The Atheism Thread - Part 6

[Feenix]

Except, to evoke Hitchens, you don't need religion to do good. But, for good people to do bad...

And I have seen otherwise good people do bad things because of religion. Things I can't imagine they would otherwise do.

This

 

[chaseter]

Heh. Not even close to being true. Why would anyone have to swallow their pride? If two people disagree about something major then they peacefully end the relationship. I don't hate her, but if our entire relationship got to a point where I have to be a Christian again I'm not going to lie just to stay with someone. Besides there are plenty of ways to be with a woman without being in a relationship. Hence where I said long term.

The story you told made you sound like a pompous ass, sorry. It sounded like you ended it...not her.

 

[chaseter]

I think you're just trolling, and this whole trend of being contrary just for the hell of it is pathetic and transparent. He clearly said that this woman was trying to convert him. There's no reason why anyone should have to deal with that; its simply disrespectful. Obvious troll is obvious.

Who the **** are you?

 

[E-Man]

The story you told made you sound like a pompous ass, sorry. It sounded like you ended it...not her.

You sure do like to jump to conclusions. "So we just faded away," means that I ended it? Also you ignored the part where I said that she tried to reconvert me. So I'm the pompous ass because I don't want to go back to a religion I don't believe in while our relationship faded because that was something important to both of us? Your logic is faulty as hell.

 

[chaseter]

Instead of sitting down like a bigger person and talking with her to see if you could work around it, you asked for her to show you irrefutable proof that her god exists fully well knowing that she could not. To do what? Prove your point that you are right and that she is wrong? That doesn't even prove or disprove anything...it's a fallacy.

Now, I don't know what all went on, just going off of what you posted. It sounded more like you wanted to get off a zinger from your post. While I don't want to paint broad brush strokes...that is most atheists in a nutshell in my experience. I'm a pessimist agnostic and both polar sides are insufferable to me but I would never shut down anything because I didn't agree with one point of someone's life. Both of you thinking you know everything and being stubborn in your belief systems makes neither of you the bigger person in that situation.

And yes, you are searching for a needle in a haystack in Texas with that set of pre-req's but I wish you luck. Just hope you didn't let that catch go because you detest religion. Then again, you may have Katie Holmes'd it and escaped...I have no idea...I just have your posts.

 

[moviedoors]

I'm a pessimist

No ****.

 

[Superwoman Prime]

Religion was natural. It was the science of yesterday, and it's understandable that humans thousands or even hundreds of years ago attributed strange phenomena to gods.

 

[Superwoman Prime]

Calling religion the bane of humanity or whatever is near-sighted and immature. Religion can be an expression of our greatest flaws, but in itself, it's not really a strength or weakness.

I am an atheist, by the way.

 

[regwec]

As most of us have said, it is a manifestation of weakness/flaws. It isn't really an entity in itself at all. Like depression or addiction, I think it's a social ill, but it is useless to blame people for being depressed or addicted. I do think it's important that theists and realists be frank with each other, however. I think the social convention that you must "respect others' beliefs" is very damaging, because it effectively licences ignorance and dogma. I think it is important for everyone to have their beliefs challenged all of the time.

 

[Schlosser85]

I believe organized religion does more to hold society back than help it, and I am particularly incensed about the incalculable numbers of people (not just gays, though for obvious reasons that strikes the biggest cord with me) whose lives have been literally, physically destroyed because of archaic beliefs from Leviticus that belong in the Dark Ages. Or actually, a lot earlier than that.

That said, someone's personal religiosity is not a good or bad thing, it is filtered through what is in that person's own heart. For some people, it enhances their natural sense of compassion and calls them to greater works of charity, while for others it serves as a convenient justification for the hatred and bigotry they possess with or without the Bible.

Religion doesn't make the man, the man makes the religion.

 

[Feenix]

I believe organized religion does more to hold society back than help it, and I am particularly incensed about the incalculable numbers of people (not just gays, though for obvious reasons that strikes the biggest cord with me) whose lives have been literally, physically destroyed because of archaic beliefs from Leviticus that belong in the Dark Ages. Or actually, a lot earlier than that.

That said, someone's personal religiosity is not a good or bad thing, it is filtered through what is in that person's own heart. For some people, it enhances their natural sense of compassion and calls them to greater works of charity, while for others it serves as a convenient justification for the hatred and bigotry they possess with or without the Bible.

Religion doesn't make the man, the man makes the religion.

Only religion can make people slaughter children or sacrifice virgins. Human history has been marred with the crimes of the religious.

 

[regwec]

To be fair, I don't think that's always true. Some people are just bad'n's. Hitler is one example, the putrid Ian Watkins is another.

It does seem credible that religion leads otherwise good people to do unspeakable things, however. Oliver Cromwell appears to be a case in point.

 

[Breogan]

Lest we forget Stalin, Mao.

Religion can be/has been a motivator for peace, progress, benefit of all too.

It really comes down to those who interpret it and how they use it.

Everyone hopefully/ideally has the right to take it or leave it as they will. The problem comes from those (both extremes for it and against it) saying there's only one way to interpret it. What they mean is "my way".

 

[Superwoman Prime]

Only religion can make people slaughter children or sacrifice virgins.

Hyperbole? Rhetoric?

 

[Superwoman Prime]

All right, regwec. We agree more than I thought.

And your post echoes my own views, Schlosser85.

 

[Feenix]

To be fair, I don't think that's always true. Some people are just bad'n's. Hitler is one example, the putrid Ian Watkins is another.

It does seem credible that religion leads otherwise good people to do unspeakable things, however. Oliver Cromwell appears to be a case in point.

Hitler was a Christian. In Mein Kampf, he talks endlessly about doing the Lord's work and all that other crap.

As for Stalin, his regime was all about state worship. It was a religion unto itself.

And Superman Prime, how many non-religious people do you know that would blow up a school because girls were learning or bomb an abortion clinic? I'm not exaggerating, religion has done far worse for mankind than good.

 

[Superwoman Prime]

Hmm. Islam went a long way in bringing us algebra.

 

[Feenix]

Well, bombing schools completely overshadows anything good that Islam has done (as it should).

I'm not saying that religion didn't bring something to the table, but that doesn't erase all the horrific things that religion has led people to do. Here's a small list:

http://www.skeptically.org/hhor/id4.html

Besides, we would have figured out algebra without religion.

 

[Superwoman Prime]

I think militant atheism has the potential to cause equal or greater ill effects. The difference would be outward. I can't prove this. Yet. But the aggression and closed-mindedness I see from many atheists is eerily reminiscent of their opponents.

 

[Feenix]

I think militant atheism has the potential to cause equal or greater worse effects. The difference would be outward. I can't prove this. Yet. But the aggression and closed-mindedness I see from many atheists is eerily reminiscent of their opponents.

I don't agree at all. I know there are "militant" atheists, but they haven't shown any violence. They haven't flown any planes into buildings, bombed any churches, executed religious people, etc.

Part of being an atheist is being rational and murder and violence are not rational.

I don't believe for one second that atheists could cause worse problems than religion. At all. Ever. The religious have centuries upon centuries of blood on their hands.

 

[Superwoman Prime]

Oh, dear. You quoted the awkwardly reworded sentence before the edit.

I don't agree at all. I know there are militant atheists, but they haven't shown any violence. They haven't flown any planes into buildings, bombed any churches, executed religious people, etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians_in_the_Soviet_Union

Part of being an atheist is being rational and murder and violence are not rational.

People who claim to be rational are sometimes irrational.

I don't believe for one second that atheists could cause worse problems than religion. At all. Ever. The religious have centuries upon centuries of blood on their hands.

That may be because religion has had the floor for centuries now. Of course it will have more violence on its record.

 

[Superwoman Prime]

I'll kindly excuse myself from this discussion/debate. It would be depressing to defend Christianity.

Regwec and Schlosser have already picked up any slack I might've been unable to.

 

[regwec]

Hmm. Islam went a long way in bringing us algebra.

This kind of sentiment is quite widespread, but I think it represents slightly faulty analysis. In the last days of the eastern Roman Empire, the great seats of learning were cities like Alexandra, Antioch and Damascus. In the Seventh Century, the near east and North Africa were invaded and subjugated by the followers of the first caliphs, who spoke Arabic and claimed to follow a new prophet.

Predictably enough, cities like Alexandra, Antioch and Damascus continued to be seats of learning, although formal written works were thereafter in Arabic rather than the Greek used before.

How this equates to "Islamic" learning, I just don't understand. It is equivalent to calling the art of the Yuan Dynasty a flowering of creativity from the Mongol Hordes.

 

[Breogan]

How this equates to "Islamic" learning, I just don't understand.

Well nobody put it the way you did, but because that branch of study was being preserved and advanced under the Islamic civilization.

 

[regwec]

But the point was that it would have advanced anyway. The fact that some religious fanatics had rolled into town to chop a few hands off and stone a few women does not credit their belief system with the advances coincidentally made in mathematics etc.