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 12-02-2013, 06:00 AM
 
9,745 posts, read 6,718,665 times
Reputation: 2484

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by AREQUIPA View Post
Spock, T'Pol, 'T'Pau and the rather unconvincing Tuvok are nothing to do with atheism. And atheism is the furthest you can go with not believing is a god. There is no 'beyond'. There are social and philosophical consequences of being atheist, but they apply is one is agnostic, deist or irreligious theist. There is no progression of atheism beyond atheism.

I suggest you let atheists say what they are and what they think, rather than trying to tell us.
For some that may be the case because they have a very strong need to believe (it is called logic for them). I often see a nouveau atheists do this over and over again. BTW, I don't think you are a nouveau atheist.

In nouveau atheism I detect a strong urge for self-reaffirmation and the rejection of anything that remotely resembles any God. It is not easy to live like that---------looking for validation and rejecting anything that threatens the conversion to atheism.

As I said, the existence or non-existence of God is really a moot point and not worthy of too much consideration. Lets enjoy what we have and what we can palpate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-02-2013, 06:52 AM
 
212 posts, read 203,579 times
Reputation: 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by Julian658 View Post
I knew I was not the only one that suspected this. Some folks are just too zealous and militant.

Higgs boson theorist says he agrees with those who find Dawkins' approach to dealing with believers 'embarrassing'.


I am surprised that Dawkins has never criticized the Bible, per se, but has focused upon what religious people say the Bible says.

I mean, though Dawkins might at some passages recoil, and claim that science contradicts what he may comprehend a passage or two to mean,... surely he noticed, that before 1940, the whole world of Science was uncertain if there was "a beginning to the Universe."

Before 1940, prior to the Big Bang evidence, science debated the beginning of Time and most assumed that the cosmos had always been there.


Then, in gen 1:11, he might have applauded the Bible for correctly asserting that the roots of the Plant Kingdom appeared before the Animal Kingdom.

And a close reading of Gen 1:9, (i.e.; "that all the waters under heaven were collected together into one place") certainly describes the recent discovery of Pangaea.

My point is that Dawkins denigrates religion and the bible and the church all founded upon his argument against what some church people say they glean from their own poor reading of scripture.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2013, 07:05 AM
 
212 posts, read 203,579 times
Reputation: 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by Julian658 View Post
For some that may be the case because they have a very strong need to believe (it is called logic for them). I often see a nouveau atheists do this over and over again. BTW, I don't think you are a nouveau atheist.

In nouveau atheism I detect a strong urge for self-reaffirmation and the rejection of anything that remotely resembles any God. It is not easy to live like that---------looking for validation and rejecting anything that threatens the conversion to atheism.

As I said, the existence or non-existence of God is really a moot point and not worthy of too much consideration. Lets enjoy what we have and what we can palpate.

I agree.

However, the 2000 years of Christianity and the 1400 years of Islam have been fueled by the battle of the sexes.

Sexual Prudence, on the one hand, has necessarily resisted the proclivity for adolescents to engage in pre-marital sex with the attendant millions of both abortions and bastards, by using these argument of the Bible, Jesus, and God.


The atheism necessary to refute the Bible support given to this one side is invented by the feminists and gays, who (I would argue), otherwise could not care at all about religion or what the Bible may or may not say.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2013, 07:13 AM
 
39,014 posts, read 10,812,637 times
Reputation: 5080
Quote:
Originally Posted by Julian658 View Post
For some that may be the case because they have a very strong need to believe (it is called logic for them). I often see a nouveau atheists do this over and over again. BTW, I don't think you are a nouveau atheist.

In nouveau atheism I detect a strong urge for self-reaffirmation and the rejection of anything that remotely resembles any God. It is not easy to live like that---------looking for validation and rejecting anything that threatens the conversion to atheism.

As I said, the existence or non-existence of God is really a moot point and not worthy of too much consideration. Let's enjoy what we have and what we can palpate.
I believe I may be losing your drift. However, no matter ho theists may perceive atheists or take particular kinds and their behaviour and use it to bash atheism as such, there is only atheism that is non -belief in gods. New atheism if it is anything at all, is merely the old atheists standing up and speaking out. In that respect I am a 'New' or 'militant' atheist. the term 'fundamentalist' atheist is at best a far -fetched and denigrating analogy with the behaviour of religious fundamentalists. It does not apply to the tenets or dogma of atheism as are none. Merely the non - belief in any gods.

That is a logical position, given the lack of really sound evidence for a god. While there may be reasons why individual atheists may want to believe that no god exists, that is irrelevant to the logical basis of atheism.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cupid dave View Post
I agree.

However, the 2000 years of Christianity and the 1400 years of Islam have been fueled by the battle of the sexes.

Sexual Prudence, on the one hand, has necessarily resisted the proclivity for adolescents to engage in pre-marital sex with the attendant millions of both abortions and bastards, by using these argument of the Bible, Jesus, and God...

This, I might also say, is the answer to cupid Dave's posts above. Dawkins is an authority on biology so his views on evolution deserve respect. His views on religion are generally logically reasoned, but they are his own views. I can't recall him analyzing the Bible, just saying that it should count for nothing more than any other book of myths.

The fact is that the bible has been analyzed and increasingly found wanting. That rather than the sexual thing is the reason why we don't believe it. That the Churches are so hung up on Sex is one ongoing debate, but not the rationale for rejecting it.

I may say that the reason why we have the problems Dave mentions is because the Churches have opposed taking a rational view of sex, including the interest of young people in it. Teaching responsibility about it and providing the means to avoid the unpleasant side -effects would be an improvement on the church - based refusal to talk about it other than with embarrassed smirkings and flying into a hysterical fury if anyone suggests taking the youthful interest in sex seriously and responsibly, rather than preaching a moribund and unworkable moral code and wringing the hands and blaming secularist - led decline in moral standards on the religious morality's failure to do anything but cause the problems in the first place and continue to refuse to face up to them.

Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 12-02-2013 at 07:31 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2013, 08:49 AM
 
9,745 posts, read 6,718,665 times
Reputation: 2484
Quote:
Originally Posted by AREQUIPA View Post
I believe I may be losing your drift. However, no matter ho theists may perceive atheists or take particular kinds and their behaviour and use it to bash atheism as such, there is only atheism that is non -belief in gods. New atheism if it is anything at all, is merely the old atheists standing up and speaking out. In that respect I am a 'New' or 'militant' atheist. the term 'fundamentalist' atheist is at best a far -fetched and denigrating analogy with the behaviour of religious fundamentalists. It does not apply to the tenets or dogma of atheism as are none. Merely the non - belief in any gods.

That is a logical position, given the lack of really sound evidence for a god. While there may be reasons why individual atheists may want to believe that no god exists, that is irrelevant to the logical basis of atheism.
I fully agree with your position.

But, I am not making myself clear----or perhaps i do not communicate my point effectively. I am well past the stage of atheism and now I am able to enter another stage where atheism or theism are moot points. I can go to a Catholic wedding and truly enjoy the Schubert Ave Maria in the same manner a believer would. In other words I fool myself on purpose for just a few seconds to enjoy my humanity. That is why I said you (and others) cannot imagine or have fantasies----that is the Vulcan analogy.

Imagine a very powerful wealthy man in real life visiting a dominatrix so he can pretend to be a weakling and quite submissive. It all comes down to imagination, inner creativity, and unleashing of a fantastic world that lives inside. Imagine you are a kid again. Being like SPOCK 24/7 is not much fun.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2013, 09:15 AM
 
212 posts, read 203,579 times
Reputation: 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by AREQUIPA View Post


The fact is that the bible has been analyzed and increasingly found wanting. That rather than the sexual thing is the reason why we don't believe it. That the Churches are so hung up on Sex is one ongoing debate, but not the rationale for rejecting it.

I may say that the reason why we have the problems Dave mentions is because the Churches have opposed taking a rational view of sex, including the interest of young people in it. Teaching responsibility about it and providing the means to avoid the unpleasant side -effects would be an improvement on the church - based refusal to talk about it other than with embarrassed smirkings and flying into a hysterical fury if anyone suggests taking the youthful interest in sex seriously and responsibly, rather than preaching a moribund and unworkable moral code and wringing the hands and blaming secularist - led decline in moral standards on the religious morality's failure to do anything but cause the problems in the first place and continue to refuse to face up to them.

Well, sure, now...
I the past, societies did have the pill nor condoms or such devices, and teenage sex was treated by culturally pushing the couple to get married.
Even in the Puritan days of 1700, 60% of the girls were pregnant when married.

Getting pregnant was actually the way girls managed to get the guy to marry them, because the whole society was raised to never even talk about sex, and offered absolutely no exceptions to having a bastard, like Welfare encourages and under rights today.

Sure,...
We can look back now, and say it was "preaching a moribund and unworkable moral code" coupled to the social forces that made the couple get formally married.
But those two facets of the sexual mores did work in tandem together to make sure the Family had a father and mother,... especially reinforced by no divorce, except for the girl wearing a Scarlet A, in need be.

Now its different.
We can afford $1 Trillion in Welfare payments every year, and supply free condoms and pills, backed up with 1.2 million abortions every year.
But then, societies needed strong families because there was the Draft instead of paid mercenary Armies and the boys had to be relied upon to be socially responsible, loyal god-fearing, family men.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2013, 09:21 AM
 
212 posts, read 203,579 times
Reputation: 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by Julian658 View Post
I fully agree with your position.

But, I am not making myself clear----or perhaps i do not communicate my point effectively. I am well past the stage of atheism and now I am able to enter another stage where atheism or theism are moot points. I can go to a Catholic wedding and truly enjoy the Schubert Ave Maria in the same manner a believer would. In other words I fool myself on purpose for just a few seconds to enjoy my humanity. That is why I said you (and others) cannot imagine or have fantasies----that is the Vulcan analogy.

Imagine a very powerful wealthy man in real life visiting a dominatrix so he can pretend to be a weakling and quite submissive. It all comes down to imagination, inner creativity, and unleashing of a fantastic world that lives inside. Imagine you are a kid again. Being like SPOCK 24/7 is not much fun.

Yeah, yeah, yeah,...

What was the name of that famous poem about, All is well in the world," and the mention of the madding crowd growing up around us all as the little girls sings, "All is well in the world"...

I can't remember the author... anyone?????
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2013, 12:48 PM
 
39,014 posts, read 10,812,637 times
Reputation: 5080
Quote:
Originally Posted by Julian658 View Post
I fully agree with your position.

But, I am not making myself clear----or perhaps i do not communicate my point effectively. I am well past the stage of atheism and now I am able to enter another stage where atheism or theism are moot points. I can go to a Catholic wedding and truly enjoy the Schubert Ave Maria in the same manner a believer would. In other words I fool myself on purpose for just a few seconds to enjoy my humanity. That is why I said you (and others) cannot imagine or have fantasies----that is the Vulcan analogy.

Imagine a very powerful wealthy man in real life visiting a dominatrix so he can pretend to be a weakling and quite submissive. It all comes down to imagination, inner creativity, and unleashing of a fantastic world that lives inside. Imagine you are a kid again. Being like SPOCK 24/7 is not much fun.
Perhaps you did not make that clear, but that's ok. Further discussion brings further clarity. And you are right. I also have gone through a rather edgy period of newly discovered atheism to a more tolerant position. You may be attracted to Catholicism the way I am still rather attracted to Buddhism. Perhaps neither of us believe either religion and, if so, I didn't realize that and so I did misunderstand you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cupid dave View Post
Well, sure, now...
In the past, societies did have the pill nor condoms or such devices, and teenage sex was treated by culturally pushing the couple to get married. ....(and the like)
While it is easy to look back and register my disgust at what seemed a screwed up ethos, there is a case for understanding the position society was in. I blame it mostly on religion, but that may be unfair.

We have moved on a lot in some ways, but not in others.

Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 12-02-2013 at 01:47 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-03-2013, 10:25 AM
 
Location: The backwoods of Pennsylvania ... unfortunately.
5,846 posts, read 3,353,084 times
Reputation: 4055
Quote:
Higgs, who called Dawkins a fundamentalist is also atheist.
True, but Higgs is falling into the 'politically correct' trap. In that sense, he is playing right into the hands of religion which, as I said, demands respect and blind obedience. In that way, religion is like a spoiled child who has gotten his way most of his life and is now, for the first time, meeting up with folks that refuses to coddle him. This is why religion throws a fit whenever it doesn't get its own way or when people - even when non-Christian - refuse to adhere to religion's prejudicial morality.

Quote:
And your comments are correct regarding the religious right. But, the majority of religious people are very tolerant.
It really doesn't matter how the 'majority' of Christians behave; what matters is how the prominent Christian leaders behave, what preachers say behind the pulpit. There, you will find rampant intolerance, and that is bleeding into the general population of Christians. That is why we have 32 states with anti-gay laws. Those intolerant laws were funded and pushed by intolerant Christians. Many of those amendments were passed with a popular vote, so the 'majority' of 'tolerant' Christians must have left their tolerance at home that day.

Do you know that "Obamacare" is back in the Supreme Court? Yeah ... because of the issue of whether the government can force religious institutions to require contraception be made available on their insurance policies. Well, okay, I can see why some churches and purely Christian businesses (like book stores and such) might be a bit angry.

BUT ... that isn't the whole issue. Part of the court case involves allowing a business owner's personal religious belief to determine business policy even if the business itself is secular. This is where we're seeing the emergence of theocratic fascism in this country; if religion wins its case, it sets a precedent that allows religious bosses who own secular businesses to impose their personal religion onto his/her employees - even when off the clock! The only recourse an employee will have is to quit their job. Good luck dealing with that if you're an atheist.

Quote:
Sometimes more tolerant than militant atheists.
Militant atheists really haven't forced anyone to do anything. By and large, militant atheists simply give religion the tongue-lashing it deserves. They might occasionally raise some money to put up a handful of athiestic billboards or signs on the sides of busses (note how religion goes ape when that happens since atheists are just barely allowed to exercise their 1st Amendment rights). Militant atheists might attend atheist rallies and debate Christians on a forum. Rare, though, is the case when a militant atheist actually brings religion to court - such as removing "God" from the Pledge of Allegience. Of course, the atheist lost.

In fact, the only clear cut case that I remember where atheism won was in taking formal student prayer out of the public schools - and Christians are still insisting that prayer be put back in because, of course, lack of prayer in school is why the Newtown shootings occurred (among other things).

What I've noticed is that a lot of Christians put forth the façade of tolerance to avoid confrontation, but simmering just below the surface is a belief that everyone ought to be Christian, the world will be better if everyone was Christian. Those that refuse to accept Christianity should be marginalized and treated as second class citizens. You would be surprised at the number of atheists who have lost their jobs, their families, their community reputations, even their security for admitting they don't believe in God. This kind of story never makes the headlines, but trust me, it's there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-03-2013, 10:38 AM
 
9,745 posts, read 6,718,665 times
Reputation: 2484
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shirina View Post
True, but Higgs is falling into the 'politically correct' trap. In that sense, he is playing right into the hands of religion which, as I said, demands respect and blind obedience. In that way, religion is like a spoiled child who has gotten his way most of his life and is now, for the first time, meeting up with folks that refuses to coddle him. This is why religion throws a fit whenever it doesn't get its own way or when people - even when non-Christian - refuse to adhere to religion's prejudicial morality.



It really doesn't matter how the 'majority' of Christians behave; what matters is how the prominent Christian leaders behave, what preachers say behind the pulpit. There, you will find rampant intolerance, and that is bleeding into the general population of Christians. That is why we have 32 states with anti-gay laws. Those intolerant laws were funded and pushed by intolerant Christians. Many of those amendments were passed with a popular vote, so the 'majority' of 'tolerant' Christians must have left their tolerance at home that day.

Do you know that "Obamacare" is back in the Supreme Court? Yeah ... because of the issue of whether the government can force religious institutions to require contraception be made available on their insurance policies. Well, okay, I can see why some churches and purely Christian businesses (like book stores and such) might be a bit angry.

BUT ... that isn't the whole issue. Part of the court case involves allowing a business owner's personal religious belief to determine business policy even if the business itself is secular. This is where we're seeing the emergence of theocratic fascism in this country; if religion wins its case, it sets a precedent that allows religious bosses who own secular businesses to impose their personal religion onto his/her employees - even when off the clock! The only recourse an employee will have is to quit their job. Good luck dealing with that if you're an atheist.



Militant atheists really haven't forced anyone to do anything. By and large, militant atheists simply give religion the tongue-lashing it deserves. They might occasionally raise some money to put up a handful of athiestic billboards or signs on the sides of busses (note how religion goes ape when that happens since atheists are just barely allowed to exercise their 1st Amendment rights). Militant atheists might attend atheist rallies and debate Christians on a forum. Rare, though, is the case when a militant atheist actually brings religion to court - such as removing "God" from the Pledge of Allegience. Of course, the atheist lost.

In fact, the only clear cut case that I remember where atheism won was in taking formal student prayer out of the public schools - and Christians are still insisting that prayer be put back in because, of course, lack of prayer in school is why the Newtown shootings occurred (among other things).

What I've noticed is that a lot of Christians put forth the façade of tolerance to avoid confrontation, but simmering just below the surface is a belief that everyone ought to be Christian, the world will be better if everyone was Christian. Those that refuse to accept Christianity should be marginalized and treated as second class citizens. You would be surprised at the number of atheists who have lost their jobs, their families, their community reputations, even their security for admitting they don't believe in God. This kind of story never makes the headlines, but trust me, it's there.

You make very good points, but the religious folks have been top dog for a long time. If you travel Europe you will immediately realize that the Catholic Church was probably the most influential institution in Western Civilization----they are not anymore. Things are slowly changing, but it will take a lot of time.

Lastly, the realization of Atheism comes at different times for many. In Europe it is more common because they are older than America.
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
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