What can WE do?

Velocity Eleven
Posts: 29
Joined: 2007-07-08
User is offlineOffline
What can WE do?

I stongly approve of the RRS and what it does

 I live in the UK and the problem of religion isn't as big here, but even 1% of a population being theists is far too much in my oppinion. What can we, as average joes do to help in our daily life?


aiia
Superfan
aiia's picture
Posts: 1923
Joined: 2006-09-12
User is offlineOffline
1%? Where are you getting

1%? Where are you getting your number from?


Velocity Eleven
Posts: 29
Joined: 2007-07-08
User is offlineOffline
I'm not refferencing

I'm not refferencing anything inparticular population, just saying that if it were the case, even 1% is too much

Velocity Eleven


aiia
Superfan
aiia's picture
Posts: 1923
Joined: 2006-09-12
User is offlineOffline
oh ok sorry, I are slow 

oh ok

sorry, I are slow 


LosingStreak06
Theist
LosingStreak06's picture
Posts: 768
Joined: 2007-05-22
User is offlineOffline
You could go around killing

You could go around killing theists.

Not a great option, but if theism is as bad of a problem as you say, then it might be worth consideration. 


Slayne
Slayne's picture
Posts: 91
Joined: 2008-01-02
User is offlineOffline
 Hey Velocity... coolni...

 Hey Velocity... coolni... My company is called Velocity PC.

 


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Quote: You could go around

Quote:

You could go around killing theists.

Not a great option, but if theism is as bad of a problem as you say, then it might be worth consideration.

Yeah, except theists have a nasty habit of multiplying when you kill them... the whole martyr complex.

In all seriousness, that's a large part of the problem.  Theism has the double whammy effect.  It's a ridiculous belief, but the people who wrote the books at least had the forethought to tell believers that they would be ridiculed.  That way, when they're ridiculed, they say, "See!  Our holy book said this would happen, so we're right!"

Not that there have been many atheist jihads in history (none that I can think of), but if there were (which I think would be horrible) I don't think it would solve any problems.

That's why we like the rational approach... using your brain instead of a gun.

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


LosingStreak06
Theist
LosingStreak06's picture
Posts: 768
Joined: 2007-05-22
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit

Hambydammit wrote:
Quote:

You could go around killing theists.

Not a great option, but if theism is as bad of a problem as you say, then it might be worth consideration.

Yeah, except theists have a nasty habit of multiplying when you kill them... the whole martyr complex.

Killing them all would rectify that situation, I imagine.

Hambydammit wrote:
In all seriousness, that's a large part of the problem. Theism has the double whammy effect. It's a ridiculous belief, but the people who wrote the books at least had the forethought to tell believers that they would be ridiculed. That way, when they're ridiculed, they say, "See! Our holy book said this would happen, so we're right!"

And yet ridicule is one of the tactics encouraged by many of the prominent proponents of atheism (including the RRS). I've always wondered why this is.


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Quote: And yet ridicule is

Quote:
And yet ridicule is one of the tactics encouraged by many of the prominent proponents of atheism (including the RRS). I've always wondered why this is.

Because there are many who have never really thought about their beliefs.  The truly devout are lost, in my opinion.  There's no hope for most of them.  The fence sitters, and the  'default' theists, for lack of a better term, are the ones whose minds might change after realizing, perhaps for the first time, how bizarre and irrational theism is.

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


LosingStreak06
Theist
LosingStreak06's picture
Posts: 768
Joined: 2007-05-22
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit wrote: The

Hambydammit wrote:

The truly devout are lost, in my opinion. There's no hope for most of them.

I agree wholeheartedly. That is why I suggested the sword.

Hambydammit wrote:
The fence sitters, and the 'default' theists, for lack of a better term, are the ones whose minds might change after realizing, perhaps for the first time, how bizarre and irrational theism is.

 Perhaps, but I remain unconvinced that ridicule is the best way to show them that. Even if it is efficient, it also creates hostility among the hopelessly lost. And, quite frankly, I do not wish to see the hopelessly irrational becoming increasingly hostile. Especially when they do not share my beliefs.


Tarpan
Special Agent
Posts: 26
Joined: 2006-06-06
User is offlineOffline
LosingStreak06

LosingStreak06 wrote:
Hambydammit wrote:

The truly devout are lost, in my opinion. There's no hope for most of them.

I agree wholeheartedly. That is why I suggested the sword.

Hambydammit wrote:
The fence sitters, and the 'default' theists, for lack of a better term, are the ones whose minds might change after realizing, perhaps for the first time, how bizarre and irrational theism is.

Perhaps, but I remain unconvinced that ridicule is the best way to show them that. Even if it is efficient, it also creates hostility among the hopelessly lost. And, quite frankly, I do not wish to see the hopelessly irrational becoming increasingly hostile. Especially when they do not share my beliefs.

 

I believe that the approach works for some.  One thing it does do a really good job at is get a attention and that is something that the issue needs at this point is simply attention (good or bad).  If people want to argue about the delivery, at least they are acknowledging the topic.

I personally try to take a much more passive approach.  I believe in the idea of 'seeding' ideas that act like a virus.  This is why I try to ask questions and post simplistic conflicts that people can understand.

That said, I strongly believe in the 'many approaches' method and the aggressive nature works for some and definitly draws attention even if it's not always positive.


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Quote: Perhaps, but I

Quote:
Perhaps, but I remain unconvinced that ridicule is the best way to show them that.

~sigh~

I know you don't agree with our tactics.   Let me go get the horse carcass so we can beat on it some more.

Quote:
Even if it is efficient, it also creates hostility among the hopelessly lost.

I could scarcely care if the hopelessly lost get more hostile.  They're already pretty damn hostile.   Our goal is not to keep the peace with religion.  It's to end it.  We suspect there will be some opposition.

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7522
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Velocity Eleven wrote:I

Velocity Eleven wrote:

I stongly approve of the RRS and what it does

 I live in the UK and the problem of religion isn't as big here, but even 1% of a population being theists is far too much in my oppinion. What can we, as average joes do to help in our daily life?

 

Things you can do to help us grow, and what I'm doing (long)

Looking for 50 good men. (atheist activist call out)

 

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


LosingStreak06
Theist
LosingStreak06's picture
Posts: 768
Joined: 2007-05-22
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit

Hambydammit wrote:

Quote:
Perhaps, but I remain unconvinced that ridicule is the best way to show them that.

~sigh~

I know you don't agree with our tactics. Let me go get the horse carcass so we can beat on it some more.

Please don't. If I thought that it was worth talking about, I would actually make an argument, rather than simply stating the way I feel. I'm a bit taken aback at the dead horse comment, though, being that nearly everything that is talked about on this forum has been discussed ad nauseum since atheism first began. I'd suspect you'd be more than obliged to have another horse in your deceased herd.

Quote:
Quote:
Even if it is efficient, it also creates hostility among the hopelessly lost.

I could scarcely care if the hopelessly lost get more hostile. They're already pretty damn hostile. Our goal is not to keep the peace with religion. It's to end it. We suspect there will be some opposition.

Then I advise you to take up my original post, and kill us all.


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Quote: I'm a bit taken

Quote:
I'm a bit taken aback at the dead horse comment, though, being that nearly everything that is talked about on this forum has been discussed ad nauseum since atheism first began.

This topic is just a lot less interesting than the others.  We fully admit that we don't know for certain that this is the best way to do things.  Barring evidence to the contrary, however, we have to go with the whole "Number One Atheist Site in America and Still Growing" thing.

Faith, morality, and other topics are of continuing interest because there's a clear right answer and a clear wrong answer to most questions within them.  Fighting about whether or not we ought to be mean to theists is just a pissing match, and it's boring.

 

Quote:
I'd suspect you'd be more than obliged to have another horse in your deceased herd.

Creepy visual.

Quote:
Then I advise you to take up my original post, and kill us all.

Have you ever noticed that it's inevitably the theists who think that killing people who disagree is a good thing to do?

Not my bag, dude.  Not my bag.

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


The Doomed Soul
atheist
The Doomed Soul's picture
Posts: 2148
Joined: 2007-08-31
User is offlineOffline
*Disclaimer*I, in no way,

*Disclaimer*

I, in no way, had anything to do, with making Streak say anything, in this forum... no, i'm serious! really!

*Disclaimer*

 

I am Doomed Soul, and i support his message ^_^

What Would Kharn Do?


LosingStreak06
Theist
LosingStreak06's picture
Posts: 768
Joined: 2007-05-22
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit wrote: Faith,

Hambydammit wrote:

Faith, morality, and other topics are of continuing interest because there's a clear right answer and a clear wrong answer to most questions within them.

I can't even begin to explain the extreme degree to which I disagree with that sentiment. 

Hambydammit wrote:
Fighting about whether or not we ought to be mean to theists is just a pissing match, and it's boring.

Again, I find it incredibly odd that you find it more imperative to discuss questions which already have answers to them rather than discussing those which do not. To each his own, I suppose.

Hambydammit wrote:

Have you ever noticed that it's inevitably the theists who think that killing people who disagree is a good thing to do?

I never said it was good. To be honest, I don't believe really subscribe to the concept of "good." I merely said that it would accomplish the goal you laid out: namely, ending religion. It is a means to an end.

Hambydammit wrote:
Not my bag, dude. Not my bag.

Then what exactly do you plan to do with those who are, as you put it, truly devout? The ones who will not be moved? You have already said that you will not make peace with them, so what will you do? By what means do you intend to accomplish your end?


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Quote: I can't even begin

Quote:
I can't even begin to explain the extreme degree to which I disagree with that sentiment.

I know.

Quote:
Again, I find it incredibly odd that you find it more imperative to discuss questions which already have answers to them rather than discussing those which do not. To each his own, I suppose.

It's that pesky problem -- millions of people, yourself included, don't know this.  I think it's pretty important to tell them.

 

Quote:
To be honest, I don't believe really subscribe to the concept of "good."

This, of course, is part of the truth in the discussion of morality.  There is not, and cannot be "good" as defined by Christians.

 

Quote:
I merely said that it would accomplish the goal you laid out: namely, ending religion. It is a means to an end.

However, there is objective cause and effect.  There is "better" and "worse."  I think that killing all the Christians would be one of the worst possible ways to handle the problem of religion.  The problem isn't the theists.  It's the theism.  

I don't think killing all theists would solve anything to do with theism.  It might have a profoundly good effect on the environment in the long run, but I can't find any way to justify it.  All those bodies would really stink up the place for a long time, and I, for one, don't want to have to deal with that.

 

Quote:
Then what exactly do you plan to do with those who are, as you put it, truly devout?

Eventually, they'll find their own ways to die, and maybe the next generation will be less devout.   I'm thinking long term.

 

Quote:
You have already said that you will not make peace with them, so what will you do? By what means do you intend to accomplish your end?

What part of my involvement with RRS do you not get?

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


Tilberian
Moderator
Tilberian's picture
Posts: 1118
Joined: 2006-11-27
User is offlineOffline
LosingStreak06 wrote: Then

LosingStreak06 wrote:

Then what exactly do you plan to do with those who are, as you put it, truly devout? The ones who will not be moved? You have already said that you will not make peace with them, so what will you do? By what means do you intend to accomplish your end?

Jumping in here...

It may not be possible to change the minds of many lving people, but it is possible to shift the common views of society so that with each generation the meme in question is farther and farther away from the mainstream view until it finally acheives the status of myth or fantasy that it should have had in the first place. Lots of people used to believe in Thor in Scandanavia. Not so many now, but there are more Scandanavians than ever. So it is possible to destroy an errant belief without killing the people who hold it.

Lazy is a word we use when someone isn't doing what we want them to do.
- Dr. Joy Brown


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

Velocity Eleven wrote:

I stongly approve of the RRS and what it does

I live in the UK and the problem of religion isn't as big here, but even 1% of a population being theists is far too much in my oppinion. What can we, as average joes do to help in our daily life?

It is always important, when inviting theists over for dinner to properly prepair and barbaque your kitten. Make sure you have pleanty of goats blood. And if your pentagram is not semetrical, your theists friends will surely be dissapointed.

What can you do? In your country, get rid of those stupid PC laws that will backfire on you. Secondly, write your elected officials and tell them to put some pressure on us over here to be less dogmatic.

1. Protect free speech. Even theirs.

2. Challenge hocus pokes claims at every turn.

That is what you can do.

And dont think it is a small thing to be active online. I can remember the atheist community on line not even being on the raidar in 2001. But in those 7 short years, there has been an explosion of atheist websites, books ect ect ect.

Whatever you do, just get the word out. You dont have to be Madolyn O'Hair, or Infidel Guy, or Rational Responders or Richard Dawkins. You just have to raise your voice. It does add up, just like saving pennies.

 

"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


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13396
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
LosingStreak06 wrote: You

LosingStreak06 wrote:

You could go around killing theists.

Not a great option, but if theism is as bad of a problem as you say, then it might be worth consideration.

Jeeze, you had to go there didnt you? No, we want no part of what theists are masters at. Once you indoctrinate someone into the club, you can make them a robot to do the killing for you.

Theism is a problem, I do agree with that. But we are not going to act like the fictional tyrant in the sky and commit mass genocide because people believe absurd things.

We are just going to raise our voices and let people know that there is a better alturnitive than superstitious fiction. Most atheists I know are rational enough to know that 6 billion people are not going to be on the same page. 

"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


LosingStreak06
Theist
LosingStreak06's picture
Posts: 768
Joined: 2007-05-22
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit wrote: It's

Hambydammit wrote:

It's that pesky problem -- millions of people, yourself included, don't know this. I think it's pretty important to tell them.

You make the mistake of thinking that my not caring for the answers is indicative that I have not heard them.

Quote:
This, of course, is part of the truth in the discussion of morality. There is not, and cannot be "good" as defined by Christians.

Or any group, I should think. 

Quote:
However, there is objective cause and effect. There is "better" and "worse." I think that killing all the Christians would be one of the worst possible ways to handle the problem of religion. The problem isn't the theists. It's the theism.

The solution of course is to separate the theists from their theism. But again, the problem remains in those who refuse the separation process. 

Quote:
I don't think killing all theists would solve anything to do with theism.

It would certainly eliminate it from the minds of theists. 


Quote:
Eventually, they'll find their own ways to die, and maybe the next generation will be less devout. I'm thinking long term.

That's a rather big maybe. What if the next generation just becomes more devout? 

Quote:
What part of my involvement with RRS do you not get?

I dare say that doesn't really answer my question. 


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13396
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
LosingStreak06

LosingStreak06 wrote:
Hambydammit wrote:

Quote:
Perhaps, but I remain unconvinced that ridicule is the best way to show them that.

~sigh~

I know you don't agree with our tactics. Let me go get the horse carcass so we can beat on it some more.

Please don't. If I thought that it was worth talking about, I would actually make an argument, rather than simply stating the way I feel. I'm a bit taken aback at the dead horse comment, though, being that nearly everything that is talked about on this forum has been discussed ad nauseum since atheism first began. I'd suspect you'd be more than obliged to have another horse in your deceased herd.

Quote:
Even if it is efficient, it also creates hostility among the hopelessly lost.

I could scarcely care if the hopelessly lost get more hostile. They're already pretty damn hostile. Our goal is not to keep the peace with religion. It's to end it. We suspect there will be some opposition.

Quote:
Then I advise you to take up my original post, and kill us all.

Speeding 80mph in a 25mph zone is dangerous. Having sex with multiple partners, especially without a condom is dangerous. I dont suggest putting people on death row for such things. But if I can raise awarness of the flaws in their actions, maybe they would be less likely to do them.

Religion IS dangerous. Because inherantly it sets up a club and outsiders are a threat to that club. And on top of that religion teaches superstitious crap that young minds absorb like spounges. Religion dumbs down society and turns lagit science into science fiction. It is the type of thing that gets someone to refuse medical treatment and also gets them to kill another human. 

You are absolutly right, our goal, for most atheists, because I dont speak for every single one, is to end religion.

BUT, what pisses me off is that when an atheist says |"end religion" even some atheists accuse other atheists as wanting some genocidal government force tactic.

NO, that has been tried by theists(and some theists make the case that atheists have used it as well|) and it always fails. It is human nature, in all cultures and all individuals, to want to be free. Thomas Jefferson would not see that statement "end religion"(the way I view it and RRS as well) as a call to use government to end religion. I think he would see it as an intelectuall battle where the one with the provable(not the most popular, but the one with solid data) argument is the one others should voluntarly adapt.

I do get a lip twitch when people suggest that when I say, "You need to give up Santa for adults" that somehow means I want to put a gun to your head to force you to do it.

Ann Cunthead, a devoute Christian suggested that we force Muslims to convert to Christianity. And she is just as wrong as any Islamoterrorist wanting to force non-Muslims to convert to Christianity.

I am all for "cant we all just get along". But I am not for supressing feelings. I think the words can fly in either direction as long as humans accept that no matter what is said, that I dont want to die and you dont want to die, so in that mutual empathy, we hash it out, we bitch and recognize we like bitching, and leave it at that.

So LosingStreak, please let this be the last time that you ever suggest that most atheists want to commit acts of genocide to end religion.

Why dont YOU work on a cohearant argument proving the god you claim exists insted of trying to demonize us. 

 

"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


Tarpan
Special Agent
Posts: 26
Joined: 2006-06-06
User is offlineOffline
Please people please, the

Please people please, the important thing to remember is that I am right and you all are wrong.  Even if you agree with me.


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Quote: You make the mistake

Quote:
You make the mistake of thinking that my not caring for the answers is indicative that I have not heard them.

Nah.  I know you've heard.  The thing is, you keep asking the same questions, so I feel obliged to give you the answers repeatedly.

Quote:

This, of course, is part of the truth in the discussion of morality. There is not, and cannot be "good" as defined by Christians.

Or any group, I should think.

Well, no.  'Good' can be defined when it doesn't use a nonexistent referent... but that's another topic.

 

Quote:
The solution of course is to separate the theists from their theism. But again, the problem remains in those who refuse the separation process.

I'm having a hard time understanding what you are getting at.  Clearly we know that many will not abandon theism.  Because we can define good (we have clear terms with real meaning, after all!), we can say that it's not good to kill theists.  One of the main things we hate about theism is that it often preaches that it's good to kill people who disagree with you.  We find that to be very nasty, for legitimate, objective reasons.

 

Quote:
That's a rather big maybe. What if the next generation just becomes more devout?

Then we will have failed, at least in the short term.  That would suck.

 

Quote:

What part of my involvement with RRS do you not get?

I dare say that doesn't really answer my question.

You asked what I am going to do.  It seems rather obvious that I'm going to be involved with trying to spread rationality, doesn't it?

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


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

Hambydammit wrote:

Quote:
You make the mistake of thinking that my not caring for the answers is indicative that I have not heard them.

Nah. I know you've heard. The thing is, you keep asking the same questions, so I feel obliged to give you the answers repeatedly.

Quote:

This, of course, is part of the truth in the discussion of morality. There is not, and cannot be "good" as defined by Christians.

Or any group, I should think.

Well, no. 'Good' can be defined when it doesn't use a nonexistent referent... but that's another topic.

Quote:
The solution of course is to separate the theists from their theism. But again, the problem remains in those who refuse the separation process.

I'm having a hard time understanding what you are getting at. Clearly we know that many will not abandon theism. Because we can define good (we have clear terms with real meaning, after all!), we can say that it's not good to kill theists. One of the main things we hate about theism is that it often preaches that it's good to kill people who disagree with you. We find that to be very nasty, for legitimate, objective reasons.

Quote:
That's a rather big maybe. What if the next generation just becomes more devout?

Then we will have failed, at least in the short term. That would suck.

Quote:

What part of my involvement with RRS do you not get?

I dare say that doesn't really answer my question.

You asked what I am going to do. It seems rather obvious that I'm going to be involved with trying to spread rationality, doesn't it?

 

Hamby, it is hard for the theist to understand where we are comming from. It is hard for the alpha male(statistical majority) to accept help from the beta(statistical minority).

I myself did not have a hard time giving up on the idea of Santa, but that was just me. Others in my neighborhood who had been indoctrinated blew a gasket when I presented them with the truth and accused me of hating them and hating a fictional character. It even went as far as their parents having a talk with my parents about my "insentitivity" when all I was doing was pointing out the truth.

The truth is often hard to swallow, but, just like popping a big zit, it hurts like a bitch, but feels wonderfull after all the pressure is gone. 

"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


LosingStreak06
Theist
LosingStreak06's picture
Posts: 768
Joined: 2007-05-22
User is offlineOffline
I don't find any of the

I don't find any of the "objective" definitions of "good" to be particularly compelling.

Quote:
One of the main things we hate about theism is that it often preaches that it's good to kill people who disagree with you.

One of the main things I dislike about humanism is that it places human life at paramount value. 

Quote:
I'm having a hard time understanding what you are getting at.

There are two factors in belief that, as far as I have seen, will determine a man's conscious behavior in any given environment: 1. What he believes, and 2. how strongly he believes it.

A man who believes very weakly that he has the ability to fly will not try to jump off of his rooftop.

A man who believes very strongly that he will be rewarded in heaven if he flies a jet into a building will, more likely than not, do so.

It's an argument that I've seen here on several occasions: if theists really believe in God, then why don't they all have abortions so that their children are saved by God? If they really believe in God, why don't they pray instead of going to the hospital when they need medical assistance?

Consider this my test for you. I already know what your belief is: you believe that religion must come to an end. I am curious, though, as to how far you are willing to go to for your belief


LosingStreak06
Theist
LosingStreak06's picture
Posts: 768
Joined: 2007-05-22
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote: Hamby, it

Brian37 wrote:

Hamby, it is hard for the theist to understand where we are comming from. It is hard for the alpha male(statistical majority) to accept help from the beta(statistical minority).

Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't alphas of any given population generally make up a majority? Also, I'm pretty sure I have a good idea where you are coming from. It is not as if I have not been ostracized for my beliefs. In the eyes of Christianity, there is little difference between an atheist and a pseudopaganistic anti-realist.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13396
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
LosingStreak06 wrote: I

LosingStreak06 wrote:

I don't find any of the "objective" definitions of "good" to be particularly compelling.

Quote:
One of the main things we hate about theism is that it often preaches that it's good to kill people who disagree with you.

One of the main things I dislike about humanism is that it places human life at paramount value.

Quote:
I'm having a hard time understanding what you are getting at.

There are two factors in belief that, as far as I have seen, will determine a man's conscious behavior in any given environment: 1. What he believes, and 2. how strongly he believes it.

A man who believes very weakly that he has the ability to fly will not try to jump off of his rooftop.

A man who believes very strongly that he will be rewarded in heaven if he flies a jet into a building will, more likely than not, do so.

It's an argument that I've seen here on several occasions: if theists really believe in God, then why don't they all have abortions so that their children are saved by God? If they really believe in God, why don't they pray instead of going to the hospital when they need medical assistance?

Consider this my test for you. I already know what your belief is: you believe that religion must come to an end. I am curious, though, as to how far you are willing to go to for your belief

Quote:
I am curious, though, as to how far you are willing to go to for your belief

Just like any species, most will only take what they need to survive, and like all species, will defend themselves when they feel a threat.

You want to turn atheism vs theism into Superman vs Kriptonite, good vs evil. The advantage that the atheist has that the theist doesnt, is that we recongnize that the moth can falsely fly into the lighbub thinking it is the moonlight.

Are atheist perfect? No, we will die(hopefully from old age) just like any theist. The differance is that we recognize that superstition is not needed to live life. If anything, we are just frustrated that humanity hasn't caught up to the 21rst century.

How far will I go? Thomas Jeffeson risked becoming a criminal(cutting ties to the UK). But I doubt he was saying, "Not only do I want to leave your club, I want to stick you in an oven because I dissagree with you" He was merely saying, " I dont need you to survive and I would apreciate you not dictating to me every aspect of my life".

I will defend myself if need be, as would any human. But I am not seeking the opression of others. I am offering others an alturnitive to what they are currently buying. 

"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


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13396
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
LosingStreak06

LosingStreak06 wrote:
Brian37 wrote:

Hamby, it is hard for the theist to understand where we are comming from. It is hard for the alpha male(statistical majority) to accept help from the beta(statistical minority).

Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't alphas of any given population generally make up a majority? Also, I'm pretty sure I have a good idea where you are coming from. It is not as if I have not been ostracized for my beliefs. In the eyes of Christianity, there is little difference between an atheist and a pseudopaganistic anti-realist.

Thats exactly why it perplexis me as to why you would even joke or imply that atheists want to commit acts of genocide to end religion?

I have as much in common with Tom Cruise and Mitt Romney in the issue of being ostricised and demonized. My like or dislike with them and you and any theist is irrellivent to the issue of EVIDENCE! Just like you reject Allah.

I am perfectly capable of empathy. I just get a lip twitch when theists imply that we lack that common human quality.

The bottem line is both you and I being apposed on the issue of theism think the other is full of shit. FINE, my problem isnt that people believe absurd things. My problem is that we get accused of the same tactics as facists and theocrats.

You admit to being demonized by Christians. I CAN empathize with that, but that doesnt make your version of deity any more real than the version Tom Cruise promotes.

EMPATHY is a seperate issue than EVIDENCE! 

 

"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


LosingStreak06
Theist
LosingStreak06's picture
Posts: 768
Joined: 2007-05-22
User is offlineOffline
Quote:

Quote:
You want to turn atheism vs theism into Superman vs Kriptonite, good vs evil.

No, I think that's what you want to think I want. I have no qualms at all with atheism.

Quote:
why you would even joke or imply that atheists want to commit acts of genocide to end religion

I'm not implying that they do want to, but rather that perhaps they should want to. 


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13396
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
LosingStreak06

LosingStreak06 wrote:

Quote:
You want to turn atheism vs theism into Superman vs Kriptonite, good vs evil.

No, I think that's what you want to think I want. I have no qualms at all with atheism.

Quote:
why you would even joke or imply that atheists want to commit acts of genocide to end religion

I'm not implying that they do want to, but rather that perhaps they should want to.

Where the fuck is that comming from? Genocide is allowed, if not sanctioned by the Abrahmic gods. What the fuck makes you think force is a solution? I am not going to become what I dispise.

As deluded as I think Muslims, Christians, Scientologists and the idiots who read horriscopes are, what make you think ANY LABEL, not just atheists, should want to seek genocide as a solution?

I obeyed my dad out of fear. But that was not using reason on his part, it was merly his based alpha male status.

"Question with boldness even the existance of God, for if there be one, surely he would pay more homage to reason than to that of blindfolded fear" Thomas Jefferson

I doubt in the least that Jefferson would take any offense to my blasphemy of his deist(not Christian) god. I think the worst he would say is, "Brian, you are an idiot for thinking nothing produced something, and here is why". And I doubt he would want to stick me in an oven for saying, "No Thomas, you are an idiot for postulating the super natural at all. Even you denied the virgin birth and death of Jesus". Then I would proceed to explain why even his generic "god of nature" claim was flawed.

I think even atheists sometimes, and most certainly theists, dont give credit to their fellow human for being able to stand the heat in the kitchen.

I know you get picked on, and I do too. Even before I was an atheist I got picked on for other reasons. IT SUCKS, but that is NOT an excuse to avoid criticism and truth. 

 

"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


LosingStreak06
Theist
LosingStreak06's picture
Posts: 768
Joined: 2007-05-22
User is offlineOffline
Your problem is that you are

Your problem is that you are equating genocide with theism. One does not have to be a theist to believe that killing is acceptable. One merely needs to believe that there is something that has more value than human life. Theism is not necessary for this belief.


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Quote: I don't find any of

Quote:
I don't find any of the "objective" definitions of "good" to be particularly compelling.

That's fine. Your consent is not necessary for the statement to be true. 'Good' is simply a measure of relation between a thing and a purpose or goal.

Despite your disapproval, a bottle which does not leak and holds liquid is a good bottle for the purpose of holding liquid and not leaking.

Similarly, for any given behavior, that behavior is good if it coincides with the goal of behaving. While everyone may not agree on a goal, one cannot disagree with the definition of good in this regard.

Theists have a hard time wrapping their brain around a relative definition for a variety of reasons, but that's ok. It's one of the reasons RRS is here. We want to help people understand.

Quote:
One of the main things I dislike about humanism is that it places human life at paramount value.

Who said anything about humanism? I'm not a humanist.

Quote:
Consider this my test for you. I already know what your belief is: you believe that religion must come to an end. I am curious, though, as to how far you are willing to go to for your belief

I swear sometimes I think you have multiple personalities. Sometimes you say things that are very insightful, and other times you can't grasp the simplest of concepts.

The reason we want religion to come to an end is that theism is harmful to people. Killing people is also very harmful to people, so it doesn't make very much sense to kill people to save them. Only a theist could believe something so contradictory.

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Quote: Your problem is that

Quote:
Your problem is that you are equating genocide with theism.

Theism is one of several belief systems that can promote and/or encourage genocide.

Quote:
One does not have to be a theist to believe that killing is acceptable.

You've been around long enough that you should have learned some basic logic skills.  Why do you keep making such basic blunders?

Nobody has said that only theists believe killing is acceptable.

 

Quote:
One merely needs to believe that there is something that has more value than human life.

Coming from the person who doesn't like humanism.  How ironic.  This is true, of course.  Virtually everyone believes that there is something more valuable than human life.  It is most likely instinctual.

This is also completely unrelated to the topic, which is only still entertaining me because it's so ridiculous.

 

Quote:
Theism is not necessary for this belief.

Yes.  We know.

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


LosingStreak06
Theist
LosingStreak06's picture
Posts: 768
Joined: 2007-05-22
User is offlineOffline
Quote: 'Good' is simply a

Quote:
'Good' is simply a measure of relation between a thing and a purpose or goal.

I don't see how that makes "good" anything close to being objective, as all purposes and goals are subjective. 

Quote:
Theists have a hard time wrapping their brain around a relative definition for a variety of reasons, but that's ok.

Again with the generalizations. I'm perfectly fine with relative definitions, but I don't consider them to be objective. And I'll go ahead and save you some time by letting you know that ridiculing isn't one of the things that will work on me.

Quote:
Who said anything about humanism? I'm not a humanist

To be quite frank, I consider anyone who considers harming human beings to be a necessarily bad thing to be at least somewhat of a humanist. 

Quote:
Sometimes you say things that are very insightful, and other times you can't grasp the simplest of concepts.

If I seem ignorant, then perhaps it is because you misunderstand me. 

I'm asking you a fairly simple question, and you seem to be incapable of answering it. I can understand if you have difficutlies hypotheticals, but I didn't realize that you completely lacked the ability to move beyond the literal.

 

Quote:
Only a theist could believe something so contradictory.

 And only an atheist could bite off a theist's head for being genuinely curious.

Quote:
Theism is one of several belief systems that can promote and/or encourage genocide.

Now that's a MUCH less biased way of putting it. At least someone around here is capable of such.

Quote:
Nobody has said that only theists believe killing is acceptable.

It has been very heavily implied throught this thread that such is the case.

Quote:
Virtually everyone believes that there is something more valuable than human life.

Well yes, but it doesn't tell me anything about what YOU think is more valuable than human life. Which is what I wanted to know in the first place. Again, goes to show what I get for being curious.


BMcD
Posts: 777
Joined: 2006-12-20
User is offlineOffline
Killing all the theists

Killing all the theists would not end theism unless we were also willing to expunge all knowledge of their prior existence. Otherwise, someone is bound to come along and take their extermination as evidence that they were on to something, and ressurect it.

Further, anti-theistic genocide, while it would almost certainly prove the dedication of those willing to commit it, would drive others away from atheism simply because of their unwillingness to be identified with cold-blooded murder. Some of the 'fence-sitters' as you call them, who might be persuaded to question their beliefs based on rational discussion and critical thinking, might well be left wondering 'how could rational people participate in such slaughter?' and, groping desperately for an answer, fall back into their theistic ways, especially in looking to a reassuring presence for guidance, and finding an easy scapegoat for such behavior in the 'devil' figures prevalent in (though actually blasphemous and contrary to the scriptures of) the western monotheistic religions.

So, considering the great amount of damage to the overall atheist cause, and most certainly to the Rational cause (which some folks might even see as greater than the cause of atheism, don'cha know. Atheism is a subset of rationality, not versa vis.) that such genocide would almost inevitably cause, I would have to say that no, killing all the theists is not a rational, or even effective, means of ending theism.

Also, it's morally repugnant to kill people over an idea. That's just wasteful. Killing them for fertilizer for replanting forests, though... 

"You've got to remember that these are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know... morons." - The Waco Kid


Subdi Visions
Bronze Member
Subdi Visions's picture
Posts: 278
Joined: 2007-10-29
User is offlineOffline
LosingStreak06 wrote: One

LosingStreak06 wrote:

One of the main things I dislike about humanism is that it places human life at paramount value.

Human life isn't of paramount value? Of course I'm not talking about people who desperately need to die. But of people like my sons, my mother, my wife, my family and friends, the people on this forum like you, the people I work with. I must be missing something. I honestly can't think of anything more important than life, in general.

I'm not as sharp as most of the people on this forum so if you could keep your answer to a college reading level that would help me immensely. Smiling 

Respectfully,
Lenny

"The righteous rise, With burning eyes, Of hatred and ill-will
Madmen fed on fear and lies, To beat and burn and kill"
Witch Hunt from the album Moving Pictures. Neal Pert, Rush


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7522
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Just trying to draw some

Just trying to draw some attention to the answers again (massive derailment here)...

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


LosingStreak06
Theist
LosingStreak06's picture
Posts: 768
Joined: 2007-05-22
User is offlineOffline
Sapient wrote: Just trying

Sapient wrote:

Just trying to draw some attention to the answers again (massive derailment here)...

Yeah... sorry about all that. 


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Quote: I don't see how that

Quote:
I don't see how that makes "good" anything close to being objective, as all purposes and goals are subjective.

Um... just think of boxes.  In each box is a perspective and a goal.  Within each box, something is either good or bad, objectively.  Which box you decide to pick up is a subjective decision.

Quote:
And I'll go ahead and save you some time by letting you know that ridiculing isn't one of the things that will work on me.

I wasn't ridiculing.  I was stating the obvious.

 

Quote:
To be quite frank, I consider anyone who considers harming human beings to be a necessarily bad thing to be at least somewhat of a humanist.

I don't consider harming human beings to be a necessarily bad thing.  I am not a humanist.  (emphasis on "necessarily&quotEye-wink

 

Quote:

If I seem ignorant, then perhaps it is because you misunderstand me. 

I'm asking you a fairly simple question, and you seem to be incapable of answering it. I can understand if you have difficutlies hypotheticals, but I didn't realize that you completely lacked the ability to move beyond the literal.

What's the question again?

 

Quote:

Only a theist could believe something so contradictory.

 And only an atheist could bite off a theist's head for being genuinely curious.

Feh.

 

Quote:

Theism is one of several belief systems that can promote and/or encourage genocide.

Now that's a MUCH less biased way of putting it. At least someone around here is capable of such.

I'm trying to remember who said it as an absolute in the first place...

Who could that have been?

...

Somebody was the only one in the thread to say anything about it being absolute, or about theists being the only ones to promote genocide...

Who was that......

 

YOU!

 

Quote:

Nobody has said that only theists believe killing is acceptable.

It has been very heavily implied throught this thread that such is the case.

No, you wanted to believe that's what we were saying because it makes it seem easier to criticize us if we've said something obviously false.

 

Quote:

Virtually everyone believes that there is something more valuable than human life.

Well yes, but it doesn't tell me anything about what YOU think is more valuable than human life. Which is what I wanted to know in the first place. Again, goes to show what I get for being curious.

It depends.  If I had the choice between letting one person die or having an entire species wiped out, it might be a tough choice.  That includes me, by the way.  I might take a bullet if I knew it would save a species.  You see, as I've mentioned, I'm not a humanist.  I don't believe human life is more valuable than other life -- inherently.  That doesn't mean I'm going to let a bear kill me if I have a choice, but I don't default to the position that human life is paramount.

I guess this is why it's so hard for theists to understand the way a lot of atheists think.  There simply aren't absolute standards.  Give me a scenario, and I'll tell you if something is more valuable than human life to me.  There's no way for me to give you an absolute answer because every situation has its own variables.

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


Vessel
Vessel's picture
Posts: 646
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
LosingStreak06

LosingStreak06 wrote:

Quote:
Virtually everyone believes that there is something more valuable than human life.

Well yes, but it doesn't tell me anything about what YOU think is more valuable than human life. Which is what I wanted to know in the first place. Again, goes to show what I get for being curious.

How can a human consider anything more valuable than human life? Without human life there is no way for a human to value anything. I understand that often humans value some things more than they value some human's lives, but not human life in general. Usually, the things that are valued more than particular human lives are valued because of their effect on human lives. This value, though, is dependent on continued human life. When we remove human life from the picture we remove any value as far as any human can be concerned.

 

“Philosophers have argued for centuries about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, but materialists have always known it depends on whether they are jitterbugging or dancing cheek to cheek" -- Tom Robbins