U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Atheism and Agnosticism
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-25-2017, 10:07 PM
Status: "Smacking fundies." (set 1 day ago)
 
Location: Ontario, Canada
25,783 posts, read 13,404,281 times
Reputation: 11668

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by mordant View Post
Thanks. Been having more fun, honestly, at TTA, but it was down earlier today, which made me think of C-D. This is no longer my preferred hangout (only so many hours in a day) after the moderation changes on R&S but I do plan to dip in here and there. You can always visit me at TTA, same handle there ;-)
I'll echo Unsettomati's plaudits for your posts.

I also fully understand and agree with the reasons for your absence and regret the recent decline of the R&S section of the CD forums.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-25-2017, 10:18 PM
 
39,035 posts, read 10,825,389 times
Reputation: 5082
Quote:
Originally Posted by mordant View Post
I think Nozz says it best, he happens to be unbelieving in deities because he doesn't afford belief to unsubstantiated things. As such, going all the way back in time to the OP in 2013, I agree that the "really important" thing going on is not atheism, but empiricism, rationalism, adhering to a sound as opposed to a failed epistemology, actual as opposed to faux morality and ethics, things of that nature. Atheism is just one facet of those things, not the main event.
He's back! He's back! Mordant's back!

Yes, I agree that a general push or increased rationality, education, better ethics everywhere is all nedful, and the campaign to dislodge religion from its position of social (and political!)influence is just one aspect. It just happens to be the one that I have dedicated my life, time and fingers to.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2017, 12:43 PM
 
Location: City-Data Forum
7,945 posts, read 4,738,704 times
Reputation: 1328
Quote:
Originally Posted by cyrano View Post
Disagree strongly as to both. I'm not interested in "spreading" atheism. I'm interested in "spreading" tolerance; you can believe and practice whatever religion you want, so long as you don't force it, formally or otherwise, on me.

That may be too much to ask of pious, rabid, and/or insecure religionists, especially those who embrace the argument that their "religious liberty" is being infringed upon if they're dumb enough to live in a state that prohibits their "god-given right" to refuse to serve queers. but they can always move to Alabama, Arkansas, or Iran.


I no more have "religious" beliefs than I have "banana" beliefs.
But I've seen a lot of fundamentalists who love to force their views upon others any way they can.
Won't you be "reducing tolerance" by not tolerating their intolerance?
Won't you be forcing your "tolerance-inclusion" "religious/life-views" formally or otherwise, on those who want to force their views on others and be intolerant but you won't let them?

pious, rabid, and insecure religionists will simply grow in number if all liberals keep turning a blind eye to them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2017, 01:54 PM
 
Location: Columbia MO
1,717 posts, read 1,864,761 times
Reputation: 2049
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuminousTruth View Post
But I've seen a lot of fundamentalists who love to force their views upon others any way they can.
Won't you be "reducing tolerance" by not tolerating their intolerance?
Won't you be forcing your "tolerance-inclusion" "religious/life-views" formally or otherwise, on those who want to force their views on others and be intolerant but you won't let them?

pious, rabid, and insecure religionists will simply grow in number if all liberals keep turning a blind eye to them.
No and no. Leave me out of whatever ridiculous (un)holy war you have in mind.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2017, 03:33 AM
 
Location: Top of the South, NZ
17,169 posts, read 13,712,727 times
Reputation: 5546
I'm not interested in spreading atheism, only in doing my bit to ensure that I don't have to live according to the dictates of someone's religious belief.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2017, 06:10 AM
 
39,035 posts, read 10,825,389 times
Reputation: 5082
Unfortunately, that is only going to happen by depriving religion of power and authority. And that is only going happen by changing people's hearts and minds about religion.

It isn't about atheism, so much as a sortagod -belief doesn't matter. It is about getting more "Nones" which includes atheists, "Agnostics" - as the call themselves) and irreligious theists. We are all in the same camp or out to be, and one of the most distressing things about the campaign is that those who ought to be working with us fighting us bitterly over "New" (outspoken) atheism and First -cause-Sortagod, which is a purely academic discussion, and nothing to do with rolling back organized religion.

The "Agnostic" (so called) hatred for atheism was incomprehensible, but it seems to stem from the McCarthy years where God, country, and bomb Hanoi if we have o was set against Commies, new -age hippies and everything "Liburl"and still is, though its anywhere with Muslim in it that has to be bombed, now.

No wonder Sam Harris suggested changing our name. He had a case, and it might have worked (as it did with Gays) But I'm against it. The need is to change perception, not try to fool people we aren't what we are -which could backfire if the attempt at deception - that's what it is really - is seen through. Atheism cannot afford to make a single bad mistake or the Opposition will leap on it and claim to have discredited the whole thing -
no I mean which is why the OP idea of a repackaging of atheism isn not right, or even a good idea. We have the right answer, even if it isn't the easy answer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2017, 01:22 PM
 
Location: Texas
35,225 posts, read 19,277,067 times
Reputation: 20841
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuminousTruth View Post
So as you all might have realized, I like atheists (the ones on here are usually smart) as much as I like theists. But I was thinking about the growth in atheism... and about how meaningless it is. What is atheism going to accomplish? Nothing. It is simply piggy backing on increased intelligence, etc, which are the actual good things. So the more the atheists deconvert the bad people in religion, the more bad people there will be in Atheism.

I think this is the atheist's grand mistake. I think some people have some natural inclinations, and that as atheists convert bad people with their arguments and growing power, they will invite more degradation of Enlightenment and Ethical values into their fold. Instead of focusing on the growth in criticism of the God question, atheists should be focusing on intelligence and critical thinking, etc, especially for their children (which they seem to often do, not wanted to "push" atheism into their children).

This is the problem I have with the atheist label, and why I prefer people to label themselves by things that matter a little bit more than whether or not deities exist, which is what the whole atheist/theist argument ultimately boils down to. The label of "Brights" denotes a certain "inquiry, visibility, and intelligence" and the label "Humanist" denotes a certain "goal, respect, and focus." The word "Agnostic" denotes a certain "understanding, limitation, and broader inquiry."

The first people to be labeled "atheist" were the ancient Christians, often called the Nazarenes. They (after they took over Rome), along with the Islamists in the Arab lands, destroyed Enlightenment/progressive values and plunged their civilizations into dark ages. The Atheists in Russia were no better, after shredding their constitution and focusing only on economic equality and national security, they denied Enlightenment values and freedom, plunging their societies into dark eras. All of these people accepted a form of authoritarian conservatism which wanted nothing to do with inquiry and counter-arguments. But these possible consequences of such a theist-centered focus are only one possible outcome of the mistake.

Another outcome of atheists' spreading of unmonitored atheism and their acceptance of inferior deconverts would likely be that the pious religious would point to the atheists and say "look at their degradation, we are better" and so have an incentive for the good people to turn to religion where it is organized and clean.

There could be no inferior converts in a strongly monitored Humanist or Bright movement. However, any organization might succumb to corruption, so there would still be work and inquiry that would need to be done. Still why would anyone want to spread disbelief in gods? Spread how you got there, not the short cut to it (accepting atheism).

Do any of you disagree that calling yourself an atheist is a mistake? Do any of you disagree that spreading atheism (without spreading actual good things) is meaningless EVEN if ending (current) theism is not?

Your post seems to be aimed at "evangelical atheists" who have some desire to turn others away from their faith.

In my long lifetime, I haven't encountered one of these. Atheists I know (including me) just have no interest in religion and view it as a personal value best left to each individual.

Currently, religions of all labels/brands seem to be losing adherents at a rate that no doubt causes them great concern. This loss isn't due to any kind of effort on the part of atheists. It's simply the inevitable outcome of increased awareness and connectedness in our world. Information is freely available to nearly everyone these days and that obviates the emotional need for many to seek spiritual refuge in old easily debunked myths.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2017, 05:05 PM
 
13,477 posts, read 4,986,806 times
Reputation: 1365
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuminousTruth View Post
So as you all might have realized, I like atheists (the ones on here are usually smart) as much as I like theists. But I was thinking about the growth in atheism... and about how meaningless it is. What is atheism going to accomplish? Nothing. It is simply piggy backing on increased intelligence, etc, which are the actual good things. So the more the atheists deconvert the bad people in religion, the more bad people there will be in Atheism.

I think this is the atheist's grand mistake. I think some people have some natural inclinations, and that as atheists convert bad people with their arguments and growing power, they will invite more degradation of Enlightenment and Ethical values into their fold. Instead of focusing on the growth in criticism of the God question, atheists should be focusing on intelligence and critical thinking, etc, especially for their children (which they seem to often do, not wanted to "push" atheism into their children).

This is the problem I have with the atheist label, and why I prefer people to label themselves by things that matter a little bit more than whether or not deities exist, which is what the whole atheist/theist argument ultimately boils down to. The label of "Brights" denotes a certain "inquiry, visibility, and intelligence" and the label "Humanist" denotes a certain "goal, respect, and focus." The word "Agnostic" denotes a certain "understanding, limitation, and broader inquiry."

The first people to be labeled "atheist" were the ancient Christians, often called the Nazarenes. They (after they took over Rome), along with the Islamists in the Arab lands, destroyed Enlightenment/progressive values and plunged their civilizations into dark ages. The Atheists in Russia were no better, after shredding their constitution and focusing only on economic equality and national security, they denied Enlightenment values and freedom, plunging their societies into dark eras. All of these people accepted a form of authoritarian conservatism which wanted nothing to do with inquiry and counter-arguments. But these possible consequences of such a theist-centered focus are only one possible outcome of the mistake.

Another outcome of atheists' spreading of unmonitored atheism and their acceptance of inferior deconverts would likely be that the pious religious would point to the atheists and say "look at their degradation, we are better" and so have an incentive for the good people to turn to religion where it is organized and clean.

There could be no inferior converts in a strongly monitored Humanist or Bright movement. However, any organization might succumb to corruption, so there would still be work and inquiry that would need to be done. Still why would anyone want to spread disbelief in gods? Spread how you got there, not the short cut to it (accepting atheism).

Do any of you disagree that calling yourself an atheist is a mistake? Do any of you disagree that spreading atheism (without spreading actual good things) is meaningless EVEN if ending (current) theism is not?
I say I am atheist by definition. Its a quick point of reference. Luckily, more rational people are joining the ranks so I am finding myself not having to say "but not one of those kind." luckily for me, more middle of the roaders are joining the ranks.

I have to think of why anti-religion and socialism go hand in hand. They both do not care about the end game, they only care about the means. No matter how many people get hurt in the end.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2017, 09:01 PM
 
Location: Boston
3,732 posts, read 1,469,827 times
Reputation: 5802
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuminousTruth View Post

I think this is the atheist's grand mistake.
Hmm I think its your mistake.
The real mistake most atheists make is they confuse religion with God.
Having proven religion wrong , they conclude they have disproven God.
That was the biggest mistake I made over the course of my 40 yrs an atheist.
I assumed I had dealt with but had actually sidestepped the real issue of God.

Oddly, it was only through closer examination of science, especially mathematics, that I came to believe in God.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2017, 09:06 PM
 
Location: Boston
3,732 posts, read 1,469,827 times
Reputation: 5802
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arach Angle View Post
I have to think of why anti-religion and socialism go hand in hand..

They both "play God".
Stalin played God in a terrible way as people will do if given unbridled power over others.
The economist Milt Freedman said you cannot have socialism without the use of force as it goes against the natural order of humanity, that is to reach toward freedom.
Freedom is the natural state. Socialism is the well intended road to hell.

The anti religion atheist is a prey to that within which craves to play God, their own ego.
Been there myself and left clawmarks on the gates of hell.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Atheism and Agnosticism
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top