Panel on Atheism, CNN's Paula Zahn Now

[Az]

Run time: 03:56 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8lKNpcRP9kg   Posted on YouTube: April 17, 2015 By YouTube Member: YouTube Help Views on YouTube: 12180171   Posted on DU: February 18, 2007 By DU Member: Az Views on DU: 1585

 
A further follow up to the previous panel. This appeared after Dawkin's interview.

[Erika]

1. Ok. I'll start out

In my wildest imagination, I can't imagine a Heaven with a Jesus. The logistics of such an insane proposition is beyond reasonable thought.

Some people cannot face the fact they will die and that's it. Ah, why not.

[Erika]

2. No reply?

OK.

[rpannier]

3. In the wildest imaginations of others, they can't imagine there not being a Heaven,

not being Nirvana, etc.

Your post seems to make these people out as ignorant and people who believe like you do as the only enlightened ones.

Maybe the solipcists are right and this whole world is just your imagination or my imagination and everything and everybody you see is a dream?

[Erika]

5. How did I accuse anyone of ignorance?

I just couldn't buy into their thoughts.

[rpannier]

8. My apologies if I misinterpreted and/or misrepresented your position

I took your comment about people not being able to accept that you die and that's it to mean they were less than enlightened.

My apologies.

[Erika]

10. I believe in one way

That does not mean I disrespect others beliefs.

Thank you.

I do belive atheists are being given the shaft while many of them have very high moral standards. They are discriminated against.

[papau]

13. I see - not believe - that on DU many atheists work full time shafting the religious. On DU there

is no way one can say atheists are discriminated against. I see DU atheists trying for victim status - claiming daily life is tough on the atheists, making a mockery of real victims of discrimination. Cases like Nicole Smalkowski are rare, thank God, and real discrimination like that against Nicole seems well taken care of in our courts.

But I agree with you that "atheists... many of them have very high moral standards". And I'll add that many atheists are quite pleasant and good knowledgeable conversationalists and progressives. I recommend the UU group meetings (20% minimum to 40% to sometimes more than half in the room will be atheist) to anyone interested in hearing the atheist side of things in polite conversation.

It would just be nice if more on DU were into civil conversation rather than in your face proselytizing.

That said, the religious forum has become much more civil in the last few months - which is not to say it is always civil or even mostly civil, but it is less an anti-Christian, religion is stupid, people growing in wisdom become atheists, echo chamber.

[Az]

19. I can count a number of events on just those around me

Including myself. I have been accosted and had my property vandalized due to my atheism. I have friends that have been fired for it. I have friends that have been assaulted for it. It is not rare enough by a long shot. And we are constantly assailed on the Television on a daily basis. This series of discussions should be evidence enough of that. CNN did not even have the civility to grant an initial fair discussion panel. We were dismissed as though we were garbage or worse. It was only after concerted effort and clamor that we were given a fair representation. And even then they cut us short.

Please do not dismiss our anger as unfounded. We may not be suffering the same oppression as other minority groups. But that does nothing to console us for the oppression we are suffering. And your dismissal of it just piles another load of it on us.

[Onceuponalife]

4. atheist here

I'm an atheist and I don't neccessarily feel persecuted. I don't go around announcing it to everybody, but I'm not ashamed to call myself an atheist when someone asks my religion (not that it is a religion). That gentleman on that video is mistaken and quite ignorant on his views of atheists and gays. Whose lifestyle is being shoved in whose face?

[Erika]

6. Atheists are good people with a humanist vision!

And yes, I do see religious people as those who wish to think they will live forever. What egos.
And what fear.

[rman]

12. There are good atheists and there are good religious folk

And there are bad atheists and bad religious folk.

So, being a "good" or a "bad" person has nothing to do with being religious or not.

[rpannier]

7. Points here

1. Excellent icon. Sharks fan here.

2. I agree 100% with you on the announcing thing. The American Taliban seem willing to throw their religion into conversations at every opportunity. But, if a member of another belief system, or non-belief system chimes in with their position, then according to the American-Taliban, "They're shoving their beliefs into other people's faces."

3. It never ceases to amaze me, how ready they (American Taliban) are to place themselves into the discriminated against class. The whole society is picking on them. But then they turn around and remind us, Christians are a sizeable majority in the US.

4. James Madison said, "The purpose of the Constitution is to protect the minority from the oppressive will of the majority."

[Erika]

9. Atheists are the ones being picked on

Big time.

[NMMNG]

11. Agreed n/t

[papau]

14. Disagree n/t

n/t

[NMMNG]

15. Coming from one of DU's biggest athiest haters and bashers,

your opinion doesn't carry much weight. :eyes:

[papau]

16. athiest haters? - no - - just telling some folks to get out of my face with their beliefs n/t

n/t

[Az]

18. Um who is in your face?

[papau]

20. It's both wasted energy and of late, there's less need to tell those that loudly needing

self affirmation, faith/belief in atheism reinforcement, and self esteem boosts that it is not polite to tear down others.

I believe I have had some interesting conversations on history and logic and the nature of belief and faith, some on DU, where while no minds were changed, points of view were rather politely expressed.

But then there are still posts, even over the last month, in the form of "Jesus Freaks are ... fill in the blank" and "Religion has caused ..fill in the blank ... and only ending religious faith will allow mankind to progress" and "With education people will reject religion because smart informed people are not religious, and look how I matured into the fine intelligent atheist now posting" and "We are the most discriminated against minority and have a right to have our posts anywhere on DU (even in the middle of a person's thread that they started in the Religious forum on the death of their wife - where someone felt the need to tell the gentlemen that there was no God - but he felt his pain").

No - few are in my face on DU anymore as DU is a bit calmer in the forums I post in - and letting the impolite have their own echo chamber in the Religious forum seems the only solution for me, as letting others carry on that "conversation" is best - for me. Little about religion is permitted to be discussed in the religious forum because of the atheist need to tell everyone that they are atheists and others are wrong - to tell them over and over again. So little is lost by just saying the religious forum is for the non-Catholic, the non-Christain, the non-Jew, the non-Muslim. Folks like ayeshahaqqiqa are heros to me - but I choose not to engage that much anymore.

And I should note that your thread AZ called Delusion was excellent and I thank you for starting it. I was sorry to see that your only response post was "Az 3. We do not directly experience reality" - - as I think you and Lerkfish and perhaps Rabrrrrrr could have had an interesting discussion.

I just do not have the energy for battle like that any more.

Again I liked your thread - esp. "varkam 150. I do not believe theists to be deluded
I believe theists to be mistaken." ...and "Rabrrrrrr 171. You are correct that it is a FACT that there is no empirical evidence for a god or gods. However, that doesn't mean that the statement "there is/are no god/gods" is a fact. Until there is conclusive proof either way, god/s exist AND don't exist at the same time. The FACT is, we really don't know. It's a probability wave that refuses to collapse at this point.Perhaps, someday, we will know for sure. Probably not, though. Speaking personally, I don't care where people sit on the atheism/theism fence, as long as they aren't in-your-face evangelical about having "the truth". No one has that. Not yet, anyway."

Have at it -

I'll read the discussions - but I have retired from the discussion - except for attempts to not have the discussion spill over into forums not called Religion by pointing out that most of our Democratic Party members both disagree with our atheist friends and do not see atheists as the defining members of the Party.

[Az]

21. Where there is oppression there is anger

In any movement that opposes oppression you will find those that try to deal with it peacefully and those who express their anger more forcefully. The argument is always the same within as well. The pacifists insist that the only way to reach people is with respect. The others believe that such methods are weak and take to long if they work at all. They act on their anger and say what is on their mind.

Look at how the atheists were consistently treated on these interviews. They were called hypocrites without provocation. They were told to shut up. And originally they were not even given voice. This is not unusual for us. We see others speaking about us in such ways and many wish to return the favor. It is difficult to overcome such an attitude.

Add to the mix that unlike other civil rights movements the primary issue being focused on is who is right and who is wrong. Atheists and theists disagree. Its not that they look different or have different hobbies. Its that each side thinks the other is wrong. And the problem is further fanned by the fact that if one side makes their claims known using the wrong words they can infuriate the other.

Atheists believe that theists are wrong about god. But if they say that theists are deluded they set of a firestorm. This despite the word being technically correct. Its that so many words in this discussion carry emotional baggage.

Likewise the theists use words and ideas about atheists that carry a lot of problems with them as well. The notion that we are immoral because we have no basis for our morality such as God. Or that we are in league or pawns of Satan. All manner of insulting things along these lines are perfectly acceptable for many theists to proclaim on a daily basis even on TV without repercussion.

George Bush Sr proclaims atheists non-citizens and no one raises a an eyebrow. Star Jones declares atheists untrustworthy and there is no reaction from the public. As the father of the family in the first segment pointed out it is permitted in this society to dismiss and demean atheists. And some atheists are tired of it.

[papau]

22. well said - and very true. - - the foolish theist attacks on atheists may well be a response to

perceived "fists raised" by atheists. I'm not saying that is an excuse - I'm only noting the emotion.

Indeed there have been some papers in the EU on how secularists are losing their 150 - 200 year old hold on government power because of a theist response to perceived attacks by atheists (and those of other cultures).

I believe in a separation of Church and State, indeed in a government acts much like a secularist would want it to act.

I see no hope of keeping that separation of church and state once the level of "heat" in the discussion (not just between atheist and theist - but also between faiths) reaches a tipping point - a single faith will have a majority and majority rules. MLK's great skill - in my opinion - was keep the heat on - but well below that tipping point. There were mass meetings/riots before MLK - and after - that achieved much less that he achieved with his keeping the heat near to but usually below "simmer". To have progress there must be discussion - and while it may be enjoyable to throw out terms like "Jesus Freaks" as in the thread on DU by someone, such terms kill the discussion. Indeed DU is not the enemy - indeed I - despite BMUS's comment above - am not the enemy. But likewise the Democratic Party is not a party that has a platform that says atheists, as atheists, are a group we are fighting for politically. The party is certainly not against atheism in any way - it just has no stand on the subject, other than to say the party supports those of all faiths and those with no belief in God in their right to not be harassed by government because of their beliefs - and that the public has a right to expect that a moral standard guides the decisions of Democratic Party leaders.

[NMMNG]

23. You're the one getting into peoples' faces here

This is a thread about atheism. You chose to click on and read it, then respond to it. If you didn't want to read about what atheists think/feel/don't believe you should have avoided the thread. Nobody forced you to jump in here or "got in your face about it", you made the choice yourself. Don't blame others for your own behavior. I certainly wouldn't walk into a church then rant because the pastor was giving a sermon and "getting in my face" about his beliefs. :eyes:

[TheBaldyMan]

17. the rev. is a nutter

'all these godless atheists and gays are destroying our Christian country.'

Hasn't he heard of separation of church and state?

[provis99]

24. as an agnostic,

i don't know who pisses me off more: wild-eyed ignorant Bible-thumpers, or smug, arrogant whiny-victim atheists. A pox on both your houses. Go agostic and apathetic!