This is in regards to some people's comments about atheism.

First of all, if you are going to say practicing atheism is stupid, then you are stupid. Atheism IS NOT a practice. It IS NOT even a religion, nor is it a belief. Atheism is defined as “An absence of belief in the existence of gods.” Simply put - a person who does not believe in God. Atheism is not a hatred for religion either; it is simply the lack of belief for it.

If you are going to debate something, at least bring some education of the subject to the table.

Atheists can entertain any idea about God and religion, due to the fact that they have no true belief in it. They can entertain the idea that God is all that the Bible makes him out to be, they can entertain the idea that God and Satan are best friend’s, and earth is a board game for them to play. Atheists can entertain the theory of Big Bang, evolution, and even the idea that religion and the bible were invented for mass crowd control by intelligent people with a goal of becoming tyrants. So to claim that atheism is stupid does not make sense. It is not stupid to not believe in something that has not been sufficiently proven. I could argue that is in fact stupid to believe in any form of deity/god. But arguing the opposite is not logical.

It is like someone exclaiming “Alas!”, and then you saying “No, that is stupid!” That does not make sense.

There are also two types of atheists:

The one I described above, and then there is the extreme atheist. The extreme atheist believes there is absolutely, what-so-ever, no place for religion or God anywhere at anytime. While the other, does not believe in God, but that doesn’t mean we don’t think religion or the notion of God has its’ purposes (i.e. crowd control, some people need religion to find a form of strength/purpose, etc).

It is for this reason that I am capable of arguing/debating many things about religion and Gods. I can entertain any and all ideas, simply because I do not believe in any of it. And in a way, you could say that this allows me to see many things “outside of the box”, from non-subjective views, and essentially all views of opinion.

[This message has been edited by Aeon (edited 03-07-2005).]

quote:This morning there was a knock at my door. When I answered the door I found a well groomed, nicely dressed couple. The man spoke first:

John: "Hi! I'm John, and this is Mary."

Mary: "Hi! We're here to invite you to come kiss Hank's ass with us."

Me: "Pardon me?! What are you talking about? Who's Hank, and why would I want to kiss His ass?"

John: "If you kiss Hank's ass, He'll give you a million dollars; and if you don't, He'll kick the shit out of you."

Me: "What? Is this some sort of bizarre mob shake-down?"

John: "Hank is a billionaire philanthropist. Hank built this town. Hank owns this town. He can do whatever He wants, and what He wants is to give you a million dollars, but He can't until you kiss His ass."

Me: "That doesn't make any sense. Why..."

Mary: "Who are you to question Hank's gift? Don't you want a million dollars? Isn't it worth a little kiss on the ass?"

Me: "Well maybe, if it's legit, but..."

John: "Then come kiss Hank's ass with us."

Me: "Do you kiss Hank's ass often?"

Mary: "Oh yes, all the time..."

Me: "And has He given you a million dollars?"

John: "Well no. You don't actually get the money until you leave town."

Me: "So why don't you just leave town now?"

Mary: "You can't leave until Hank tells you to, or you don't get the money, and He kicks the shit out of you."

Me: "Do you know anyone who kissed Hank's ass, left town, and got the million dollars?"

John: "My mother kissed Hank's ass for years. She left town last year, and I'm sure she got the money."

Me: "Haven't you talked to her since then?"

John: "Of course not, Hank doesn't allow it."

Me: "So what makes you think He'll actually give you the money if you've never talked to anyone who got the money?"

Mary: "Well, He gives you a little bit before you leave. Maybe you'll get a raise, maybe you'll win a small lotto, maybe you'll just find a twenty-dollar bill on the street."

Me: "What's that got to do with Hank?"

John: "Hank has certain 'connections.'"

Me: "I'm sorry, but this sounds like some sort of bizarre con game."

John: "But it's a million dollars, can you really take the chance? And remember, if you don't kiss Hank's ass He'll kick the shit of you."

Me: "Maybe if I could see Hank, talk to Him, get the details straight from Him..."

Mary: "No one sees Hank, no one talks to Hank."

Me: "Then how do you kiss His ass?"

John: "Sometimes we just blow Him a kiss, and think of His ass. Other times we kiss Karl's ass, and he passes it on."

Me: "Who's Karl?"

Mary: "A friend of ours. He's the one who taught us all about kissing Hank's ass. All we had to do was take him out to dinner a few times."

Me: "And you just took his word for it when he said there was a Hank, that Hank wanted you to kiss His ass, and that Hank would reward you?"

John: "Oh no! Karl has a letter he got from Hank years ago explaining the whole thing. Here's a copy; see for yourself."

* From the desk of Karl **

1. Kiss Hank's ass and He'll give you a million dollars when you leave town.

2. Use alcohol in moderation.

3. Kick the shit out of people who aren't like you.

4. Eat right.

5. Hank dictated this list Himself.

6. The moon is made of green che.ese.

7. Everything Hank says is right.

8. Wash your hands after going to the bathroom.

9. Don't use alcohol.

10. Eat your wieners on buns, no condiments.

11. Kiss Hank's ass or He'll kick the shit out of you.

Me: "This appears to be written on Karl's letterhead."

Mary: "Hank didn't have any paper."

Me: "I have a hunch that if we checked we'd find this is Karl's handwriting."

John: "Of course, Hank dictated it."

Me: "I thought you said no one gets to see Hank?"

Mary: "Not now, but years ago He would talk to some people."

Me: "I thought you said He was a philanthropist. What sort of philanthropist kicks the shit out of people just because they're different?"

Mary: "It's what Hank wants, and Hank's always right."

Me: "How do you figure that?"

Mary: "Item 7 says 'Everything Hank says is right.' That's good enough for me!"

Me: "Maybe your friend Karl just made the whole thing up."

John: "No way! Item 5 says 'Hank dictated this list himself.' Besides, item 2 says 'Use alcohol in moderation,' Item 4 says 'Eat right,' and item 8 says 'Wash your hands after going to the bathroom.' Everyone knows those things are right, so the rest must be true, too."

Me: "But 9 says 'Don't use alcohol.' which doesn't quite go with item 2, and 6 says 'The moon is made of green che.ese,' which is just plain wrong."

John: "There's no contradiction between 9 and 2, 9 just clarifies 2. As far as 6 goes, you've never been to the moon, so you can't say for sure."

Me: "Scientists have pretty firmly established that the moon is made of rock..."

Mary: "But they don't know if the rock came from the Earth, or from out of space, so it could just as easily be green che.ese."

Me: "I'm not really an expert, but I think the theory that the Moon was somehow 'captured' by the Earth has been discounted*. Besides, not knowing where the rock came from doesn't make it che.ese."

John: "Ha! You just admitted that scientists make mistakes, but we know Hank is always right!"

Me: "We do?"

Mary: "Of course we do, Item 7 says so."

Me: "You're saying Hank's always right because the list says so, the list is right because Hank dictated it, and we know that Hank dictated it because the list says so. That's circular logic, no different than saying 'Hank's right because He says He's right.'"

John: "Now you're getting it! It's so rewarding to see someone come around to Hank's way of thinking."

Me: "But...oh, never mind. What's the deal with wieners?"

Mary: She blushes.

John: "Wieners, in buns, no condiments. It's Hank's way. Anything else is wrong."

Me: "What if I don't have a bun?"

John: "No bun, no wiener. A wiener without a bun is wrong."

Me: "No relish? No Mustard?"

Mary: She looks positively stricken.

John: He's shouting. "There's no need for such language! Condiments of any kind are wrong!"

Me: "So a big pile of sauerkraut with some wieners chopped up in it would be out of the question?"

Mary: Sticks her fingers in her ears. "I am not listening to this. La la la, la la, la la la."

John: "That's disgusting. Only some sort of evil deviant would eat that..."

Me: "It's good! I eat it all the time."

Mary: She faints.

John: He catches Mary. "Well, if I'd known you were one of those I wouldn't have wasted my time. When Hank kicks the shit out of you I'll be there, counting my money and laughing. I'll kiss Hank's ass for you, you bunless cut-wienered kraut-eater."

With this, John dragged Mary to their waiting car, and sped off.



Thanks pals



I agree... I got caught in a loop with a christian once. I proved Jesus hadn't lived the perfect life. So he told me that I beleived in Jesus.(?) Now I was thinking, What The Fuck? Because I was searching for logic behind it.

Then he told me that because I used a statement from the bible I was assuming it was true- therefore in order for me to be correct I had to beleive in god, and that's impossible!

Now- That torqued me off. What a fucking jagg off.

Just because you're arguing about a book doesn't mean you beleive in it. You could argue over the book fight club that doesn't mean you beleive in a 'Tyler Durden'.

You christians have no logic in what you say and there is more proof against it then for it.

GODDAMNIT I HATE CHRISTIANS!

You've described the ideal atheist, but in all honesty are all, or even most atheists like that?

For every ideal atheist that you described there are 20 atheists that associate atheism with the rejection of the christian god, and they act accordingly.

Some insight into myself: I do reject all gods, but due to the fact that Im surrounded by Christians, Im more likely to refer to the Christian god. What good does it do to try and talk sense to a Christian if you're going to tell them about how Islam is wrong? It would be more personal if you 'attacked' their own religion and then entertained the idea of how god (in general) is illogical or whatever. I couldn't articulate that very well, but Im sure you understand what I was trying to say.

[This message has been edited by unchewed_meat (edited 03-08-2005).]

The post for the most part describes myself, and many people I know who are the same way.

(athiests, but not extreme ones)

But it is true that there are many atheists who are the extreme version which I described above. I personally do not think that there is absolutely no place for religion, I believe it has its' purposes.

Those other atheists don't. I can't say much for them, because that is their belief, and I respect that.

I posted this though, because in one of the other topics I saw people talking about "athiests this - athists that"...saying it is a religion, and on and on. So I thought I would post this to clear somethings up, because it appeared that not many people were very educated.

quote:Originally posted by napoleon_complex:

You've described the ideal atheist, but in all honesty are all, or even most atheists like that?

For every ideal atheist that you described there are 20 atheists that associate atheism with the rejection of the christian god, and they act accordingly.



[This message has been edited by Aeon (edited 03-11-2005).]

The reason atheism is often perceived as a religion is because so many atheists are evangelical. I don't care if people believe in no gods, one god, many gods, spirit animals, ancestors, whatever. The only groups I've encountered who consistently preach that their view is better than all the others, however, are christians and atheists. I understand (sort of) why christians preach, but why do atheists? Why do they need converts?

Calm, logical atheists, like the originator of this thread, seem like sensible people, but the ones who are offended by people who like their own beliefs and aren't concerned about the logic or lack thereof in them, proselytize like the most rabid christians out there. Their perceptions might be different, but their attitudes are/seem the same. And both groups, if questioned about why they are bothering, will answer that they are thinking of your own benefit, either to 'find salvation' or to 'stop fooling yourself'.

Just an observation.

Absent

edit: SwordChucks, I've seen that story (and some other good ones) on a pagan website, but I've lost the url. I don't know if you got it from the same site, but could you give me a link?

Absent

[This message has been edited by AbsentMindedWitch (edited 03-11-2005).]

Well, atheism could be called a religion. A religion can be anything you want it to be, it has little meaning. In the revalistic meaning, if someone regards it as their religion, then it is, but atheism isn't something most people would consider a religion of any sort.

I honestly don't press my ideas on other people. I really don't even argue when someone is trying to talk to me about god, but I will retaliate if they offend me, and I have a very short temper. Many christians often talk about god, I let them go on all they want, as long as they don't drag me into the conversation I don't care. If they do drag me in, I tell them that I'm atheist and don't care to talk about. Anyone that knows a christian knows that they won't drop it there. That is the only time that I get into heated debates... I do know a few people that are "atheists" just for the sake of getting into arguments. The one part that pisses me off the most about it is that they have no idea what they are arguing. The main reason they bring up is "If you believe in God then you are stupid" with no explanation...

quote:Originally posted by AbsentMindedWitch:

The reason atheism is often perceived as a religion is because so many atheists are evangelical. I don't care if people believe in no gods, one god, many gods, spirit animals, ancestors, whatever. The only groups I've encountered who consistently preach that their view is better than all the others, however, are christians and atheists. I understand (sort of) why christians preach, but why do atheists? Why do they need converts?

Calm, logical atheists, like the originator of this thread, seem like sensible people, but the ones who are offended by people who like their own beliefs and aren't concerned about the logic or lack thereof in them, proselytize like the most rabid christians out there. Their perceptions might be different, but their attitudes are/seem the same. And both groups, if questioned about why they are bothering, will answer that they are thinking of your own benefit, either to 'find salvation' or to 'stop fooling yourself'.

Just an observation.

Absent

edit: SwordChucks, I've seen that story (and some other good ones) on a pagan website, but I've lost the url. I don't know if you got it from the same site, but could you give me a link?

Absent



Thanks!

The question you posed about 'why athiests feel the need to preach or convert others', is an interesting one.

For me, I wouldn't say I go preach, in the sense that I go around preaching athiesm. But, I do like to talk about it and religion when its the topic of discussion. The main reason being, I beleive people must challenge their own beliefs and thoughts, ask questions see more than one side of the story to truly understand the subject at hand. If you go about never asking questions, how much could you really know?

And in regards to converting, I don't see the need to convert others. However, there are a few times where I like to discuss things (like above) and challenge the person to think for themselves.

For example, I met someone at an outdoor BBQ, and they were not drinking aything because everything was coke & beer. This person was a Morman, and apparently drinking such beverages is against their religion, because of the altering 'effects' the drinks have on the body.

In a nutshell, I thought this was the most ridiculous thing in regards to religion that I had heard yet (probably cause I am a coke fiend, and drink enough coke to kill a small elephant). And this was one time I tried to convince the person that they should just drink the coke, because they wanted to. And that they ARE NOT going to hell for a beverage. I was not necessarily trying to convert him, but I was thinking - maybe that person would be happier if he did! I would feel like crap if I couldn't drink coke!

[This message has been edited by Aeon (edited 03-11-2005).]

quote:Originally posted by KikoSanchez:

Well, atheism could be called a religion. A religion can be anything you want it to be, it has little meaning. In the revalistic meaning, if someone regards it as their religion, then it is, but atheism isn't something most people would consider a religion of any sort.



That does make sense, so I can why you some think atheism is a religion. This would mean there are athiests out there, saying that atheism is a religion. Though it really isn't, it "is" for them.

But I could also say kickboxing is my religion, and technically, nobody could say it isn't then.

It would be like an opinion then. If I say I like pizza and it is my favorite food, as long as this is true, then nobody can deny this fact.

But I think that religion has a more defined outline to what is and isn't a religion. Because if it didn't, then you can claim anything like above - and then what is religion? Just a statement? It would lose it's meaning if so, which is exactly what you pointed out.

No, it wouldn't.

The most common references to atheism as a religion I notice:

People that can't accept the fact that some people dont want a religion.

Christians who are pissed about no prayer in school/no creationalist teaching call atheism a religion to persuade schools not to teach darwin/big bang.

'Religion' in its etymoligical version literally means to re-connect. To re-connect to the divine or spiritual. Atheism, if anything, would be the anti-religion in this case. The same goes for agnosticism, which I definetly would not call a religion by any means either. Neither idea has any sort of dogmatic beliefs or practices, the followers only being binded together by one single belief. In my opinion, to consider either of these a religion is just raping the word of any utility.

I don't think that atheism is a religion, but I do think that it is a system of beliefs. I think it requires faith, but I don't think it's a religion.

quote:Originally posted by Aeon:

[B] And in regards to converting, I don't see the need to convert others. However, there are a few times where I like to discuss things (like above) and challenge the person to think for themselves.

B]

This is what I mean. Atheists almost always assume that anyone with a personal religion does not think for themselves. I personally have put a lot of thought into my religion and find the 'think for yourself' argument to be just a knee-jerk reaction to the fact that I have done so and not come to the same conclusions as the person I'm talking to. It often seems like 'think for yourself!' = 'think like me!'

I only talk about my religion if asked, and sometimes not even then, since it's usually a springboard to some kind of conversion attempt and I get bored easily, but even so, I do get cornered by both atheists and christians.

As for groups with dietary restrictions, like jews and mormons, sometimes the reasons are current and sometimes they aren't, but if a person is willing to accept these restrictions as part of their commitment, more power to them. I don't drink, (for medical reasons, not spiritual http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif) ) and it's amazing how many people are bothered enough by my having a coffee instead of a beer to argue about it. (or even give me a mixed drink instead of a pop as a joke or something) It's like my not indulging in something is a criticism of someone who does indulge, when I really don't care.

I have to admit, though, that in the right mood the discussions can be fun for me, too. I'm closer idealogically to an atheist than a christian, and if I had to decide using intellect alone I'd be an agnostic. But a religion has to appeal to a person as a whole, and I find atheism emotionally lacking. For that alone, I guess atheism isn't a religion, but some people do get very emotional when proselytizing it.

I've also noticed, on a personal level, that the atheists I've met seem to be less offended by a pagan than a monotheist. Is this normal? Do you have any thoughts on it?

Absent

[This message has been edited by AbsentMindedWitch (edited 03-12-2005).]

If you find yourself emotionally lacking without a religion perhaps you should evaluate your life and what's wrong with it, rather than jumping into something.

I'm an atheist; this doesn't mean I assume religious people don't think. Please don't generalize.

I do have problems with people believing in the bible as if it were completely literal, because then they aren't thinking for themselves, and you really can't argue that they think for themselves if their entire lives are dictated by a centuries old book.

Atheism is not a religion. It is a lack of religion, which is different. Atheism can be a set of beliefs, or you can describe it as a lack of beliefs, conversely. Usually atheists will show differences between a certain religion and their own thoughts, which highlights their own beliefs. By saying "I don't believe in the Bible as the literal word of god" we can instantly see where the difference in beliefs lie. It's still not a religion.

Evolution and evolutionary theory are two different things, but i'm not arguing that right now.

I wish people could all just get along, and then religion wouldn't be necessary, and we wouldn't have to label each other by what we believe on silly issues that don't even really matter all that much since we'll all be dead before we know the truth.

Lastly, please educate yourselves before you post. Don't repost ignorant statements; look things up, and when you have become knowledgeable from credible sources, then post information. Thanks.

" It is a lack of religion, which is different."

I don't care how many dictionaries disagree with me, but that's BS. Atheism is a lack of a belief in god(s)...nothing more. Originally, Buddhists were atheists, and some still are...but they are certainly quite religous. A religion is simply a devotion, nothing more or less.

(Anyone else notice that at any one time, about 50% of the topics on the front page are revolving around inter-related issues?)

quote:Originally posted by Fanglekai:

If you find yourself emotionally lacking without a religion perhaps you should evaluate your life and what's wrong with it, rather than jumping into something.



You misunderstand me, but probably I didn't phrase it properly. Religion doesn't provide the emotion in my life, i.e. I am not emotionally lacking without it. Rather, emotion is part of my being, along with other intrinsic things such as intellect, joy (as nature, not only emotion), and extrinsic things such as education and experience. Anything I take into my life, such as religion or friendship, needs to satisfy my own nature, which is why atheism not appealing to my emotions is important to me. On every other level, it is a satisfying solution.

I'm not one of the many who (understandably, in my view) discover religion through despair. I don't think everyone needs religion (I don't think anyone NEEDS it, actually), but I don't think it is automatically a crutch to provide something missing from one's life, either. I've always been a contented person, hopefully not smug, but happy. My traumas have all been health-related, and didn't start until adulthood. I've always been loved and accepted by everyone I cared about. I don't follow my father's religion because it doesn't suit me intellectually; I don't follow my mother's because her path goes places I can't follow. My path is specific to my self and suits me. When my nature changes (and it does, of course, as I grow) my path changes.

Even when we all get along (and in small groups, we do) religion will still be necessary for some. It is the imposing of religions that screws things up. As I said above, I don't care what religion a person has, or if they have none. I don't understand why it is important to one person what another person's religion is.

Preaching is what bothers me. The content of someone's personal beliefs (or lack thereof http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif) ) has relevance only to the person holding them.

__________________________________________

By saying "I don't believe in the Bible as the literal word of god" we can instantly see where the difference in beliefs lie.

_________________________________________

Is this in answer to my last question? If so, do you mean that it is more reasonable to argue with a group that has codified their beliefs into a major reference work, as christian monotheists have, than with people whose beliefs vary according to the individuals espousing them, as pagans' do? I realize that atheism rejects all religions equally; it just always seems a rejection of christianity when it comes up in conversation. Is this because of the size of the christian community as a whole? Or does it vary with the background of the individual atheist?

Absent

quote:Originally posted by Fanglekai:

Lastly, please educate yourselves before you post. Don't repost ignorant statements; look things up, and when you have become knowledgeable from credible sources, then post information. Thanks.



What do you consider a credible source regarding atheism? And is it descriptive or prescriptive?

Many people consider the christian bible a credible source for chistianity, though it seems only relevant to itself, and is definitely prescriptive.

Is there a coherent description of atheists as a whole, or is it an individually defined philosophy?