Just pissing in the wind!

Lux
Theist
Posts: 204
Joined: 2007-05-14
User is offlineOffline
Just pissing in the wind!

It seems that most atheists are atheists because of bad experiences. It seems less to do with rationality or reason, which I think is a cop-out. I read most of what the leaders of this here outfit wrote, and it seems they are just sick of religion in general. A lot has to do with Judgemental Chrisitans. Having spent half my life in Chicago and half in South Carolina, I see a huge difference in Christian mentality. Also, it isn't too easy being Catholic in South Carolina either, so on that note I understand where you all are coming from. Having said that, the difference is I Continue to believe in God because I have done alot of searches for meaning in life, and to me, this is the only thing that makes sense. I could have gone the other way like you guys did, but I found reason to keep my faith. I think a belief in God rests on a razors edge. But trust in general rests on a razors edge. We are fragile as humans and our emotions and beliefs reflect that. I can come across as a pompus asshole, so I apologize for that in light of my previous posts. Eye-wink

"Atheism turns out to be too simple. If the whole universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning..." -CS Lewis


marcusfish
Superfan
marcusfish's picture
Posts: 676
Joined: 2007-05-11
User is offlineOffline
Jessica0 wrote: However it

Jessica0 wrote:
However it does sounds like I am a minority. It seems like I read somewhere that most atheists are born atheists. Maybe it was a Dawkins book.

I am not sure that there is any solid documentation either way (I seem to recall seeing threads on the subject). Logic would dictate that we are not born believing in any particular super-wizard, that we would need to be taught such things.  


Anbesol
Theist
Posts: 116
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
Let me try this again, this

Let me try this again, this time there is no insults, no name calling, no demanding, just my calm, honest opinion, and I beg you to hear my cry, for I cry not for Christians, but for you and them alike, and I cry for the rest of the effected world in this hateful fued.  I only wish to bring about equality for everyone, not just you but the Christians as well, and not just us but the rest of humanity.

This is my last cry to a community that I only wish to help, I am casting my pearls so please hear me out, do not pick apart what i say and  figure out why I "need to find evidence" or formulate a calculus equation to prove I'm right, I only want to present you with evidence that should be made self-evident, and if you have no leaning of mind when reading this, then perhaps you will hear me for what I have to say. 

I apologize for name calling, I am very deeply disturbed by both sides of this movement and sometimes the disturbance manifests itself in anger, I am not angry at you for what you believe, I became angry at you for how you insulted and belittled others for believing what they believe - though reciprocating those insults was also in poor practice.  Please, read... 

Guys.  I do not disagree with you - the god you have conceived certainly does not exist.  All the absurdities of concepts of god you have been exposed to HAVE been superstitious and silly.  So to say that I wish to "conform you" to my way of thinking is a false pretense, I only wish to show the commonalities that YOU guys have with other religions.  You can know somebody by their fruits, not by their labors.  People labor religion over here and it produces bad fruits, not because of the religion, but because of the poor practice.  There are some communities, and certainly many more in the eastern world that practice religion and have good fruits.  Science is actually a practice of religion in most religions, and they dont have the same pursuit to cover up any conflicts of interest either.  I did NOT come here to change anybodys mind from their own beliefs, I only wished to show that, well, deep down, they arent really that much different then everybody else.  And the absurdities of convicting yourself and limiting yourself to any belief, pro or con, no god or a god, is a practice of segregation and dishonoring the self.  It is a practice of blind faith, because the same faith that these christians have against science, you have against religion in general.  And it is NOT through honest interest in the said religions, its through your blind refusal to admit to believe in a god that has been imposed on you in an intolerant society from day one.

The seed of YOUR anger lies in your inequalities amongst society - amongst politics, amongst your employers, you have every reason to be angry about it, but to act angry is again, poor practice.

To all the gods that have been put in order for you guys - you are absolutely right, they do not exist, there is no ultimatum or high meaning, there is no god you need to service or make sacrifice for, there is only mindful awareness, the Buddhists call the pure conscious awareness of mind, "god", because pure consciousness is none other then god, without conditionings, without services, just inner peace and equality, and the pursuit of harmony.  This is what hte Christians call the will of the father, though they have manipulated the will of the father to be a go-to-iraq and kill kill kill the bad bad people, that doesnt make it so.  Read it and decide for yourself, do not take the interpretations others feed you, interpret it your self.  If your minds have conquered the fear of eternal punishment, then you'll see right through that bullshit about it - the book of revelations is indeed an awful piece of work an one that has been a THORN in everyones side, include other religious people who also believe in god, if it can so be said.  But most of all, if you ask most any well practiced religious man if they believe in god, they are very likely to respond with another question, such as "why does it matter?", or "what difference does it make?", not with "oh my god dude, my god hes all mine you should like, totally check him out, hes way better then the other gods, my god could kick your gods ass".  You guys have transformed the word "god" into science, and now that is what youre using to battle evangelists, but you are sinking to their level and perpetuating the problem, rather then addressing the root cause to said problems.  You guys have shunned me as a "theist" and all the while I never opposed what you were for, just HOW you were for it, and how you went about it.  Do I believe that Jesus Christ was fathered by nobody but some spirit molecule that found its way in the virgin mary?  No, its a parable to express how the mother of Jesus was pure of heart and pure of mind, she was unadulterated in a spiritual sense.  I also believe that the parable to his ressurection is that, although they silenced Jesus in body, his spirit lives on, and continued to flow through the work of his disciples.  Do I think he literally ressurected?  Hell no, I know a man of his calibur, would he TO have ressurected, would have continued to teach such wonderful work.  He taught for 3-4 years, most spiritual masters teach for decades, Buddha taught for 49, until he died in his 80's.  Christ brought such a message of peace, but he came to a society that was not ready for him, although he did not falter to the will of others in selfishness, this refusal to bend with the will of the oppressive people who suffered was looked at as blasphemy and intolerance, when in reality he was not being intolerant, just being unaffected by their intolerance, for this, he became like a sacrificial sheep to them, and let their intolerance be taken out on him, to raise their spirits, watching the brutal killing of a man in such a fashion is a good way to help wake people up, many of the people of the time that had seen of such acts actually began to practice kindness a lot better then ever before.

 Jesus was a man of ethics and morals, but he knew the functions of them very thuroughly, and I can have a deep respect for other christians, because I know what an inspirational man Christ can actually be (to the mind that is open to receiving him), but when people make it out to be a "my god is better then your god" and this whole "believe or else" bullshit, then they segregate and they create the same intolerance Christ wished to eradicate.  He is still being their sacrificial lamb, but were society to reform in global unity, their is a way that we can bring about an era that better understands Christs message, and does not abuse it so willingly as it is done.  The problem is, this would require a lot of work and a lot of dedication from everybody, and ultimately we would need to reopen the canon, destroy the heirarchies of the church, and continue to write again in inspiration of god.  The spirit of christ, in the metaphoric sense, lives on, why should his teachings stop?  This is the ethics of the eastern religions, and I for one think its a much deeper and reason minded precept to take upon religion, we also must begin having open dialogues between varying religions, we must take the understanding that though their may be one goal, there are many paths, and if we worked together we could better share the work of these paths.  If you say it is not possible, it has already begun very well in the east, and has been going on for a long time.  Zen, is rooted in 3 very different bases of knowledge, The Knowledge of the Vedas, the knowledge of Confucias, and the Knowledge of Shinto.  It is a culmination of the three, and an equally ecclectic assimilation of all of them, it borrows teachings from all, and it does not prolaim any sense of superiority.  Most Buddhist practices incorporate other teachings as well, and many of them particularly include Christs messages, which were of pure conscious clarity.

So no, you guys do not conflict with any of my beliefs or thoughts, and I did not come here to change anyones minds.  You guys keep believing whatever the hell you want to, why do I care what you believe?  I never did.  The only thing I was disgusted by was your blind intolerance towards other schools of thought because you superficially felt your school was supreme commander of the universe, it is not.  I read an interesting thing today - Religion without science is superstition, Science without religion is materialism.

I sincerly express to you that your staple argument is a reciprocated destructive precept, I promise to you, that the age old argument that has two demanded answers, will lead to two people becoming more and more crazed and convicted against each other.  What you need to do FIRST, is find out what you have in common, and then you can seperate yourselves from the differences.  You guys came because the Christian Community has oppressed you, so now you seek vengeance and want to counter oppress, but oppression begets oppression, and its fighting fire with fire when fire is clearly fought with water.

 I do not ask you to change any of your beliefs that you hold your self, but perhaps, to help you seek to understand just WHY it is they believe what they believe, and it goes a lot deeper then most of you have ever been made aware of, it goes beyond their fear of death, their fear of death is what creates dogma, not religion, conviction is the sign of a frightened mind, not spirituality. 

 

now, If you have heard what I said, perhaps you see the reason for the "Does God exist?" being an absurd and unproductive practice.  If you change it to show the direct contradictions between the teachings of christ and the followers, and the teachings of christ and the later books, then you will be succesful beyond your wildest measure, as these truths SHALL become self evident, and expressing them to people who admire this man, will help them to see, if you come at them with the lovingness Christ had, then again, you will be wildly succesful.  I am casting my pearls, and I hope that you can see them for what they are worth.  If not, I sincerely do give up on this community, and will go on to the next. 


marcusfish
Superfan
marcusfish's picture
Posts: 676
Joined: 2007-05-11
User is offlineOffline
I read your entire post as

I read your entire post as calmly as I could even through your veiled insults and attacks. 

I ask that you do the same.  

There have been quite a few wise philosophers throughout human history. I only know of the famous ones but I'm sure there were many more left at the wayside because their beliefs were inconvenient. 

To cast aside an entire philosophy because there are aspects of it that are obviously putrid, violent, and hateful would be simple minded. Using the Judeo-Christian religion as an example, there are countless passages about violence, intolerance, and just good old fashioned hatred in the teachings of these religions. However, much like our society has done, it would be reasonable to pick the moral passages out and put them into use. The moral society in the US has struggled back and forth since it's creation. In the end, I think we've chosen a direction that "could" work out. Only time can tell. 

To have constructive dialogue with practitioners of the cruel, violent, and intolerant teachings of Judeo Christian faith would be good for all, I suspect. In order to really cover any ground we are eventually going to have to sit down at the table with each other and hash it out in a way that doesn't end in an ice pick in someones temple. 

The eastern faiths (of which I have limited knowledge) are not the center of my attention. There are many philosophies that I agree with and would probably be a fervant follower were it not for the mystical aspect of the path.

Being millitant / radical about a belief is rarely helpful (as I have already said in previous responses to you). Taking on a constructive approach would clearly be desirable.

There, I have left out my commentary and answered what I can deduce is the spirit of your argument.  


zarathustra
atheist
zarathustra's picture
Posts: 1521
Joined: 2006-11-16
User is offlineOffline
Lux wrote: It seems that

Lux wrote:
It seems that most atheists are atheists because of bad experiences. It seems less to do with rationality or reason, which I think is a cop-out.

 The same can be said for many theists.  Often times people hit rock bottom and find emotional solace in religion.  Scientology, for example, thrives in part by approaching recently widowed people and drug users.  

 

Lux wrote:
Having spent half my life in Chicago and half in South Carolina, I see a huge difference in Christian mentality.

Quite to be expected , as religion is simply a cultural phenomenon.

Lux wrote:
... I Continue to believe in God because I have done alot of searches for meaning in life, and to me, this is the only thing that makes sense.

As have we all.  To me, a man who rose from the dead and into the clouds, and shows up again every Sunday in the bread and wine is not high on the list of things that make sense.

Lux wrote:
I could have gone the other way like you guys did, but I found reason to keep my faith.

If you're looking in advance for a reason to keep the faith, you will more than likely find a reason to keep the faith.  If you dispel  any preconeived biases and start only with the fact, faith comes not so strongly.

Lux wrote:
BTW, I read that Rook was going to be a priest? believe me I know how demanding it is to grow up Catholic.

Doesn't have to be.  You can pick and choose what you want to follow, show up on sunday for roll call, and noone is the wiser.

There are no theists on operating tables.

πππ†
π†††


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
marcusfish wrote: Vastet

marcusfish wrote:
Vastet wrote:
Anbesol wrote:
Lux, these kids are the most adamently, militant atheist kids I have ever seen in my life. This isnt a matter of them listening to you, they wont listen to anything you say. I gave them the golden and obvious truth of the matter with contradicting their staple argument and they shunned me lol.
Uh huh. Listen kid, on the off chance that I haven't already ripped your so-called "obvious truth of the matter" apart already, feel free to repost it so I can. I don't feel like digging up every one of your posts to locate it.

Here is the original argument / first post

Thanks man. Though now when looking at the size of that post and the size of the most recent post in this topic by the same guy, I have to choose one or the other to respond to. I'll take this topic, and deal with the other tomorrow if I can.

Anbesol wrote:
Let me try this again, this time there is no insults, no name calling, no demanding, just my calm, honest opinion, and I beg you to hear my cry, for I cry not for Christians, but for you and them alike, and I cry for the rest of the effected world in this hateful fued. I only wish to bring about equality for everyone, not just you but the Christians as well, and not just us but the rest of humanity.~~~~~~

I'm always willing to give someone a second chance, no matter how much they pissed me off with the first one. Since you've apologized for your inflammatory remarks I shall do the same. I'm sorry.

Anbesol wrote:
Guys. I do not disagree with you - the god you have conceived certainly does not exist. All the absurdities of concepts of god you have been exposed to HAVE been superstitious and silly.

Well I haven't yet concieved of a god myself. I've never felt the need to. Closest I come is knowing that I'm god when I dream, if I realize I'm dreaming.
You are mostly correct in that all concepts I've been exposed to are silly. There are some concepts that aren't so silly, but they tend to have no reason to believe in them either.

Anbesol wrote:
So to say that I wish to "conform you" to my way of thinking is a false pretense, I only wish to show the commonalities that YOU guys have with other religions.

Well that's easy enough to do. You get any organization made up of more than 5 people and you can show how it's similar to a religion.

Anbesol wrote:
You can know somebody by their fruits, not by their labors. People labor religion over here and it produces bad fruits, not because of the religion, but because of the poor practice. There are some communities, and certainly many more in the eastern world that practice religion and have good fruits. Science is actually a practice of religion in most religions, and they dont have the same pursuit to cover up any conflicts of interest either. I did NOT come here to change anybodys mind from their own beliefs, I only wished to show that, well, deep down, they arent really that much different then everybody else.

I honestly don't think there's much difference between me and the average theist. They just believe in one thing that I don't believe in. It's a pretty big thing, but we're both still human.

Anbesol wrote:

And the absurdities of convicting yourself and limiting yourself to any belief, pro or con, no god or a god, is a practice of segregation and dishonoring the self.

I would agree. But then atheism by definition is not limitting. It is not denial of a god, merely a lack of belief in one. I haven't met many atheists who actually believe there isn't any god. I believe that certain gods don't exist, but I can't honestly throw out the entire concept altogether. Simply because it's such a vague one.

Anbesol wrote:
It is a practice of blind faith, because the same faith that these christians have against science, you have against religion in general.

The key word is "general". I am not one who discards a belief just because it's a belief. I will do a bit of looking into it first. The key thing is that almost every religion claims a creator, which is physically impossible. Any religion that claims a creator I can and will immediately discard as false, since it is false.

Anbesol wrote:
And it is NOT through honest interest in the said religions, its through your blind refusal to admit to believe in a god that has been imposed on you in an intolerant society from day one.

This might apply to some people, but not very many of them can be found here. Now I won't lie and say I ever found religion to be interesting. The only one I looked into at all that did happen to be interesting was wicca. But it doesn't work and magic is so much more interesting in video games and books where it does work.
And no god was ever imposed on me from day one in an intolerant society. For the first 19 years or so of my life I had never even bothered to argue the idea with anyone(I don't remember the exact day that changed, but it was at some point in my teens). I didn't think it was worth it. Who cares what people believe in, it doesn't affect me. But then I started paying a bit more attention to politics and Canada's closest neighbour and it's policies. I noticed Israel and Palestines eternal conflict. I found religion wasn't just a horrible thing in the past, it's a horrible thing in the present. It consumes lives, resources, time, and for what? It doesn't produce a single thing that can't be produced without it.

Anbesol wrote:

The seed of YOUR anger lies in your inequalities amongst society - amongst politics, amongst your employers, you have every reason to be angry about it, but to act angry is again, poor practice.

When I'm angry about those things, I criticize those things. I condemn capitalism. But I'm not against it because I'm against religion or vice versa. I'm against it because it doesn't work. Like religion doesn't work. They cause more harm than good, and there are better alternatives. All one needs to do is look.

Anbesol wrote:
To all the gods that have been put in order for you guys - you are absolutely right, they do not exist, there is no ultimatum or high meaning, there is no god you need to service or make sacrifice for, there is only mindful awareness, the Buddhists call the pure conscious awareness of mind, "god", because pure consciousness is none other then god, without conditionings, without services, just inner peace and equality, and the pursuit of harmony.

What exactly is pure consciousness?

Anbesol wrote:
This is what hte Christians call the will of the father, though they have manipulated the will of the father to be a go-to-iraq and kill kill kill the bad bad people, that doesnt make it so. Read it and decide for yourself, do not take the interpretations others feed you, interpret it your self. If your minds have conquered the fear of eternal punishment, then you'll see right through that bullshit about it - the book of revelations is indeed an awful piece of work an one that has been a THORN in everyones side, include other religious people who also believe in god, if it can so be said. But most of all, if you ask most any well practiced religious man if they believe in god, they are very likely to respond with another question, such as "why does it matter?", or "what difference does it make?", not with "oh my god dude, my god hes all mine you should like, totally check him out, hes way better then the other gods, my god could kick your gods ass". You guys have transformed the word "god" into science, and now that is what youre using to battle evangelists, but you are sinking to their level and perpetuating the problem, rather then addressing the root cause to said problems.

The root cause of religion is not an effective strategy. I've tried it a few times. I even tried using it in such a way to stop those who were religious from doing certain things without attacking the religion itself. Even less success, if that's possible. The root cause of the problems with religion tend to be that religions are inherrantly isolationist. Follow or be an enemy. Some christians try to duck it by saying their god judges people, but it's they who believe in that god judging people that way, so they can't duck it even though they try.

Anbesol wrote:
You guys have shunned me as a "theist" and all the while I never opposed what you were for, just HOW you were for it, and how you went about it.

I don't shun you for being a theist. In general I don't care what people believe in. But when those beliefs encroach on my freedoms and rights I will fight back. The more they encroach the more I will fight.

Anbesol wrote:

Do I believe that Jesus Christ was fathered by nobody but some spirit molecule that found its way in the virgin mary? No, its a parable to express how the mother of Jesus was pure of heart and pure of mind, she was unadulterated in a spiritual sense.

I'm not sure jesus even existed. Or that the man christianity attempts to remember had that name in the first place.

Anbesol wrote:
I also believe that the parable to his ressurection is that, although they silenced Jesus in body, his spirit lives on, and continued to flow through the work of his disciples. Do I think he literally ressurected? Hell no, I know a man of his calibur, would he TO have ressurected, would have continued to teach such wonderful work. He taught for 3-4 years, most spiritual masters teach for decades, Buddha taught for 49, until he died in his 80's. Christ brought such a message of peace, but he came to a society that was not ready for him, although he did not falter to the will of others in selfishness, this refusal to bend with the will of the oppressive people who suffered was looked at as blasphemy and intolerance, when in reality he was not being intolerant, just being unaffected by their intolerance, for this, he became like a sacrificial sheep to them, and let their intolerance be taken out on him, to raise their spirits, watching the brutal killing of a man in such a fashion is a good way to help wake people up, many of the people of the time that had seen of such acts actually began to practice kindness a lot better then ever before.

I think if jesus did exist and did do what it's suggested he did then he'd be absolutely disgusted with what he started, and wish he'd kept his mouth shut. I'd certainly react that way.

Anbesol wrote:
Jesus was a man of ethics and morals, but he knew the functions of them very thuroughly, and I can have a deep respect for other christians, because I know what an inspirational man Christ can actually be (to the mind that is open to receiving him), but when people make it out to be a "my god is better then your god" and this whole "believe or else" bullshit, then they segregate and they create the same intolerance Christ wished to eradicate. He is still being their sacrificial lamb, but were society to reform in global unity, their is a way that we can bring about an era that better understands Christs message, and does not abuse it so willingly as it is done. The problem is, this would require a lot of work and a lot of dedication from everybody, and ultimately we would need to reopen the canon, destroy the heirarchies of the church, and continue to write again in inspiration of god. The spirit of christ, in the metaphoric sense, lives on, why should his teachings stop? This is the ethics of the eastern religions, and I for one think its a much deeper and reason minded precept to take upon religion, we also must begin having open dialogues between varying religions, we must take the understanding that though their may be one goal, there are many paths, and if we worked together we could better share the work of these paths. If you say it is not possible, it has already begun very well in the east, and has been going on for a long time. Zen, is rooted in 3 very different bases of knowledge, The Knowledge of the Vedas, the knowledge of Confucias, and the Knowledge of Shinto. It is a culmination of the three, and an equally ecclectic assimilation of all of them, it borrows teachings from all, and it does not prolaim any sense of superiority. Most Buddhist practices incorporate other teachings as well, and many of them particularly include Christs messages, which were of pure conscious clarity.

Well, while you go around telling people how to be good, I'll go around chopping off the bad bits at the knee cap. Maybe we can meet in the middle for a BBQ. Unfortunately there are too many people in religious institutions more than willing to take up arms in defense of their indefensible beliefs. Someone has to hold them off while you tell them a better way.

Anbesol wrote:
So no, you guys do not conflict with any of my beliefs or thoughts, and I did not come here to change anyones minds. You guys keep believing whatever the hell you want to, why do I care what you believe? I never did. The only thing I was disgusted by was your blind intolerance towards other schools of thought because you superficially felt your school was supreme commander of the universe, it is not. I read an interesting thing today - Religion without science is superstition, Science without religion is materialism.

I don't think we're as blindly intolerant as you suspect we are. But it's certainly done a good job of getting peoples attention.

Anbesol wrote:
I sincerly express to you that your staple argument is a reciprocated destructive precept, I promise to you, that the age old argument that has two demanded answers, will lead to two people becoming more and more crazed and convicted against each other. What you need to do FIRST, is find out what you have in common, and then you can seperate yourselves from the differences. You guys came because the Christian Community has oppressed you, so now you seek vengeance and want to counter oppress, but oppression begets oppression, and its fighting fire with fire when fire is clearly fought with water.

I can't speak for the RRS, but I can certainly speak for myself. I tried being the nice guy and got nowhere. I see the world sliding deeper and deeper into religious darkness. When considering our technical capabilities as a species I truly worry that religion will end our society permanently if not fought off. I know there are a lot of people out there being nice about it. I also know that being nice about it isn't going to get through to everyone. Some people have to be an ass to get through an ass's thick skull. I'm suited to the task.

Anbesol wrote:
I do not ask you to change any of your beliefs that you hold your self, but perhaps, to help you seek to understand just WHY it is they believe what they believe, and it goes a lot deeper then most of you have ever been made aware of, it goes beyond their fear of death, their fear of death is what creates dogma, not religion, conviction is the sign of a frightened mind, not spirituality.

I've spent most of my life thinking about things like that. Religion is dogmatic by definition. Spirituality is not religion.

Anbesol wrote:
now, If you have heard what I said, perhaps you see the reason for the "Does God exist?" being an absurd and unproductive practice.

I can see how it seems that way to you. I disagree however. I have turned a number of people onto a brighter path with my methods. And my methods don't destroy spirituality, merely the dogmatic religion.

Anbesol wrote:
If you change it to show the direct contradictions between the teachings of christ and the followers, and the teachings of christ and the later books, then you will be succesful beyond your wildest measure, as these truths SHALL become self evident, and expressing them to people who admire this man, will help them to see, if you come at them with the lovingness Christ had, then again, you will be wildly succesful.

It would be nice. But as I alluded to above: been there, tried that, didn't work.

Anbesol wrote:
I am casting my pearls, and I hope that you can see them for what they are worth. If not, I sincerely do give up on this community, and will go on to the next.

If you feel you must leave then you are of course welcome to. But if you can keep the heat down and post like this every time(unless you're attacked of course) I see no problem with you remaining here. The more approaches to stopping mindless devotion the better.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Iruka Naminori
atheist
Iruka Naminori's picture
Posts: 1955
Joined: 2006-11-21
User is offlineOffline
Anbesol wrote:

Anbesol wrote:

you group of self-centered retard

/Moderator Hat On

My dear Anbesol, you are riding the ragged edge of disaster. It's seems you have a rather difficult time debating without sprinkling in a lot of baseless assertions and ad hominem attacks. Cut it out. You have been warned.

/Moderator Hat Off

ON EDIT: It looks like Susan beat me to it.  As long as you continue to post thoughtfully, Anbesol, you are more than welcome to stay. 

Books on atheism, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


Iruka Naminori
atheist
Iruka Naminori's picture
Posts: 1955
Joined: 2006-11-21
User is offlineOffline
serotonin_wraith wrote: I

serotonin_wraith wrote:

I would be someone who did have a bad religious experience during childhood- not any one thing in particular, just the whole thing. I honestly believed I was going to die come armageddon, because I could not find it in me to love such a bastard of a god. It was hard to see the whole picture back then, being raised in it it's all I knew, but I knew that I'd rather have died than think of gays and women as less than equal. I thought that was disgusting.

Now I'm out of it I've gotten a much better view of every side of the argument and I see no reason to believe in God. I hate to see religion have any influence on politics and my daily life, but one of my main reasons for wanting it gone is to prevent other kids having to go through the same kind of shit I did. It sickens me to know of children being raised in their parents' religion- it's something that's forced on them. If they're adults and they choose it, that's fine. But the children don't have a say, and when they reach adulthood it's hard for them to shake off all the brainwashing.

My fundy upbringing certainly carried with it a lot of really bad experiences.  It also left me totally unprepared for the world as it really is.  However, my eventual atheism took a long time to solidify and the reasons were multiple.  Logic play a rather large part as did my disgust with religion and how it mindfucks its adherents, particularly children that were brainwashed. 

Books on atheism, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


Iruka Naminori
atheist
Iruka Naminori's picture
Posts: 1955
Joined: 2006-11-21
User is offlineOffline
The Patrician wrote: I was

The Patrician wrote:

I was going to write a reasoned response then I saw who the topic creator was so instead I'll settle for this:

 

Y halo thar subjective comment LOL!1!!1!

Actually Lux is engaging us openly.  It's the other guy with the "subjective comments." 

Books on atheism, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


marcusfish
Superfan
marcusfish's picture
Posts: 676
Joined: 2007-05-11
User is offlineOffline
Iruka Naminori wrote: The

Iruka Naminori wrote:
The Patrician wrote:

I was going to write a reasoned response then I saw who the topic creator was so instead I'll settle for this:

 

Y halo thar subjective comment LOL!1!!1!

Actually Lux is engaging us openly. It's the other guy with the "subjective comments."

Truly.

Lux tried to start a topic but has been completely overshadowed by arbitols posts. Does anyone even remember what the original post was about? 


JCE
Bronze Member
JCE's picture
Posts: 1219
Joined: 2007-03-20
User is offlineOffline
marcusfish wrote: Truly.

marcusfish wrote:

Truly.

Lux tried to start a topic but has been completely overshadowed by arbitols posts. Does anyone even remember what the original post was about?

I think he was trying to explain his perspective and open a dialog with us to achieve better understanding.  I hope Lux comes back and responds to my post.


marcusfish
Superfan
marcusfish's picture
Posts: 676
Joined: 2007-05-11
User is offlineOffline
jce wrote: My parents were

jce wrote:

My parents were not bible-thumpers so good and bad was taught from the standpoint of "treat others as you want to be treated" but the bible was never mentioned. I guess my question to you is, do you think you would be less moral without the bible and why?

Ah yes, there was a constructive discussion going on here. Now I remember...sorry for aiding in it's derail. (no sarcasm intended)


JCE
Bronze Member
JCE's picture
Posts: 1219
Joined: 2007-03-20
User is offlineOffline
marcusfish wrote: Ah yes,

marcusfish wrote:
Ah yes, there was a constructive discussion going on here. Now I remember...sorry for aiding in it's derail. (no sarcasm intended)

No worries!  That guy is a tough one NOT to respond to - he seems to get under the skin.  Like a tick. 


Iruka Naminori
atheist
Iruka Naminori's picture
Posts: 1955
Joined: 2006-11-21
User is offlineOffline
jce wrote: marcusfish

jce wrote:

marcusfish wrote:
Ah yes, there was a constructive discussion going on here. Now I remember...sorry for aiding in it's derail. (no sarcasm intended)

No worries! That guy is a tough one NOT to respond to - he seems to get under the skin. Like a tick.

Yeah, you'd think with a limited insultory vocabulary consisting of "idiots" and "kids" we could ignore him.   Trolls: if we didn't feed them, they wouldn't stay.

OK.  Back to Lux's topic. 

Books on atheism, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


Maragon
Maragon's picture
Posts: 351
Joined: 2007-04-01
User is offlineOffline
I really enjoy how Anbesol

I really enjoy how Anbesol generalizes all of us here as 'kids'.

 

I understand that our logical posistion and truthful statements about your religion may be disquieting to you, but calling us kids is such an opaque attempt at decrying our claims.

Simply labelling us as kids doesn't make our points unfounded, 'immature' or unrealistic.

 I'm sorry that you are so blinded by your theism that you need to resort to petty ad hominem. 


mr subjective
Posts: 1
Joined: 2007-05-22
User is offlineOffline
Yep

Sigh. (I hope you can all hear the world-weariness in that sigh). Look. Yes, this site is horrible for the cause of atheism. So far, from reading the threads, I notice more irrationality and emotion than I do "rationality".

Let us look at several of the different problems with this site and this debate. Ok. Christianity is an ideology. Science is an ideology. Thinking in any particular pattern means that you are operating under an ideology. Now, I have no problem with people operating under different ideologies. Eh. Whoever understands the world in whatever ways they understand them blah blah blah… it doesn’t matter.

Here is what matters. You are putting two different ideologies against one another. In one, a God can not exist because he (as at least one person has stated on these forums) is not coherent. In the other, God is the central point from which the rest of the ideology expands. Trying to prove one ideology from the stance of the other is foolish. While they may have overlapping points, telling someone to prove God with science is of course nonsensical. It would be the same as telling someone to use the Bible to disprove God. Therefore, the debates are about attempting to have people switch their ideologies. This is why people say that science is a religion. It is not a religion (yet), but instead like a religion in that it is an ideology.


Why would anyone try to change someone’s ideology?

1. Well, if he/she believes that that ideology is detrimental for someone else to hold.
2. He/she acts out of resentment towards a particular ideology.
3. He/she is irrational.

If someone actively attempts to support atheism or tear down theism for the 2nd and/or 3rd reason, then maybe they would be better served to examine themselves a bit first.

If someone chooses his/her path based on the 1st reason, then good luck. However, might I suggest that the tactics used by the rational responders and forum members are probably not the most effective. It comes off as a little heavy-handed. I am not saying it is not effective, but you might want to do some research on other methods of persuasion.

Ps. Could everyone try to stop being quite so arrogant. It becomes really grating. Granted, it is something that I am trying to keep down in myself but I truly try to respect your intelligence and your point. So try to respect everyone else’s. Ok?

Love,
Mr Subjective (ish)


Susan
Susan's picture
Posts: 3561
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
Mr Subjective, Your post

Mr Subjective,

Your post has nothing to do with the original post.

Do not come into this forum and onto this site to complain about how things are done here.

Some people have what you call a heavy-handed approach, others prefer a gentler approach.  Each is welcome to their own as long as they stay within each forum's rules. 

If you want a gentle approach, confine yourself to the Kill 'Em With Kindness forum.

However, if you venture into the Atheist vs Theist forum, it's no-holds-barred and the gloves come off. 

Please take a few minutes and read the rules of this site.  There is a link at the top of the page.

 

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
mr subjective wrote: Sigh.

mr subjective wrote:
Sigh. (I hope you can all hear the world-weariness in that sigh). Look. Yes, this site is horrible for the cause of atheism. So far, from reading the threads, I notice more irrationality and emotion than I do "rationality".

Let us look at several of the different problems with this site and this debate. Ok. Christianity is an ideology. Science is an ideology. Thinking in any particular pattern means that you are operating under an ideology. Now, I have no problem with people operating under different ideologies. Eh. Whoever understands the world in whatever ways they understand them blah blah blah… it doesn’t matter.

Here is what matters. You are putting two different ideologies against one another. In one, a God can not exist because he (as at least one person has stated on these forums) is not coherent. In the other, God is the central point from which the rest of the ideology expands. Trying to prove one ideology from the stance of the other is foolish. While they may have overlapping points, telling someone to prove God with science is of course nonsensical. It would be the same as telling someone to use the Bible to disprove God. Therefore, the debates are about attempting to have people switch their ideologies. This is why people say that science is a religion. It is not a religion (yet), but instead like a religion in that it is an ideology.


Why would anyone try to change someone’s ideology?

1. Well, if he/she believes that that ideology is detrimental for someone else to hold.
2. He/she acts out of resentment towards a particular ideology.
3. He/she is irrational.

If someone actively attempts to support atheism or tear down theism for the 2nd and/or 3rd reason, then maybe they would be better served to examine themselves a bit first.

If someone chooses his/her path based on the 1st reason, then good luck. However, might I suggest that the tactics used by the rational responders and forum members are probably not the most effective. It comes off as a little heavy-handed. I am not saying it is not effective, but you might want to do some research on other methods of persuasion.

Ps. Could everyone try to stop being quite so arrogant. It becomes really grating. Granted, it is something that I am trying to keep down in myself but I truly try to respect your intelligence and your point. So try to respect everyone else’s. Ok?

Love,
Mr Subjective (ish)

I take number 1. And respect is earned, not given. Religion deserves no respect.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


marcusfish
Superfan
marcusfish's picture
Posts: 676
Joined: 2007-05-11
User is offlineOffline
mr subjective wrote:

mr subjective wrote:
Sigh. (I hope you can all hear the world-weariness in that sigh). Look. Yes, this site is horrible for the cause of atheism. So far, from reading the threads, I notice more irrationality and emotion than I do "rationality".

The presence of emotion does not make a claim irrational. The absense of logic and/or a sound argument makes a claim irrational.

Quote:
Christianity is an ideology.

Based on blind faith.

Quote:
Science is an ideology.

Based on verifiable facts which go under pain staking scrutiny by the scientific community before any idea is given even the slightest wieght.


Quote:
telling someone to prove God with science is of course nonsensical. It would be the same as telling someone to use the Bible to disprove God.

This is due to the fact that God has no definable perameters. Proving or disproving an idea that begins and ends in the imagination of the person presenting it would be impossible. I agree.

Quote:
Therefore, the debates are about attempting to have people switch their ideologies.

That would be one way to put it. I would put it closer to my trying to get someone to see past blind faith. I am not sure that "thinking" is really an ideology unto itself.

Quote:
This is why people say that science is a religion.

No, people say that science is a religion in order to change the meaning of the word and put science in the same mystical / nonsensical arena as religion. It never works, but I doubt that theists will ever stop trying.

Quote:
Why would anyone try to change someone’s ideology?

1. Well, if he/she believes that that ideology is detrimental for someone else to hold.

If I were trying to change someones way of thinking this would be the best fit of the options you provided. But again, I am not sure that changing ideology is really the same as "thinking".



Quote:
If someone chooses his/her path based on the 1st reason, then good luck. However, might I suggest that the tactics used by the rational responders and forum members are probably not the most effective. It comes off as a little heavy-handed. I am not saying it is not effective, but you might want to do some research on other methods of persuasion.

This discussion happens on many different levels. The RRS takes one particular approach which is affective in it's own goals. I find it likely that you don't actually understand how their "radical" approach to this argument actually works.

I can explain my understanding on this topic if you like.

Quote:
Ps. Could everyone try to stop being quite so arrogant. It becomes really grating. Granted, it is something that I am trying to keep down in myself but I truly try to respect your intelligence and your point. So try to respect everyone else’s. Ok?

The arrogance in this particular (and the other ten topics hijacked by retardo boy) topic was prompted by the relentless insults presented by ambesol. It's very difficult to remain constructive when you're called an "idiot" over and over.

 


jcgadfly
Superfan
Posts: 6791
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
jce wrote: marcusfish

jce wrote:

marcusfish wrote:
Ah yes, there was a constructive discussion going on here. Now I remember...sorry for aiding in it's derail. (no sarcasm intended)

No worries! That guy is a tough one NOT to respond to - he seems to get under the skin. Like a tick.

What can you say about a guy who take his name from a numbing gel?

Lux, I appreciate what you've brought up. Me, I believe my atheism was a result of both bad experiences and research. I was in a church that paid lip service to the Prince of Peace while rooting for Bush's war. I saw people doing things to each other and around my community and holding attitudes that would make the Christ (as I understood him) vomit to which they replied "We're under grace, not under law." This includes the woman to whom I am (for the moment) married. I also saw an annoying desire to replace thinking with something called faith.

As I visited other churches (on my own and in a gospel band) I saw similar things. So I began to wonder if there was somthing wrong with the system I looked in the Bible (the book which pastors told me held all the answers I ever needed) and wound up more confused than before because it seemed to justify their actions with the words of God.

At present, I don't know that there is or isn't a God but don't see any evidence for belief in one. I still have a desire to do religious theatre (acting, directing and playwriting -my Christian mom looks at that and stlil sees hope for me). There's still a part of me (this is where I will probably lose what little atheist credibility I have) that would like there to be a God that doesn't get ashamed and angry at people thinking about him more deeply and I do miss the fellowship (not a lot of atheist/freethought groups in my part of Indiana). So there are bits of confusion here and there but on the whole I feel more emotionally stable since I lost the need to try to measure up to a God that made me feel worthless no matter how many of his hoops I jumped through.

I hope I didn't commit another thread jacking - I didn't mean it as such. 

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


marcusfish
Superfan
marcusfish's picture
Posts: 676
Joined: 2007-05-11
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote: There's

jcgadfly wrote:

There's still a part of me (this is where I will probably lose what little atheist credibility I have) that would like there to be a God

Eh, fuck all who think you need to be decisive one way or the other. You're thinking, you're questioning, you're reaching out beyond what you're told by dogma (or anyone / thing for that matter) that you should feel. To me, this is what is important.

Having the answer, being "sure" about your decisions and your feelings? Over-rated boyo. We'll all be dead sooner than we would like so I don't recommend getting all twisted up in the little stuff.