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.
It is well documented and well known that the Soviet Union banned religious practices, destroyed many churches, murdered many religious leaders and did it in the name of atheism and forced atheistic propaganda. Did they kill all Christians? No. But they oppressed, tortured and killed many.
Throughout history Christians have always been killed due to their faith
By this logic, any Christian sexually abusing children, is doing it in the name of Christ - wouldn't you agree?
Before Youtube's censorship began, atheists basically owned that place. Everywhere you looked was some kind of anti-religious channel. Religion was getting attacked from all different directions, through research, comedy, making moral arguments against the morality of various gods, etc. They'd have debates and those debates would serve to, nearly always, depict the religious side as just as flawed as it really was.
One thing that annoys me about the Youtube censorship, is that we could have used Youtube to dramatically speed up the secularization of society, particularly the United States.
That's because any environment with total free access to information and maximized discussion will be ruled by the more secular groups. There are reasons why you're not supposed to ask questions in church. Part of that's just politeness, but a lot of it's because there'd be a never-ending series of questions the clergy couldn't answer.
That's probably the best way to tackle religious fundamentalism: free and open discussion and lack of censorship.
Some kinds of censorship could probably hinder the spread of some religious views. For example, Chick Tracts emphasize the threat of hell for nonbelief, That sort of fear based threat is something people will respond to unthinkingly, regardless of evidence oftentimes, so that might be something to censor. There are good reasons why Atheist Ireland actually encourages people to read the Bible though. I don't know why demolishing churches and replacing pictures of Jesus with Chinese bureacrats won't just increase people's devoutness. This seems like pointless bullying.
Maybe even censoring stuff like Chick Tracts would do more harm than good though. They can be read and mocked as sources of entertainment. They make Christian fundamentalism look bad. They can be made to basically be anti-Christian propaganda just by reading them to the public...just 100% like they're already written.
Before Youtube's censorship began, atheists basically owned that place. Everywhere you looked was some kind of anti-religious channel. Religion was getting attacked from all different directions, through research, comedy, making moral arguments against the morality of various gods, etc. They'd have debates and those debates would serve to, nearly always, depict the religious side as just as flawed as it really was.
One thing that annoys me about the Youtube censorship, is that we could have used Youtube to dramatically speed up the secularization of society, particularly the United States.
That's because any environment with total free access to information and maximized discussion will be ruled by the more secular groups. There are reasons why you're not supposed to ask questions in church. Part of that's just politeness, but a lot of it's because there'd be a never-ending series of questions the clergy couldn't answer.
That's probably the best way to tackle religious fundamentalism: free and open discussion and lack of censorship.
Some kinds of censorship could probably hinder the spread of some religious views. For example, Chick Tracts emphasize the threat of hell for nonbelief, That sort of fear based threat is something people will respond to unthinkingly, regardless of evidence oftentimes, so that might be something to censor. There are good reasons why Atheist Ireland actually encourages people to read the Bible though. I don't know why demolishing churches and replacing pictures of Jesus with Chinese bureacrats won't just increase people's devoutness. This seems like pointless bullying.
Maybe even censoring stuff like Chick Tracts would do more harm than good though. They can be read and mocked as sources of entertainment. They make Christian fundamentalism look bad. They can be made to basically be anti-Christian propaganda just by reading them to the public...just 100% like they're already written.
but then maybe they're not so much concerned about religion itself, as a lack of primary loyalty to the state. You can't really "free-think" loyalty to the state into being...unless you have one really, really fair and ideal government.
Yes it does have. Any atheists who hold power not only eliminated freeedom of religion but persecuted faithful people and banned basically religious holidays and celebrations.
Hitler was born and baptized as Catholic but later rejected his faith and became an atheist.
Not every atheist who has been leader of a state wants to eliminate religious freedoms and persecute people. A least a handful of the founders of the United States were not Christians. Most atheists want separation of church and state, and allow people religious freedoms.
Yes, there have been awful people who claim to be atheists, but most atheists are decent people who just want to live their lives.
Status:
"It Can't Rain All The Time"
(set 29 days ago)
Location: North Pacific
15,754 posts, read 7,592,007 times
Reputation: 2576
Quote:
Originally Posted by 11thHour
The Lord works in mysterious ways. It's His will. I guess you could pray uselessly and plead for Him to reverse His will.
The best line I ever heard in a movie, that explains so much, was in the movie, "I Am Legend", when Will Smith's character says, "God didn't do this, we did."
The best line I ever heard in a movie, that explains so much, was in the movie, "I Am Legend", when Will Smith's character says, "God didn't do this, we did."
See...I actually approve of Maltheism: the belief that a god exists, but it's our enemy and it's something we have to fight.
That comes pretty close to my worldview. The way I see things, there's a personification of the natural world named Mother Nature. She's a mad scientists who made smallpox, and cancer, and gave us each an incurable disorder called aging.
She's our enemy. To do best in life, we are to outsmart her. He stronger than us, but we, unlike her, have brains. We can out-think her. We can invent things. We might be able to cure aging. We can enhance our lives through ingenuity.
The biggest threat I see is the mentality of: that which is natural, that which we're used to, is what is correct.That's a major threat I see from organized religion. It tends to drag culture behind and insist that what is natural, what we're used to, is best
Not every atheist who has been leader of a state wants to eliminate religious freedoms and persecute people. A least a handful of the founders of the United States were not Christians. Most atheists want separation of church and state, and allow people religious freedoms.
Yes, there have been awful people who claim to be atheists, but most atheists are decent people who just want to live their lives.
In a couple hundred years or so...we might have to just force people into a technocracy just to survive, and I'd have no problem with that at all. I look at it like: the human species must survive, no matter the cost...but that's not a problem yet. It seems like we still might have some time to solve problems in a more free manner.
I've known several atheists who perceive telling their own children that people go to hell for nonbelief as child abuse, but I don't I've met many, if any, who want that legally treated as child abuse. They just want people not to do it. They don't want to legally control how people teach their kids.
The only I've really heard atheists want the government to intervene is when it comes to things like Jehovah's witnesses and other groups who don't want their kids to get proper medical care. That's when you'll find a lot of atheists, and non-atheists too, start talking about wanting to jail the parents.
Most of them seem to like the idea of seperation of church and state though.
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.
