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.
A phrase you included in that post that you shouldn't have. Personal fantasy, if it is a personal fantasy, religion, or belief. It is above criticism. Just as your personal beliefs are above criticism. It is when you tell other people they have to believe in them as you do that they are allowed to be criticized. I do not require you to believe what I do. Just don't bash what I believe in.
For instance, If I post a thread about something spiritual, if it isn't something you believe in, leave it be. Don't post your unwanted comments in the thread. As I would do the same for you. This is where atheism and theism needs to focus on. Leave the other alone and all will be well.
In one sense, I agree with you. I do not choose to argue with people over their beliefs if they are not imposing them on me. Sometimes even when they are being pushy, I choose to let it be, so as to maintain a relationship with that person.
This is just interpersonal relationships 101. This is different than what the "New Atheists" are engaged in. They are debating ideas in a marketplace of ideas. Unless you wish to say that no one should advance an idea, or criticize some other idea, then these sorts of discussions are fair game. Just because I respect another's right to believe something does not mean I must refrain from criticism of that position.
I also disagree with your last paragraph in part. I would not presume to jump into a thread that is clearly intended for believers only (for instance most everything in the Christian forum). However, if you absolutely believed what you put forward,
Quote:
Originally Posted by raison_d'etre
...if it isn't something you believe in, leave it be
, you would not have even begun this thread. Let me be clear, I believe you are in the right to start this thread. You have every right to investigate question and express your opinion. I just think it is a bit hypocritical to ask me not to do the same.
I didn't mean all atheists, just the ones behind this movement.
What movement?
Atheists know that there are no gods, and that people that operate under the delusion that there are gods are a clear and present danger to society, and mankind's future.
If religion and spirituality were kept personal, you might have a point. As it stands, they are not, and in many cases cannot be by definition. Keeping religion out of law is a struggle that has been happening in the United States since its inception. It is a batle that still needs to be fought, as evidenced by the Texas school curriculum, the continuing battles over school prayer, and even things that we have come to accept as mere inconveniences such as blue laws and Sunday mail delivery. In addition there are the non-governmental social pressures. It is societally unacceptable to not believe in many areas. Because of the misconceptions about atheists that are taught form the pulpit and spread by intentionally misleading characterizations like yours, being "the atheist" in a work or social setting can case one to become a pariah. This is particularly true in regions like the Southeast.
I, and I believe most of the "New Atheists", would not condone governmental suppression of religion, but will be very relieved when religions of all stripes, either by choice or by lack of public support, stop trying to remake the world according to their dogmas.
I agree that religion and spirituality are a very important part of the human experience. In my opinion they fill the same sorts of roles as xenophobia and bigotry. That is they are ideas and attitudes that served and may still serve an evolutionary purpose. That does not mean they must be given respect and honor. They do little more that divide and demarcate groups of people so that each group knows who they can mistreat, how they are allowed to do so, and to what extent.
NoCapo
Apparently you are unaware of the new religious movement that is spreading across the world. The younger generations do not want to follow their fathers into their battles. They want peace among religions. They want a true equality, this means not going to war, or having political parties based on religion.
I think many people go to atheism and agnosticism because they see no other alternative to their parents religious beliefs. They figure the religion will always be the same, they neglect to see how it is indeed changing to what most people want. But, some groups of atheists don't want to see this happen either. They want religion gone. They blame religion for all wars, and bad things that have happened on this planet. When it's a fact that man, not religion caused all these things. 9/11, not religion, but men who want to put terror into the hearts and minds of millions. Every war can be blamed on mankind's lust for power and to be in the right.
In one sense, I agree with you. I do not choose to argue with people over their beliefs if they are not imposing them on me. Sometimes even when they are being pushy, I choose to let it be, so as to maintain a relationship with that person.
This is just interpersonal relationships 101. This is different than what the "New Atheists" are engaged in. They are debating ideas in a marketplace of ideas. Unless you wish to say that no one should advance an idea, or criticize some other idea, then these sorts of discussions are fair game. Just because I respect another's right to believe something does not mean I must refrain from criticism of that position.
I also disagree with your last paragraph in part. I would not presume to jump into a thread that is clearly intended for believers only (for instance most everything in the Christian forum). However, if you absolutely believed what you put forward,, you would not have even begun this thread. Let me be clear, I believe you are in the right to start this thread. You have every right to investigate question and express your opinion. I just think it is a bit hypocritical to ask me not to do the same.
NoCapo
When someone else's beliefs infringe or attempt to infringe on mine or others, I will speak up and fight, as would you.
Apparently you are unaware of the new religious movement that is spreading across the world. The younger generations do not want to follow their fathers into their battles. They want peace among religions. They want a true equality, this means not going to war, or having political parties based on religion.
I think many people go to atheism and agnosticism because they see no other alternative to their parents religious beliefs. They figure the religion will always be the same, they neglect to see how it is indeed changing to what most people want. But, some groups of atheists don't want to see this happen either. They want religion gone. They blame religion for all wars, and bad things that have happened on this planet. When it's a fact that man, not religion caused all these things. 9/11, not religion, but men who want to put terror into the hearts and minds of millions. Every war can be blamed on mankind's lust for power and to be in the right.
I've read many descriptions by atheists of why they have discarded the ignorance of religion and gods, and I don't believe that it has been as alternative to their parents beliefs.
Not to say that children don't rebel from their parents beliefs, but they do it to get back at the parents and become Wicca, satanists, or into the occults, you know anti-god stuff, for the shock value to strike back.
And before your spew your willful ignorance about atheism, it is not anti-god, for gods are just myths. Anti-religion, yes, for it is viewed as willful organized ignorance.
Atheists know that there are no gods, and that people that operate under the delusion that there are gods are a clear and present danger to society, and mankind's future.
The movement sounds alot like you actually. It is a movement of atheists who want to "cleanse" the earth of religion. How is this any different than the theists who want to "save" the world? It isn't.
People who believe in God are not a plague, a danger to society, or to mankind's future. Want to know what is? Not atheism, not theism, but mankind itself. Yup, mankind is what you can blame for every wrong doing. To make it more clear, you could even narrow it down to society. Society tells us what to wear, how to act, what to eat, and basically what to do with out lives. The call it the social norm for a reason. This is where it is crumbling, let everyone believe as they wish, do as they wish, and be as they wish as long as they aren't hurting someone else, or infringing on their ability to have the life they want.
If it isn't hurting you, leave it be. If it's something you are uncomfortable with, too bad. If it isn't physically hurting you, you have to leave it be.
. Every war can be blamed on mankind's lust for power and to be in the right.
I absolutely agree with you on this, but the reason so many wars, persecutions, genocides, and assorted atrocities are dressed up in religion is because religion is a very convenient tool. It asks its adherents to set aside their own reason and subsume it to a book, a man, a council, or a doctrine. When people stop thinking for themselves and blindly follow a pope, pastor, imam, or scripture, it is much easier to get otherwise decent people to commit horrific acts. This is the problem with religion. it makes nice people into monsters. People who may be serious about "loving thy neighbor" can also be serious about " suffer not a witch to live"
As far as some new religious movement, I have to say I cannot see it. Until Christianity does not claim that Christ is the only way to salvation, Islam does not claim that there is one God and Mohammed is his prophet, and the Jews renounce their position as God's chosen people, I don't see how you will get past this. Religions may say we should be kind and understanding, but at the core there are fundamental disagreements that cannot be smoothed over.
NoCapo
Last edited by NoCapo; 10-02-2011 at 10:19 PM..
Reason: typo
I've read many descriptions by atheists of why they have discarded the ignorance of religion and gods, and I don't believe that it has been as alternative to their parents beliefs.
Not to say that children don't rebel from their parents beliefs, but they do it to get back at the parents and become Wicca, satanists, or into the occults, you know anti-god stuff, for the shock value to strike back.
And before your spew your willful ignorance about atheism, it is not anti-god, for gods are just myths. Anti-religion, yes, for it is viewed as willful organized ignorance.
Actually, atheism is the disbelief in gods and deities. That's it, nothing more. And anti-religion is to be against religion. Since spirituality isn't seen as a religion because it varies from person to person... it doesn't cover that.
I honestly think atheist need to pick a new term. It's a bit outdated.
I just came across it. There are two versions of it. One is done by atheists, the other is a response by Christians. Both are bad messages that are being spread.
People like Richard Dawkins see religion as a "poison" and the future of society depends on its removal, science replaces it, and atheism leads to a better life. The proponents of the new atheism are evangelistic, clever and energetic, attracting worldwide publicity and enormous funding. It is nothing more than a money game. Get people to buy my book that claims to have proof of God not existing and make millions off of a bunch of suckers.
I'd like to know the names of the movies, if you remember them or if you can ask your friend. I'd like to watch them myself.
I am personally still wrestling with where I fall on the issue that religion is poisonous. I know it can be. I've seen it and been involved in it, much to my current disgust. I don't believe all religions are vile (i.e. Buddhism or Jainism), but I do believe, like Dawkins and Hitchens and Harris, that moderate religious organizations foster fanaticism and give it a environment in which to grow.
All that said, when and where did Dawkins or others say that they "want to steal the imagination on the world" or that "they will steal the stories and fairytale from our youth"? I haven't read this in their books or heard this in their interviews. I think it's extreme and false to say "They wish to replace emotions with so called logic." Have you seen these guys? They don't appear unemotional at all, and regardless of appearances, when did they say they thought emotions were useless, extraneous, or bad? As scientists, I'd be surprised to hear them assert that emotions were unnecessary or irrelevant.
In addition, you call their reason faulty and said they have "a lack of proof". However, you don't explain their reasoning or what you find distasteful about it. You don't explain what their "proof" is or how you feel it's invalid. I struggled to find your initial post as more than a rant with little information about the subject you were ranting about. I understand better now, after a bit of banter, but you could elaborate more, if you desire a fuller understanding from your audience.
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.
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.
