Fallacy Files, "Atheists worship science like a god".

Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13396
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Fallacy Files, "Atheists worship science like a god".

Fallacy Files "Atheists worship science like a god".

I recently ran into this tired and completely false accusation that rears it's ugly head every now and then. To the theists who falsely do this, I might ask you the following. Do you have churches dedicated to the worship of cell phones? Do you have churches dedicated to the worship of medicine? Do you have churches dedicated to the worship of modern transportation?

Science is a tool, not a religion. It is why you have computers and cell phones and why we have hybrid cars and no longer use horse and buggies. And any ethical scientist does not want, or should not want their positions on scientific claims to be taboos to be blindly worshiped. An ethical scientist is going to want their claim have the shit kicked out of it. If it can withstand the scrutiny and still applies to a universal level, it is a human discovery beyond our personal labels. It is why a Jew and a Muslim and a Hindu and an atheist can all use cell phones, computers, and see doctors when we get sick. Science is not a religion, it is a tool.

Accusing atheists of worshiping Dawkins is as stupid as saying we worship the fact that the earth rotates around the sun. That is a fact, facts, unlike naked assertions, do not need to be worshiped, and are facts because they are not simply accepted, but observed and tested. Because we have over time mapped out the stars, and eventually modern telescopes, we don't have to blindly accept it, we KNOW it because of testable falsifiable data.

Religion is worshiped, it is the hollow and selfish demand of others to placate personal fantasy. That attitude is completely unacceptable in any respectable scientific setting. The tool of science is the opposite of worship. It its the strict quality control of observation and testing and does not, nor should ever rely on blind faith. Something faith is afraid of, something scientists should never be afraid of.

Atheists do not have churches with statues of Dawkins. We are not mindless robots. We still have emotions, families and flaws, because unlike the religious, we accept that humans are part of nature and nature is flawed. We don't need faith to know nature is flawed, we observe it all the time.

 

America and the west, during the cold war, people of all religious stripes, watched in amazement as Neil Armstrong landed on the moon. SCIENCE did that, and none of that accomplishment could have been physically built in any holy house of worship. Should I accuse theists of worshiping Neil Armstrong? Could he have done that by simply praying to a volcano, or to the sun, or to Vishnu? Or could it be the scientific tool got humans to the moon, regardless of the personal beliefs of humans?

So to theists, please stop this childish attempt to paint atheists as godless monsters. It is as stupid as reacting to someone telling you the moon is not made of cheese. The only thing made of cheese is your Swiss Cheese arguments, full of holes and as moldy and old as faith itself. Faith is nothing more than Santa for adults.

Faith runs from scrutiny, science faces it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


GodsUseForAMosquito
ModeratorBronze Member
GodsUseForAMosquito's picture
Posts: 404
Joined: 2008-08-27
User is offlineOffline
 I agree that science is

 I agree that science is not something to be worshiped, however I do like the comparison of the Large Hadron Collider etc to be the 'cathedrals of the 21st century'. These places are epic in scale, and instil wonder in beholders. The difference is that they are dedicated to increasing our knowledge of the world around us, rather than a refuge from it.

 

 

 


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3198
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
I'll have you know

I'll have you know that I have altars with Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens, surrounded by candles and incense that have to burn constantly, and throughout the day when stressed or worried I ask myself " WWRDD?" or "WWCHD?"

I KNOW that the God Delusion is the Absolute Truth because it says so and if I do not follow it's tenants, I will be condemned to not exist after I die. I also know that following those tenants promises me that I will not exist after I die.

Smiling

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


ThunderJones
atheist
ThunderJones's picture
Posts: 433
Joined: 2012-04-23
User is offlineOffline
Good post. This line of bull

Good post. This line of bull is one of the most annoying, and flawed, members of a theist's arguments.

Secularist, Atheist, Skeptic, Freethinker


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13396
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
harleysportster wrote:I'll

harleysportster wrote:

I'll have you know that I have altars with Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens, surrounded by candles and incense that have to burn constantly, and throughout the day when stressed or worried I ask myself " WWRDD?" or "WWCHD?"

I KNOW that the God Delusion is the Absolute Truth because it says so and if I do not follow it's tenants, I will be condemned to not exist after I die. I also know that following those tenants promises me that I will not exist after I die.

Smiling

Dawkins would ask "What kind of pip squeak are you" even of atheists.

Hitchens would ask, "Unless that is a bottle of vodka or rum, I'd suggest you keep moving" even of atheists.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3198
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Dawkins would

Brian37 wrote:

Dawkins would ask "What kind of pip squeak are you" even of atheists.

Hitchens would ask, "Unless that is a bottle of vodka or rum, I'd suggest you keep moving" even of atheists.

Just joking. Couldn't resist.

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10348
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Bad Brian. Eat more kittens.

Bad Brian. Eat more kittens.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Jabberwocky
atheist
Posts: 312
Joined: 2012-04-21
User is offlineOffline
When a scientific claim is

When a scientific claim is made, we don't treat it like a fragile glass, and refuse to touch it, lest it shatter. We instead relentlessly smash it against a concrete wall repeatedly. If the claim is no good, eventually it will fall apart. If the claim is good, it will damage the wall instead. There lies the difference between a scientific claim and a religious one.

Now on your point, I agree, and have given a lot of thought to this. Often-times, it almost does seem to a religious person that we worship someone, but I assure you we do not (for the most part anyways...I hate asserting things with 100% certainty, and I'm sure there are atheists who got there for stupid reasons, and just repeat things they hear like parrots). We don't worship any of the 4 horsemen of the often cited "new atheists". We simply enjoy what they have to say (and unlike most religious people do with the bible, we've actually read these peoples' books!). Bertrand Russell, Carl Sagan, etc....these people were simply very intelligent and fascinating. The thing is, though, any time we do mention them, we never say "praise Russell" or anything like that. When we bring them up, it's typically to bring up a specific thing they did say. While Christians bring up a good many Jesus quotes, they also spend a lot of time just worshipping the guy. That, we atheists certainly do not do. However, the theists think that we do, which brings me to my next point. 

Charles Darwin. A brilliant man in his time, he is the most important person in the history of our understanding of biology. He discovered something earth-shattering that we didn't know before. This did two things:

1. It allowed us to properly understand biology. While by now I don't doubt someone else would have likely figured it out, I think given the limited tools at the time, (the inability to delve into things such as decoding our genomes) Darwin truly did something amazing. 

2. It destroyed probably every religious assertion regarding the diversity of life on our planet.

Now due to point 2, the religious right got extremely pissed off, and over time they seem to assert the following:

Darwin made the entire thing up. No changes that great could occur over time in species, and speciation does not occur (oh wait....we've tested it and it can...the religious ignore that!). Darwin made it up because he was mad at god due to losing a child. Theists who are in the YEC business, (or just hold that view and are very outspoken) have assembled a bag of tricks designed to confuse people.

1. Darwin's theory goes against the bible entirely - Wrong. It simply disproves a few verses from the first 2 chapters of genesis, and maybe some random references to "the creation" throughout the book. I haven't checked this, but I would say that more verses in the bible are disputed by...other verses in the bible, than are disputed by the theory of evolution.

2. To expand on #1 a little, Christians get their morality from the bible, so atheists get their morality from on the origin of species, as it clearly advocates eugenics - Wrong. The theory is simply an explanation for the diversity of life. The theory is morally neutral. We can perhaps explain how we came about to be moral creatures as we are by and large, but nowhere does the theory itself tell us how to behave. It is a morally neutral theory. 

3. Evolution can't explain where life originally came from, or how the Earth came about - Correct....but YEC always suggest that evolution has claimed to have all the answers. It doesn't. It is specifically about the diversity of life, and the cause of that (evolution by random mutation and natural selection). This is a sneaky trick that won't typically fool any thinking person, but does WONDERS in keeping their ignorant followers in line with them. The fans of the big YEC crew (your Hovinds, Ken Hams and such) will simply eat this stuff up. Then, they will read about evolution, will not understand it, and also see nothing in evolutionary literature regarding the origins of life, the cosmos, the earth, other planets, et al. However, they're too ignorant to know that they shouldn't expect to find any such information. It's a completely different part of science! It's easy to see why the YEC elite and their fans sound so certain when they say "atheism is a religion" or "you're an evolutionist" <--- (a BULL$#!^ term BTW). Their "best and brightest" (who are typically both dishonest and unintelligent....see: Kent Hovind is in PRISON FOR TAX EVASION!!) tell them that evolution encompasses a much wider variety of topics than it does. Then, they make it all sound hideously implausible by leaving out some facts, twisting others into bizarre pretzels, and flat-out lying about other things. 

This seems to me to be how they frame atheism in this way. It would be useful if we could find a way to show the religious that we didn't simply replace the bible/Christianity/all belief in our minds with science. We've replaced the scientific claims in the bible with proper scientific facts, and that's it. We didn't replace the god belief with anything (other than maybe a pleasant feeling of freedom)

Theists - If your god is omnipotent, remember the following: He (or she) has the cure for cancer, but won't tell us what it is.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13396
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:Bad Brian. Eat

Vastet wrote:
Bad Brian. Eat more kittens.

What? LOL

It isn't far from the truth. Dawkins loves the book sales but is not a fan of fans. Hitchens, well, having met both at the 07 convention, there was not one moment where I didn't see Hitch with a bottle or glass. And I don't think Hitchens would mind the joke. He'd probably say "Yea, I did kinda over do it".

FYI, it is barbecue kittens, any other is cruelty to taste buds.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Beyond Saving
Silver Member
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 4280
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Vastet

Brian37 wrote:

Vastet wrote:
Bad Brian. Eat more kittens.

What? LOL

It isn't far from the truth. Dawkins loves the book sales but is not a fan of fans. Hitchens, well, having met both at the 07 convention, there was not one moment where I didn't see Hitch with a bottle or glass. And I don't think Hitchens would mind the joke. He'd probably say "Yea, I did kinda over do it".

FYI, it is barbecue kittens, any other is cruelty to taste buds.

 

Well, I remember reading an interview of Hitch once and he claimed that he never drank vodka. Johnny Walker Black or red wine were his beverages of choice so make sure you bring the right bottle to sit next to him in hell. 

It was morality that burned the books of the ancient sages, and morality that halted the free inquiry of the Golden Age and substituted for it the credulous imbecility of the Age of Faith. It was a fixed moral code and a fixed theology which robbed the human race of a thousand years by wasting them upon alchemy, heretic-burning, witchcraft and sacerdotalism.-H.L. Mencken


Beyond Saving
Silver Member
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 4280
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Jabberwocky wrote:When a

Jabberwocky wrote:

When a scientific claim is made, we don't treat it like a fragile glass, and refuse to touch it, lest it shatter. We instead relentlessly smash it against a concrete wall repeatedly. If the claim is no good, eventually it will fall apart. If the claim is good, it will damage the wall instead. There lies the difference between a scientific claim and a religious one.

Now on your point, I agree, and have given a lot of thought to this. Often-times, it almost does seem to a religious person that we worship someone, but I assure you we do not (for the most part anyways...I hate asserting things with 100% certainty, and I'm sure there are atheists who got there for stupid reasons, and just repeat things they hear like parrots). We don't worship any of the 4 horsemen of the often cited "new atheists". We simply enjoy what they have to say (and unlike most religious people do with the bible, we've actually read these peoples' books!). Bertrand Russell, Carl Sagan, etc....these people were simply very intelligent and fascinating. The thing is, though, any time we do mention them, we never say "praise Russell" or anything like that. When we bring them up, it's typically to bring up a specific thing they did say. While Christians bring up a good many Jesus quotes, they also spend a lot of time just worshipping the guy. That, we atheists certainly do not do. However, the theists think that we do, which brings me to my next point. 

Charles Darwin. A brilliant man in his time, he is the most important person in the history of our understanding of biology. He discovered something earth-shattering that we didn't know before. This did two things:

1. It allowed us to properly understand biology. While by now I don't doubt someone else would have likely figured it out, I think given the limited tools at the time, (the inability to delve into things such as decoding our genomes) Darwin truly did something amazing. 

2. It destroyed probably every religious assertion regarding the diversity of life on our planet.

Now due to point 2, the religious right got extremely pissed off, and over time they seem to assert the following:

Darwin made the entire thing up. No changes that great could occur over time in species, and speciation does not occur (oh wait....we've tested it and it can...the religious ignore that!). Darwin made it up because he was mad at god due to losing a child. Theists who are in the YEC business, (or just hold that view and are very outspoken) have assembled a bag of tricks designed to confuse people.

1. Darwin's theory goes against the bible entirely - Wrong. It simply disproves a few verses from the first 2 chapters of genesis, and maybe some random references to "the creation" throughout the book. I haven't checked this, but I would say that more verses in the bible are disputed by...other verses in the bible, than are disputed by the theory of evolution.

2. To expand on #1 a little, Christians get their morality from the bible, so atheists get their morality from on the origin of species, as it clearly advocates eugenics - Wrong. The theory is simply an explanation for the diversity of life. The theory is morally neutral. We can perhaps explain how we came about to be moral creatures as we are by and large, but nowhere does the theory itself tell us how to behave. It is a morally neutral theory. 

3. Evolution can't explain where life originally came from, or how the Earth came about - Correct....but YEC always suggest that evolution has claimed to have all the answers. It doesn't. It is specifically about the diversity of life, and the cause of that (evolution by random mutation and natural selection). This is a sneaky trick that won't typically fool any thinking person, but does WONDERS in keeping their ignorant followers in line with them. The fans of the big YEC crew (your Hovinds, Ken Hams and such) will simply eat this stuff up. Then, they will read about evolution, will not understand it, and also see nothing in evolutionary literature regarding the origins of life, the cosmos, the earth, other planets, et al. However, they're too ignorant to know that they shouldn't expect to find any such information. It's a completely different part of science! It's easy to see why the YEC elite and their fans sound so certain when they say "atheism is a religion" or "you're an evolutionist" <--- (a BULL$#!^ term BTW). Their "best and brightest" (who are typically both dishonest and unintelligent....see: Kent Hovind is in PRISON FOR TAX EVASION!!) tell them that evolution encompasses a much wider variety of topics than it does. Then, they make it all sound hideously implausible by leaving out some facts, twisting others into bizarre pretzels, and flat-out lying about other things. 

This seems to me to be how they frame atheism in this way. It would be useful if we could find a way to show the religious that we didn't simply replace the bible/Christianity/all belief in our minds with science. We've replaced the scientific claims in the bible with proper scientific facts, and that's it. We didn't replace the god belief with anything (other than maybe a pleasant feeling of freedom)

 

Well said. 

It was morality that burned the books of the ancient sages, and morality that halted the free inquiry of the Golden Age and substituted for it the credulous imbecility of the Age of Faith. It was a fixed moral code and a fixed theology which robbed the human race of a thousand years by wasting them upon alchemy, heretic-burning, witchcraft and sacerdotalism.-H.L. Mencken


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3198
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:Well, I

Beyond Saving wrote:

Well, I remember reading an interview of Hitch once and he claimed that he never drank vodka. Johnny Walker Black or red wine were his beverages of choice so make sure you bring the right bottle to sit next to him in hell. 

Having a drink with Christopher Hitchens in hell. Sounds great. I'll put it on my afterlife to do list, provided that I get placed in the same part of hell as he does. But who knows, St. Peter or Yahweh might decide to put me in another section reserved for the biker trash and have the intellectuals in another section.

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3198
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:It isn't far

Brian37 wrote:

It isn't far from the truth. Dawkins loves the book sales but is not a fan of fans. Hitchens, well, having met both at the 07 convention, there was not one moment where I didn't see Hitch with a bottle or glass. And I don't think Hitchens would mind the joke. He'd probably say "Yea, I did kinda over do it".

While I credit these men with getting me started, they are not on a pedestal for me (all joking and bullshit aside now). I admire them for being vocal about Atheism and such, but that doesn't mean that I agree with 100% of everything they have ever said nor should I be expected to.

No one is on a pedestal above or below me.

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10348
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Vastet

Brian37 wrote:

Vastet wrote:
Bad Brian. Eat more kittens.

What? LOL

It isn't far from the truth. Dawkins loves the book sales but is not a fan of fans. Hitchens, well, having met both at the 07 convention, there was not one moment where I didn't see Hitch with a bottle or glass. And I don't think Hitchens would mind the joke. He'd probably say "Yea, I did kinda over do it".

FYI, it is barbecue kittens, any other is cruelty to taste buds.

I'm not denying its the truth, but you're going to give the fundies the wrong idea with your logical post, calling into question harleysportster's satire like that.
I left out the bbq part as I figured it went without saying. > >

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3184
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
harleysportster wrote:But

harleysportster wrote:

But who knows, St. Peter or Yahweh might decide to put me in another section reserved for the biker trash and have the intellectuals in another section.

every biker i've ever met is an intellectual, or at least an aspiring one.  contrary to popular belief, in my experience stupid rednecks rarely become part of biker culture, though they might own bikes.  in fact, back in the '60s and '70s weren't rednecks and hell's angels mortal enemies?

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3198
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:every biker

iwbiek wrote:

every biker i've ever met is an intellectual, or at least an aspiring one.  contrary to popular belief, in my experience stupid rednecks rarely become part of biker culture, though they might own bikes.  in fact, back in the '60s and '70s weren't rednecks and hell's angels mortal enemies?

You 100% correct. Contrary to what most of the general public and the rednecks that own motorcycles believe, bikers are pretty intellectual. Indeed, the rednecks and the hells angels were mortal enemies at one time.

Which is what irritates me about so many rednecks that own a bike and think that makes them a biker.

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3184
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
harleysportster wrote:iwbiek

harleysportster wrote:

iwbiek wrote:

every biker i've ever met is an intellectual, or at least an aspiring one.  contrary to popular belief, in my experience stupid rednecks rarely become part of biker culture, though they might own bikes.  in fact, back in the '60s and '70s weren't rednecks and hell's angels mortal enemies?

You 100% correct. Contrary to what most of the general public and the rednecks that own motorcycles believe, bikers are pretty intellectual. Indeed, the rednecks and the hells angels were mortal enemies at one time.

Which is what irritates me about so many rednecks that own a bike and think that makes them a biker.

i love the biker characters in stephen king and peter straub's black house, which is the sequel to the talisman.  both books are actually kinda shitty, but the bikers are awesome.  they own a microbrewery, scare the shit out of the townsfolk (even though they fight very seldom), and half-drunkenly discuss philosophy.

i've seen several interviews with sonny barger.  i think if gene scott had gotten off his religious soapbox, he would have basically been sonny barger.  both men were certainly geniuses.

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3184
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
i think that dickhead david

i think that dickhead david allan coe is responsible for making rednecks think they're bikers.

he's actually pretty damn smart himself, and an excellent songwriter, but that doesn't change the fact he's a cocky poser piece of shit.

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13396
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:Brian37

Beyond Saving wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

Vastet wrote:
Bad Brian. Eat more kittens.

What? LOL

It isn't far from the truth. Dawkins loves the book sales but is not a fan of fans. Hitchens, well, having met both at the 07 convention, there was not one moment where I didn't see Hitch with a bottle or glass. And I don't think Hitchens would mind the joke. He'd probably say "Yea, I did kinda over do it".

FYI, it is barbecue kittens, any other is cruelty to taste buds.

 

Well, I remember reading an interview of Hitch once and he claimed that he never drank vodka. Johnny Walker Black or red wine were his beverages of choice so make sure you bring the right bottle to sit next to him in hell. 

LOL, it gives me some comfort to know your fucked up economic attitudes will be sitting next to my communist ass, at least neither of us will be spending eternity kissing God's ass.

But you made a good point, if you are going to offer Hitch booze, make sure it something he likes. The salad fork does not go where the spoon does. Like white vs red wine and fish and meat. Hitch did have his standards.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3561
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
harleysportster wrote:Which

harleysportster wrote:

Which is what irritates me about so many rednecks that own a bike and think that makes them a biker.

 

 

...or guys that ride production super bikes on the street are somehow the equal to Jorge Lorenzo ( young Spaniard that is a world class Super Bike / Moto GP champion. ) Dude is awesome.

 

                                                                   

 

  

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13396
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
harleysportster

harleysportster wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

It isn't far from the truth. Dawkins loves the book sales but is not a fan of fans. Hitchens, well, having met both at the 07 convention, there was not one moment where I didn't see Hitch with a bottle or glass. And I don't think Hitchens would mind the joke. He'd probably say "Yea, I did kinda over do it".

While I credit these men with getting me started, they are not on a pedestal for me (all joking and bullshit aside now). I admire them for being vocal about Atheism and such, but that doesn't mean that I agree with 100% of everything they have ever said nor should I be expected to.

No one is on a pedestal above or below me.

Now now now, our local guy with the wolf avatar knows what is best for us, and so do I. So do the right thing and worship both of us like the good heathen kitten barbecue r you are. That, or tell me to shut the fuck up.

Yea, I agree, Dawkins seems a bit snooty. Hitchens well, hated his attitudes about war policies. So people are never as simple as one topic and never always right about everything all the time. Jefferson owned slaves and most people today, if they knew what he said about religion and atheists would not vote for him if he ran today.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Jabberwocky
atheist
Posts: 312
Joined: 2012-04-21
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Yea, I agree,

Brian37 wrote:

Yea, I agree, Dawkins seems a bit snooty. Hitchens well, hated his attitudes about war policies. So people are never as simple as one topic and never always right about everything all the time. Jefferson owned slaves and most people today, if they knew what he said about religion and atheists would not vote for him if he ran today.

 

Very good point there, especially concerning Hitchens. I've been an atheist for a number of years, but have only gone online to talk about it rather recently (this is the first forum of the type I registered on). In all my time, I haven't seen a single person say "I support the Iraq war, because Hitch has to be right!!" Not one. It's a very nice testament to the refusal of the majority of atheists to label anybody as an absolute authority. 

Theists - If your god is omnipotent, remember the following: He (or she) has the cure for cancer, but won't tell us what it is.


Beyond Saving
Silver Member
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 4280
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Jefferson

Brian37 wrote:

Jefferson owned slaves and most people today, if they knew what he said about religion and atheists would not vote for him if he ran today. 

If Jefferson was running for office today, religion would be the least of his problems. I'm afraid that our country has gone so far that Jefferson would be seen as the most fringe of fringe extremists today.

It was morality that burned the books of the ancient sages, and morality that halted the free inquiry of the Golden Age and substituted for it the credulous imbecility of the Age of Faith. It was a fixed moral code and a fixed theology which robbed the human race of a thousand years by wasting them upon alchemy, heretic-burning, witchcraft and sacerdotalism.-H.L. Mencken


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10348
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
I think all the founders of

I think all the founders of America would be shocked to see what happened to their once beautiful country. Probably none of them would survive todays political climate.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


ThunderJones
atheist
ThunderJones's picture
Posts: 433
Joined: 2012-04-23
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:I think all the

Vastet wrote:
I think all the founders of America would be shocked to see what happened to their once beautiful country. Probably none of them would survive todays political climate.

Indeed.

Secularist, Atheist, Skeptic, Freethinker