we Atheists point out.

[goddess40]

90. Actually, Christians need to distance THEMSELVES from the nut-jobs

Every time the Fundies do something that is outside the Christian values and the real Christan's stay silent they are in fact condoning the behavior.

[eagler]

92. Totally agree

[onager]

77. You missed a couple of buzz words.

Why no "fundamentalist atheist?" Maybe you slipped that one into an earlier post.

You seem to have a lot of problems with atheism, since you immediately accuse us of "pure bigotry" and "anti-Xian rhetoric." Then there's the usual bogus appeal to "helping the Democratic cause."

When Democrats kiss the well-upholstered butts of the theocrats, they don't deserve my help.

Pure bigotry? Most of my family is still Xian, since they're in the Deep South. I'm not exactly bigoted against them, and certainly not my mother, who still teaches in a Baptist pre-school.

Anti-Xian rhetoric? Pfft! It's a public discussion board. That public includes atheists, and many of are no longer willing to be cowed into silence by bogus demands that we obsequiously "respect" bogus beliefs. Beliefs that, to many of us, amount to no more than the prevailing majority superstition.

But why restrict yourself to condemning only anti-Xian rhetoric? I've lived for nearly 3 years now in a country that's 95% Muslim. A few years before this I lived in Wahhabi Nation--Saudi Arabia.

I was a staunch atheist for all that time, yet I've managed to pull this off without getting deported or beheaded. I've also survived extended stays in countries that are Buddhist, Shinto, Native-Animist and even Anglican without offending the sensibilities of the residents. Not bad for someone who's apparently a raving anti-religious bigot, if I have to say so myself.

Around noon my Muslim co-workers go to pray and I go eat lunch. No problem on either side.

In some ways it's easier for me, living in a Muslim country. I don't have deluded asshats ringing my doorbell on the weekend, trying to convert me.

[eagler]

80. I need to make a distinction between "fundamentalist" atheists

and atheists who are comfortable with their beliefs and only wish to be at peace like I do. I prefer the term "fanatical" instead of "fundamentalist". It seems to much more describe an accurate picture of the problem with any one of the world's groups whether they be religious or not. As far as Muslims go - it is a beautiful religion with some devout, peaceful followers. But they too have their fanatics (as is quite evident). And they have also have spread their message and customs over the globe by proselytizing others.

[skepticscott]

82. And Muslims keep their converts

by threatening with death anyone who tries to proselytize them, or anyone who converts from Islam to any other faith. Yeah, nice peaceful religion.

And what exactly is a "fanatical" or "fundamentalist" atheist? An atheist means you don't accept the existence of any gods...how "fanatical" can you be about not finding evidence for something?

[eagler]

84. Some Muslims do proselytize others and some Muslims do convert

The fanatical atheist ( or christian or muslim ) - you know them when you see them. Kruschev or Stalin immediately come to mind.

[skepticscott]

85. The death penalty

I was speaking of is for Christians or other non-Muslims who try to proselytize Muslims. And Islamic law makes no bones about Muslim apostates being executed. Converts may get away with their lives, especially in non-Muslim countries, but the requirements of Islam leave no wiggle room.

And if YOU know a fanatical atheist when you see one, then please tell us all what characteristics you recognize them by. While you're at it, explain why, if Stalin was such a "fanatical" atheist, he supported the church when it suited him politically.

[eagler]

86. because it did suit him politically

[skepticscott]

88. If he was "fanatical"

he wouldn't have have put politics or anything else ahead of atheism, now would he? Still waiting for those defining characteristics of a "fanatical" atheist, btw...do you really have any, or were you just slinging mud and hoping no one would call you on it?

[eagler]

91. when Stalin purged and imprisoned party members when they

were found to be believers. when churches were destroyed or closed. When priests were resricted from any activity other than saying mass. when anyone had to hide religious involvement. when religion was openly scorned by the government. that was fanaticism.

[skepticscott]

100. If those are your qualifications

for a "fanatical" atheist, then there can't be too many of them around, since I doubt you could point to many people on this board or in DU who are doing any of those things...or for that matter, in the United States...or North America...or South America...or Europe...or....sheesh, just how many of these "fanatical" atheists did you say there were, anyhow? In this country we don't elect people unless they parade their religious belief like a banner, we're opening new churches that cost millions all the time, priests are free to do pretty much anything, including rape children, and our government kisses up to the religious right at every opportunity.

And you seriously need to get up to speed on what was done under Stalin in the name of political control and what was done in the name of pure atheism. I don't have time to educate you, but you'll find the "Stalin/Mao/Pol Pot" wicked atheist meme is a dead-bang loser on this board.

[eagler]

101. Well since I've been on this board since 2001 and since I am

a history teacher, I know what is discussed here and I know how religious believers were treated in Russia. Yes the "Stalin/Mao/Pol Pot" wicked atheist meme is a very appropriate point of discussion because it clearly demonstrates how extreme things can become.

[eagler]

87. them North Dakota muslims are the ones to worry about

http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2005-10/2005-10-20-voa14.cfm

[Evoman]

93. Never said anything about christianity, did I?

I just said religion was lame. Your religion is lame, but not exclusively. As far as I can tell, religion isn't really helping the democratic cause either. If anything, religion and pandering to the religious is one of the major problems of the dem party, apart from their current corporate leaning.

But who the hell cares. Religion is still lame. It's boring, it's sooooo last century. If religion was music, it would be Flock of Seagulls. Except without the kick-ass hair. If religion was a TV show, it would be Seventh Heaven, but without that hot girl that was in Texas Chainsaw Massacre. You know...the one that took her clothes off for that mag. She's damn tasty, that one.

But I digress. I was talking about how lame religion is. I'm suprised that people aren't embarrased to be religious. If I were religious, I would try to hide it, because it's so lame. The only thing worse than admitting to be religious would be if pictures got out of me at a Backstreet Boys concert holding a sign saying, "I love U Kevin".

So in conclusion, I want to reiterate how lame religion is. The fact that people get so up in arms over a harmless comment about how lame religion is, shows how lame religion is. Do you want to know how lame? Okay, imagine this:

Your teaching a bunch of kids to play catch. You take turns throwing the ball to each of them, and they catch it in their gloves. One of the kids is a lame-o. Everytime you throw the ball to him (not even that hard), he complains about how hard you throw, and that it hurts. You give him a new glove, and you teach him to catch it right, but he always fucking complains. Then you realize that it's just that the kid is really a lame crybaby. So you tell him that maybe baseball isn't his game. The kid (I'll call him Jesusman) starts to cry. You try to comfort him, but inside your head your thinking "Man, this kid is fucking lame.".

That kid is religion.

If you need me to go on, just ask. If you need me to further describe just how lame religion is, I'm glad to do it.

[trotsky]

94. ...

"That kid is religion."
:rofl:

[Skittles]

117. "I'll call him Jesusman"

:rofl:

[Name removed]

95. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[cosmik debris]

96. That's kinda harsh

And a GROSS misrepresentation of Evoman's position. There is nothing complacent or non-committal about his position. Just ask him how he feels about religion, I dare you!

[cyborg_jim]

97. Yeah - becuase he wants to beat you with logic!

OUCH! MY BRAINZ HURTZ.

[Evoman]

98. Yes, I can see how you would think that given that I'm latino and I live in Canada.

There is nothing closer to old white southerners that Canadian Latino Atheists. And since you responded to my post, I assume you want to hear about how lame religion is again.

Religion is so lame that when I once pointed out a lame dog in a doggy wheelchair to my girlfriend, the dog rolled over to me, pissed on me, and then woofed to me, "I am not woofin' religious!". I tried to correct the dog, but he didn't understand me because I have too strong an accent in dog language.

I once told a friend of mine that I found religion incredibly lame. He told me that it wasn't lame at all, and that religion was swell. At first I thought he was kidding, because...I mean...if your going to be a lame-o , just be one. But he was serious! And then afterwards, he gave his girlfriend a promise ring, and told her he loved holding hands with her and that she was a swell girl. She, of course, dumped his ass and now the only love he gets is from a 2000 year old dead prophet. Which may work for some people, but I personally find it lame. Incredibly lame.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go do some research. For some reason, I didn't know that Southern racists, in addition to the beatings, lynchings, and rapings, actually had the depravity to call black people lame.

[eagler]

99. OK. so it was a poor analogy. And i never said that you were white

and from the south. It's the fact that you think that it's ok to ridicule any given group for their beliefs. I have have no problem with your beliefs or lack of them. And i have no problem with religion being lame for you personally, but The Nazis held the Jews up to be ridiculed in the 30's and got their kicks. Those who deface mosques in the US and Canada, I'm sure they get great satisfaction from their deeds. And the Atheist girl in Oklahoma who was taunted so much in her school that she had to quit and not one single "Christian" stood up for her. No one should have to be embarrassed because of their beliefs or lifestyle or be ridiculed.

[Evoman]

102. You have a point.

I'm a lot more like Nazis then southerners, that's for sure.

As to being embarrased about belief or lifestyles, your right. In fact, I want to confess something to you. I secretly liked being pissed on by that lame dog. I know that he wanted to demonstrate that he wasn't religious (which he really didn't have too...since dog's have brain stems, why would you expect them to be?), but I secretly fell in love with that dog that day. I am glad I don't have to be embarrased about my beliefs that man-dog love is the purest kind of love. Especially when we play fire-hydrant.

Now then, there are degrees of embarassment of course. Dog-man-pee love is about a 6 of 10 (until we had this chat!). I personally put Republican beliefs at about a 7 (pretty embarrassing), liking NKOTB/Backstreet boy's at about 8 (damn embarrasing), having the hots for DeForest Kelly (may he rest in peace) at about 9 (morbidly embarrasing), and being religious at about 10.

Because, no matter how you look at it, religion is pretty damn lame. Lame like having barbed wire tattooed around your arm. Lame like Donnie Osmond. Lame like (dare I say it?) water chestnuts in stir-fry.

Religion is like playing Bach's Toccata and Fugue in E major. You can do it, but it's just not what human beings SHOULD do. It's lame. Lame like David Guest. Lame like plain white rice. Lame like Hello Kitty accessories.

[eagler]

103. You're funny. All right I give up. Happy New Year.

[Evoman]

104. Happy new year.

It's time to party....I'm out for the rest of the night.

Later.

[Skittles]

116. LOL.....Evoman

:thumbsup:

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

110. C-SPAN caller: "I am a lifelong democrat but..." -nt