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.
I'll cop to the second to a slight degree...but I'm a naturally happy guy!
What would I have to be upset about?
I'm strong and healthy...I have an awesome family...I'm materially privileged beyond what I could have ever hoped for...I have great friends (some for my whole life)...MOF, everything's cool as can be!
I even have you and the rest of TAC to amuse me. Yup!...It's alllllll good!
What's not to love, and be thankful for, about my life?
Some things make me sad...and some things make me upset and/or disappionted...but I'm seldom mad.
I try to live life with a positive vibe.
Though I have known people that were most contented when they were miserable...so they did their best to find misery in everything they could. I find them amusing, in a strange sort of way--Like the "Sad Clown" in the circus.
whether you believe there is a God, or you believe there is no God,
you still have a belief of some kind.
I'd like to say this is false, but it's not quite that. It is more a fallacy of euphemism.
There is belief involved, but it's a belief in the validity of knowledge. That knowledge does not see any persuasive evidence for a god of any kind and so does not believe in any. That is not a belief of any kind, religious or not.
On the other hand I suppose we could say that the evidence as regards personal gods is so unconvincing that we can say we believe that they are all human inventions. That is a belief and we can provide reasons why.
That still isn't a religion though, unless we use the term 'religion' to denote any field of study which has books about it. It is also worth saying that this is the rationale of atheism, whether or not one can point to this atheist or that who rather overstates the case.
Now, it would certainly facilitate reasonable discussion to get a grip on the issues rather than trying to win minor tactical points by semantic muddying of the waters.
The Evolution of Species is one of the holy scriptures.
I'm not familiar with that book, who wrote it?
Quote:
Scientists (especially the atheist ones) are the saints; the "unholy Trinity" of Harris/Dawkins/Hitchens (all white males) is worshipped.
Really? Where do we gather to worship them? How are they worshipped? Who decided they were our saints?
Quote:
The "Darwin" sticker (fish with feet) is its holy symbol.
Hint: feety-fish are humor. Yeah, a joke. Look up the word in a dictionary.
Quote:
They believe they alone possess "the truth" (actually that one is not so much like religion)
No, we believe in the continual logical, scientific search for facts about our universe. We damn well know that we don't know everything.
Quote:
How is it not like a religion?
How is a car not like a platypus?
Quote:
You need to have evolved into homo erectus to be religious;
Really? Show us evidence of the religious beliefs and practices of homo erectus.
Quote:
to be atheist you only need to be a Chihuahua or an orangutan. Humanity is not required.
Compare the statistics of educational level of atheists as compared to the religious. Take a look at the percentage of believers in prison compared to the percentage of atheists that are incarcerated. If you're honest with yourself, you'll find that you're woefully (or deliberately) ignorant of the real truth. Statistically speaking, we're smarter, more educated, and more law-abiding than you believers.
Quote:
Nor is education.
See previous answer regarding educational level. Oh, and I suggest you get some. Yours is severely lacking.
Scientists (especially the atheist ones) are the saints; the "unholy Trinity" of Harris/Dawkins/Hitchens (all white males) is worshipped.
They is??? Well...ok, I might accept that. But then you have to realize that, in the realm of science, to worship someone is to argue with them and try your best to prove them wrong. You simply don't get to be rich and famous as a scientist if you simply agree with all of your mentors. You make a name for yourself in science by showing that a theory is wrong, then replacing it with a better theory.
The Evolution of Species is one of the holy scriptures.
Scientists (especially the atheist ones) are the saints; the "unholy Trinity" of Harris/Dawkins/Hitchens (all white males) is worshipped.
The "Darwin" sticker (fish with feet) is its holy symbol.
They believe they alone possess "the truth" (actually that one is not so much like religion)
How is it not like a religion?
You need to have evolved into homo erectus to be religious; to be atheist you only need to be a Chihuahua or an orangutan. Humanity is not required. Nor is education.
That's actually true. To be 'atheist' (hold no god - belief) one only needs to be a dog or Chimp. Or chipmunk or carrot, or baby or a brick. However to be An Atheist (which is where I tend to capitalize it) one needs to have heard of the god - claims and not accept them. A Chihuahua or Orang - Utang (1) couldn't manage that.
So your last point has a grain of truth but not much more than that.
Pretty much like the rest of it. There's a grain of truth in that one could see parallels between spokesmen and saints, textbooks and scriptures, badges and Icons, but one has to have have a brain frazzled by theism to suggest that it has any more than a passing similarity to to the speculations, false claims and dogma of religions.
(1) From malay Oran - hutan = 'man of the forest'. Something for quiz night.
That's actually true. To be 'atheist' (hold no god - belief) one only needs to be a dog or Chimp. Or chipmunk or carrot, or baby or a brick. However to be An Atheist (which is where I tend to capitalize it) one needs to have heard of the god - claims and not accept them. A Chihuahua or Orang - Utang (1) couldn't manage that.
So your last point has a grain of truth but not much more than that.
Pretty much like the rest of it. There's a grain of truth in that one could see parallels between spokesmen and saints, textbooks and scriptures, badges and Icons, but one has to have have a brain frazzled by theism to suggest that it has any more than a passing similarity to to the speculations, false claims and dogma of religions.
(1) From malay Oran - hutan = 'man of the forest'. Something for quiz night.
I'll point out my own error since you didn't catch it: the scripture is On the Origin of Species.
"Orangutan" is the spelling from the American dictionary, Merriam-Webster. Is it different in London?
It may need explanation that my post was tongue-in-cheek. I was not suggesting there was more than "a passing similarity" here. Only a brain stultified by atheism would miss the humor.
But really, some folks have this overweening deference toward scientists, placing them on pedestals and acting as though they should be arbiters of everything. I respect scientists, they have their place in society, but I'm more in awe of poets, violinists, opera singers, interpreters, pole-vaulters, marathoners, beekeepers... you get the picture. Or maybe you don't.
Compare the statistics of educational level of atheists as compared to the religious. Take a look at the percentage of believers in prison compared to the percentage of atheists that are incarcerated. If you're honest with yourself, you'll find that you're woefully (or deliberately) ignorant of the real truth. Statistically speaking, we're smarter, more educated, and more law-abiding than you believers.
See previous answer regarding educational level. Oh, and I suggest you get some. Yours is severely lacking.
I can't believe some of you are still harping on this crap with "percentages" as if it proves anything. Religious groups founded the top universities. Literacy throughout the world was promoted through religion. You can also look at the severely retarded and call them "atheists" since they don't believe in God, that would also prove nothing. As for prisoners, they all check the box for a certain religion because they know they get benefits when they do so. Who cares? Some of the smartest people in the world are religious, some are not. Nothing proven.
As for prisoners, they all check the box for a certain religion because they know they get benefits when they do so. Who cares? Some of the smartest people in the world are religious, some are not. Nothing proven.
Fail. The statistics in question were independently gathered in a blind study that was not conducted by the prison system, which means the inmates would gain no benefit by lying and lose nothing by telling the truth.
But, go ahead and deny the obvious. As a believer, you excel at that.
I'd like to say this is false, but it's not quite that. It is more a fallacy of euphemism.
There is belief involved, but it's a belief in the validity of knowledge. That knowledge does not see any persuasive evidence for a god of any kind and so does not believe in any. That is not a belief of any kind, religious or not.
On the other hand I suppose we could say that the evidence as regards personal gods is so unconvincing that we can say we believe that they are all human inventions. That is a belief and we can provide reasons why.
That still isn't a religion though, unless we use the term 'religion' to denote any field of study which has books about it. It is also worth saying that this is the rationale of atheism, whether or not one can point to this atheist or that who rather overstates the case.
Now, it would certainly facilitate reasonable discussion to get a grip on the issues rather than trying to win minor tactical points by semantic muddying of the waters.
A "religion" can be any tenet you hold onto strongly. Jingoism is a religion.
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.
That's actually true. To be 'atheist' (hold no god - belief) one only needs to be a dog or Chimp. Or chipmunk or carrot, or baby or a brick. However to be An Atheist (which is where I tend to capitalize it) one needs to have heard of the god - claims and not accept them. A Chihuahua or Orang - Utang (1) couldn't manage that.
