Evil And Suffering

shortandy
Posts: 41
Joined: 2007-05-23
User is offlineOffline
Evil And Suffering

Here is a question that my mind is having trouble with. I just watched the ABC debate and their was a lady who seemed pretty upset about cancer. Here is my trouble...if there is no diety who played a part in the creation of the world, and everything that is formed came as a result of evolution and a Big Bang, then what right do I have to complain about evil or suffering? A Christian friend of mine posed this to me. He said, "If everything happened by chaos then why should we expect anything else?"

The only real explaination that I can come up with is that we evolved into something that is open to getting cancer or AIDS or anything else. Is complaining about the problems in our world a good argument to use.

Just some stuff Ive been thinking about.


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Just because we shouldn't

Just because we shouldn't expect anything else doesn't mean we shouldn't work to change things for our own betterment.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


IzzyPop
IzzyPop's picture
Posts: 116
Joined: 2007-05-09
User is offlineOffline
shortandy wrote: A

shortandy wrote:
A Christian friend of mine posed this to me. He said, "If everything happened by chaos then why should we expect anything else?"

Short answer.  We souldn't expect anything else.   It is what it is.  Cancer, disease, and evil all come with life on this planet.  As stated above, just because it is to be expected doesn't mean it had to be accepted.

I think the more telling question is, "If this was all created by a benevolent and just God, why shouldn't we expect something else?"

"When you hit your thumb with a hammer it's nice to be able to blaspheme. It takes a special kind of atheist to jump up and down shout, 'Oh, random fluctuations-in-the-space-time-continuum!'"-Terry Pratchett


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15922
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
shortandy wrote:

shortandy wrote:

Here is a question that my mind is having trouble with. I just watched the ABC debate and their was a lady who seemed pretty upset about cancer. Here is my trouble...if there is no diety who played a part in the creation of the world, and everything that is formed came as a result of evolution and a Big Bang, then what right do I have to complain about evil or suffering? A Christian friend of mine posed this to me. He said, "If everything happened by chaos then why should we expect anything else?"

The only real explaination that I can come up with is that we evolved into something that is open to getting cancer or AIDS or anything else. Is complaining about the problems in our world a good argument to use.

Just some stuff Ive been thinking about.

Just because something happens, doesnt mean we want it to happen, or that we dont want to minimize harm because something happens.

It is a far more abhorant idea to think someone promising to protect you, gives you a garuntee, and then when you dont get protected, they blame you. I certainly wouldn't hire a security guard or baby sitter that did that, would you?

I wouldnt want cancer for the same reason I wouldn't want bamboo stuck under my fingernails. But if either were to happen to me I'm not going to make up Superman vs Kriptonite explinations in order to find solutions. No need for magical sky daddies to state the obvious.

Quote:
The only real explaination that I can come up with is that we evolved into something that is open to getting cancer or AIDS or anything else.

Not a valid explination at all. You are ellivating the human species to something higher than other animals. If a volcano errupts the animals run as well, that has nothing to do with cancer. Why do those animals run? Why dont they just let the lava and fire burn them?

Recognizing reality doesnt mean that reality is always disirable.

 

 

"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


thingy
SuperfanGold Member
thingy's picture
Posts: 1022
Joined: 2007-02-07
User is offlineOffline
shortandy wrote: Here is my

shortandy wrote:
Here is my trouble...if there is no diety who played a part in the creation of the world, and everything that is formed came as a result of evolution and a Big Bang, then what right do I have to complain about evil or suffering? A Christian friend of mine posed this to me. He said, "If everything happened by chaos then why should we expect anything else?"

I would argue that you have things backwards.  If everything was the will of God (free will argument doesn't work here as people do not choose to have cancer, be hit by busses, or contract other illnesses), then why should we bother with medicine or ways to cure/repair people?  If all this happened by the will of god, then why should we expect anything else?

 

If it's by chaos (and I use the term loosely), then it's without reason, meaning or intention so it's better reason for us to try to find ways to fix these flaws and problems. 

Organised religion is the ultimate form of blasphemy.
Censored and blacked out for internet access in ANZ!
AU: http://nocleanfeed.com/ | NZ: http://nzblackout.org/


shortandy
Posts: 41
Joined: 2007-05-23
User is offlineOffline
IzzyPop wrote: shortandy

IzzyPop wrote:

shortandy wrote:
A Christian friend of mine posed this to me. He said, "If everything happened by chaos then why should we expect anything else?"

Short answer.  We souldn't expect anything else.   It is what it is.  Cancer, disease, and evil all come with life on this planet.  As stated above, just because it is to be expected doesn't mean it had to be accepted.

I think the more telling question is, "If this was all created by a benevolent and just God, why shouldn't we expect something else?"

That is my point. If there is no god who created the world, ie we are here by chance then we shouldn't expect something else. I am not suggesting that we should like it or even accept it but if there is no deity then we are simply complaining to open air. Especially for the full-blown athiest, because he or she doesn't believe anything is out there.


shortandy
Posts: 41
Joined: 2007-05-23
User is offlineOffline
thingy wrote: shortandy

thingy wrote:

shortandy wrote:
Here is my trouble...if there is no diety who played a part in the creation of the world, and everything that is formed came as a result of evolution and a Big Bang, then what right do I have to complain about evil or suffering? A Christian friend of mine posed this to me. He said, "If everything happened by chaos then why should we expect anything else?"

I would argue that you have things backwards.  If everything was the will of God (free will argument doesn't work here as people do not choose to have cancer, be hit by busses, or contract other illnesses), then why should we bother with medicine or ways to cure/repair people?  If all this happened by the will of god, then why should we expect anything else?

 

If it's by chaos (and I use the term loosely), then it's without reason, meaning or intention so it's better reason for us to try to find ways to fix these flaws and problems. 

No my argument is valid because its from your perspective. If there is no god, no diety out there, as the athiest asserts then evolution is the creative force behind all we see and even don't see. So no need for you to keep mentioning a god here. I believe we should bother with medicine and healing people, but why complain about the things medicine has yet to find a cure to. As I said before, if there is no god then we are complaining to open air and how rediculous is that!


pariahjane
pariahjane's picture
Posts: 1595
Joined: 2006-05-06
User is offlineOffline
Not to be rude, but instead

Not to be rude, but instead of complaining, perhaps we should be using that energy to find ways to alleviate the pain and suffering.
Secondly, when you talk about something that is bothering you, its a mental release. For example, when I complain about my commute, I feel better because I have released some frustration. It has absolutely nothing at all to do with god.

If god takes life he's an indian giver


shortandy
Posts: 41
Joined: 2007-05-23
User is offlineOffline
Brian: "Not a valid

Brian: "Not a valid explination at all. You are ellivating the human species to something higher than other animals. If a volcano errupts the animals run as well, that has nothing to do with cancer. Why do those animals run? Why dont they just let the lava and fire burn them? Recognizing reality doesnt mean that reality is always disirable."

 Yes it is valid because humanity is the highest creature in the evolutionary process. We are top of the food chain my friend. And in our evolutionary process we have managed to become susceptable to AIDS and cancer and modern medicine has yet to find the cure. Do we want to find the cure? Of course we do and we are working towards it. ARe these things desired? Of course not. But if there is no god to complain to then why complain? How is this a legitamate gripe if you are an atheist?


shortandy
Posts: 41
Joined: 2007-05-23
User is offlineOffline
pariahjane wrote: Not to be

pariahjane wrote:
Not to be rude, but instead of complaining, perhaps we should be using that energy to find ways to alleviate the pain and suffering. Secondly, when you talk about something that is bothering you, its a mental release. For example, when I complain about my commute, I feel better because I have released some frustration. It has absolutely nothing at all to do with god.

Exactly! Your point is well taken and valid. But why do many athiest complain about the idea of a god and suffering? Its just silly for them to do so. Complain to your friends...sure! Complain to the doctors....tell them to hurry up! But complain to or about a diety you don't believe is out there....crazy!


pariahjane
pariahjane's picture
Posts: 1595
Joined: 2006-05-06
User is offlineOffline
shortandy

shortandy wrote:

pariahjane wrote:
Not to be rude, but instead of complaining, perhaps we should be using that energy to find ways to alleviate the pain and suffering. Secondly, when you talk about something that is bothering you, its a mental release. For example, when I complain about my commute, I feel better because I have released some frustration. It has absolutely nothing at all to do with god.

Exactly! Your point is well taken and valid. But why do many athiest complain about the idea of a god and suffering? Its just silly for them to do so. Complain to your friends...sure! Complain to the doctors....tell them to hurry up! But complain to or about a diety you don't believe is out there....crazy!


I don't know any atheists who complain to a god. If you're wondering why we discuss god and religion so much its because of all the issues it has created. I'm not quite sure what you're getting at.

If god takes life he's an indian giver


shortandy
Posts: 41
Joined: 2007-05-23
User is offlineOffline
pariahjane

pariahjane wrote:
shortandy wrote:

pariahjane wrote:
Not to be rude, but instead of complaining, perhaps we should be using that energy to find ways to alleviate the pain and suffering. Secondly, when you talk about something that is bothering you, its a mental release. For example, when I complain about my commute, I feel better because I have released some frustration. It has absolutely nothing at all to do with god.

Exactly! Your point is well taken and valid. But why do many athiest complain about the idea of a god and suffering? Its just silly for them to do so. Complain to your friends...sure! Complain to the doctors....tell them to hurry up! But complain to or about a diety you don't believe is out there....crazy!

I don't know any atheists who complain to a god. If you're wondering why we discuss god and religion so much its because of all the issues it has created. I'm not quite sure what you're getting at.

I don't sit around and complain about Santa Clause, even though I know he is not real and I think its stupid to teach our kids that one man can do all that in one night. Supporting such a thing, I believe, keeps our kids from starting off as rational individuals. So why would I sit around, devote a website to bashing, and spend time and energy on something that I don't believe in. If people want to be stupid then let them be stupid. Its there right. If someone wants to tell me why I should do Santa Clause with my kids that is there right, but I have the right to tell them they are stupid.

Remember, what spured me on to post this issue was the ABC debate I just watched. A woman in the audience was upset about cancer and she voiced her frustration on the matter to the two christian guys. But if she doesn't believe in their god, why get so upset at him?


pariahjane
pariahjane's picture
Posts: 1595
Joined: 2006-05-06
User is offlineOffline
Well, complaining about

Well, complaining about Santa Claus would be stupid, wouldn't it? I mean, is there a law against gay marriage because of Santa Claus? No. The reason non-theists take issue with religion is because it effects people, oftentimes negatively. While I don't believe there is a god, I do believe that people have certain rights that religion tends to stand in the way of.

I'm not that women, so I don't know why she was frustrated.  Perhaps because she thought that they were avoiding her question or skirting around it.  I can only speculate.

As far as I'm concerned if religion stayed where it belonged (in the church and in the home) then there would be no reason to have a website. 

If god takes life he's an indian giver


ObnoxiousBitch
Superfan
ObnoxiousBitch's picture
Posts: 115
Joined: 2006-02-22
User is offlineOffline
shortandy

shortandy wrote:

pariahjane wrote:
Not to be rude, but instead of complaining, perhaps we should be using that energy to find ways to alleviate the pain and suffering. Secondly, when you talk about something that is bothering you, its a mental release. For example, when I complain about my commute, I feel better because I have released some frustration. It has absolutely nothing at all to do with god.

Exactly! Your point is well taken and valid. But why do many athiest complain about the idea of a god and suffering? Its just silly for them to do so. Complain to your friends...sure! Complain to the doctors....tell them to hurry up! But complain to or about a diety you don't believe is out there....crazy!

What you're calling "complaining" is a mischaracterization. The problem of evil is an argument that points out the logical inconsistency of an omnibenevolent deity who clearly allows (and therefore approves of) malevolence against and suffering of its creations.

Furthermore, the claims of some Christians that physical imperfection, evil and suffering is due to "sin" is an insult to my intelligence (I cannot speak for other atheists) due to its patent absurdity, and if I'm "complaining" to or about anyone, it's the people offering up such ludicrous arguments and attempting to explain away how their omnibenevolent deity loves us so much it allows atrocities, diseases and every other "evil" that befalls humanity; yet if we don't worship it, we go to hell to suffer in eternity.

Once upon a time, obvious physical imperfections were considered a physical manifestation of their victims' inherent "evil" nature. Babies born deformed were left out in the elements to die. I think people living in these modern times tend to forget that their ancient religious texts, and the barbarism and atrocities therein, show that at one time there was consensus among people that these acts were somehow "right and just" - even though we now know that physical deformities are in no way an indication of a person being "evil." We've moved beyond superstition as science explains more and more about the real world.

 Edit to add: There's a "Cancer Lady" thread that you might be interested in here:

http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/the_rational_response_squad_radio_show/the_rational_response_squad/7248

(Mod - if you can fix the link that'd be great - for some reason the link button's not working for me at the moment. Thx, Rox) 

Invisible friends are for children and psychopaths.


Tilberian
Moderator
Tilberian's picture
Posts: 1118
Joined: 2006-11-27
User is offlineOffline
shortandy wrote: I don't

shortandy wrote:

I don't sit around and complain about Santa Clause, even though I know he is not real and I think its stupid to teach our kids that one man can do all that in one night. Supporting such a thing, I believe, keeps our kids from starting off as rational individuals. So why would I sit around, devote a website to bashing, and spend time and energy on something that I don't believe in. If people want to be stupid then let them be stupid. Its there right. If someone wants to tell me why I should do Santa Clause with my kids that is there right, but I have the right to tell them they are stupid.

If there were a bunch of people around who thought that Santa Claus was really real and they wanted science classes to teach that his elves made the world in his workshop at the north pole, I'd be posting on a website attacking that belief, too.

Don't try to pretend that religion is a harmless pastime. People are flying planes into buildings because of it. 

shortandy wrote:

Remember, what spured me on to post this issue was the ABC debate I just watched. A woman in the audience was upset about cancer and she voiced her frustration on the matter to the two christian guys. But if she doesn't believe in their god, why get so upset at him?

*Yawn* So all this is really another attempt to put forth the theory that atheists really believe in God but are mad at him? OK, then I submit that you don't really believe in God, you just pretend to so that you can use the church for weddings and funerals. Now how are you going to refute me?

 

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


shortandy
Posts: 41
Joined: 2007-05-23
User is offlineOffline
pariahjane wrote: Well,

pariahjane wrote:

Well, complaining about Santa Claus would be stupid, wouldn't it? I mean, is there a law against gay marriage because of Santa Claus? No. The reason non-theists take issue with religion is because it effects people, oftentimes negatively. While I don't believe there is a god, I do believe that people have certain rights that religion tends to stand in the way of.

I'm not that women, so I don't know why she was frustrated.  Perhaps because she thought that they were avoiding her question or skirting around it.  I can only speculate.

As far as I'm concerned if religion stayed where it belonged (in the church and in the home) then there would be no reason to have a website. 

You wont find me trying to rebuttal your feelings about rights. That is valid as far as I am concerned. But I am sure that there are people of various religions that believe and wish athiesm would be kept at home then the world might be better. But can a person really seperate their beliefs from their daily lives and practices? I don't think so. A muslims beliefs are going to come out in his or her living, voting, etc, etc...just like your athiestic philosophy and world-view will come out in yours. Right now you are just out numbered. The poll that ABCf took, in reference to the debate shows that. There are way more diest than there are athiest. Right now it is survival of the fittest and the diest have it. Maybe that will change. Who really knows?


shortandy
Posts: 41
Joined: 2007-05-23
User is offlineOffline
ObnoxiousBroad

ObnoxiousBroad wrote:
shortandy wrote:

pariahjane wrote:
Not to be rude, but instead of complaining, perhaps we should be using that energy to find ways to alleviate the pain and suffering. Secondly, when you talk about something that is bothering you, its a mental release. For example, when I complain about my commute, I feel better because I have released some frustration. It has absolutely nothing at all to do with god.

Exactly! Your point is well taken and valid. But why do many athiest complain about the idea of a god and suffering? Its just silly for them to do so. Complain to your friends...sure! Complain to the doctors....tell them to hurry up! But complain to or about a diety you don't believe is out there....crazy!

What you're calling "complaining" is a mischaracterization. The problem of evil is an argument that points out the logical inconsistency of an omnibenevolent deity who clearly allows (and therefore approves of) malevolence against and suffering of its creations.

Furthermore, the claims of some Christians that physical imperfection, evil and suffering is due to "sin" is an insult to my intelligence (I cannot speak for other atheists) due to its patent absurdity, and if I'm "complaining" to or about anyone, it's the people offering up such ludicrous arguments and attempting to explain away how their omnibenevolent deity loves us so much it allows atrocities, diseases and every other "evil" that befalls humanity; yet if we don't worship it, we go to hell to suffer in eternity.

Once upon a time, obvious physical imperfections were considered a physical manifestation of their victims' inherent "evil" nature. Babies born deformed were left out in the elements to die. I think people living in these modern times tend to forget that their ancient religious texts, and the barbarism and atrocities therein, show that at one time there was consensus among people that these acts were somehow "right and just" - even though we now know that physical deformities are in no way an indication of a person being "evil." We've moved beyond superstition as science explains more and more about the real world.

 Edit to add: There's a "Cancer Lady" thread that you might be interested in here:

http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/the_rational_response_squad_radio_show/the_rational_response_squad/7248

(Mod - if you can fix the link that'd be great - for some reason the link button's not working for me at the moment. Thx, Rox) 

Its not mischaracterization at all. While this idea may not apply to all athiest it certainly applies to some.  I personally know some athiest who spend more time talking about the God of christianity than chrisitans I personally know.

In your mind evil and suffering may seem to be a proof there is no huge diety out there, but that is truely only a matter of your opinon and thought process, at best. There are many that hold to a view that the suffering in the world is spoken of in their religious text, there-by validating its claims; something I think you may have a hard time dealing with.  


IzzyPop
IzzyPop's picture
Posts: 116
Joined: 2007-05-09
User is offlineOffline
shortandy wrote: You wont

shortandy wrote:
You wont find me trying to rebuttal your feelings about rights. That is valid as far as I am concerned. But I am sure that there are people of various religions that believe and wish athiesm would be kept at home then the world might be better. But can a person really seperate their beliefs from their daily lives and practices? I don't think so. A muslims beliefs are going to come out in his or her living, voting, etc, etc...just like your athiestic philosophy and world-view will come out in yours. Right now you are just out numbered. The poll that ABCf took, in reference to the debate shows that. There are way more diest than there are athiest. Right now it is survival of the fittest and the diest have it. Maybe that will change. Who really knows?

And that is why we are here.  If we keep it in the home and do nothing then nothing happens.  The staus quo remains and that is unacceptable.

"When you hit your thumb with a hammer it's nice to be able to blaspheme. It takes a special kind of atheist to jump up and down shout, 'Oh, random fluctuations-in-the-space-time-continuum!'"-Terry Pratchett


JCE
Bronze Member
JCE's picture
Posts: 1219
Joined: 2007-03-20
User is offlineOffline
shortandy wrote: You wont

shortandy wrote:
You wont find me trying to rebuttal your feelings about rights. That is valid as far as I am concerned. But I am sure that there are people of various religions that believe and wish athiesm would be kept at home then the world might be better. But can a person really seperate their beliefs from their daily lives and practices? I don't think so. A muslims beliefs are going to come out in his or her living, voting, etc, etc...just like your athiestic philosophy and world-view will come out in yours. Right now you are just out numbered. The poll that ABCf took, in reference to the debate shows that. There are way more diest than there are athiest. Right now it is survival of the fittest and the diest have it. Maybe that will change. Who really knows?

First of all, it is spelled a-t-h-E-I-s-t. Secondly, d-e-i-s-t is not the same as theist.

It concerns me when I run into people that claim to hold their belief to some higher standard where others are not allowed to question or challenge it. Almost every theist that I run into has no problem whatsoever ridiculing me for my non-belief and yet they scream that I am not being respectful if I ridicule their belief. Atheism is not a religion so there is no need to "keep it at home" and until theists learn to keep their garbage to themselves, then yes I will continue to speak up about it - loudly.

I did not see the "cancer woman" but is it not possible that she was simply challenging their faith in a god that allows atrocities? Please look around this site and read what theists accuse atheists of - immorality, hopelessness, depression, hate, satan worship. None of these things are true but they have been led to believe this BECAUSE of their religion. Anything that teaches intolerance and hatred should be eradicated.

This is just a guess, but I would be willing to bet good money that a full 75% of believers have no idea what they truly believe or why. No examination of faith has been done, they simply accept what they have been told since they were young and that is it. The problem comes in when the church TELLS these people how to vote and what to think. Do I think a person can separate their beliefs from their daily life? YES! OF COURSE THEY CAN! It is a matter of applying critical thinking, which sadly most people do not do. They get confused and it hurts to think so much and it requires a lot of effort to research an issue, whine, whine, whine. So, they go to church (a place where they have been told no one means to harm them and religion does good things) and listen to whatever the church leaders tell them and vote or treat people accordingly. Facts and evidence are laid to waste as the church continues to promote it's own agenda and control people while collecting "tithes" so they can build an even bigger church. Great system.


shortandy
Posts: 41
Joined: 2007-05-23
User is offlineOffline
jce wrote: shortandy

jce wrote:

shortandy wrote:
You wont find me trying to rebuttal your feelings about rights. That is valid as far as I am concerned. But I am sure that there are people of various religions that believe and wish athiesm would be kept at home then the world might be better. But can a person really seperate their beliefs from their daily lives and practices? I don't think so. A muslims beliefs are going to come out in his or her living, voting, etc, etc...just like your athiestic philosophy and world-view will come out in yours. Right now you are just out numbered. The poll that ABCf took, in reference to the debate shows that. There are way more diest than there are athiest. Right now it is survival of the fittest and the diest have it. Maybe that will change. Who really knows?

First of all, it is spelled a-t-h-E-I-s-t. Secondly, d-e-i-s-t is not the same as theist.

It concerns me when I run into people that claim to hold their belief to some higher standard where others are not allowed to question or challenge it. Almost every theist that I run into has no problem whatsoever ridiculing me for my non-belief and yet they scream that I am not being respectful if I ridicule their belief. Atheism is not a religion so there is no need to "keep it at home" and until theists learn to keep their garbage to themselves, then yes I will continue to speak up about it - loudly.

I did not see the "cancer woman" but is it not possible that she was simply challenging their faith in a god that allows atrocities? Please look around this site and read what theists accuse atheists of - immorality, hopelessness, depression, hate, satan worship. None of these things are true but they have been led to believe this BECAUSE of their religion. Anything that teaches intolerance and hatred should be eradicated.

This is just a guess, but I would be willing to bet good money that a full 75% of believers have no idea what they truly believe or why. No examination of faith has been done, they simply accept what they have been told since they were young and that is it. The problem comes in when the church TELLS these people how to vote and what to think. Do I think a person can separate their beliefs from their daily life? YES! OF COURSE THEY CAN! It is a matter of applying critical thinking, which sadly most people do not do. They get confused and it hurts to think so much and it requires a lot of effort to research an issue, whine, whine, whine. So, they go to church (a place where they have been told no one means to harm them and religion does good things) and listen to whatever the church leaders tell them and vote or treat people accordingly. Facts and evidence are laid to waste as the church continues to promote it's own agenda and control people while collecting "tithes" so they can build an even bigger church. Great system.

Sorry that I am a horrible speller, but I am a thinker as are you. To say that we can seperate our world-view and or beliefs from our daily lives is ignorant. How can such a thing be. What we believe and our world-view are who we are. When you vote or speak on abortion, women's rights, homosexuality, etc, etc, you bring you athiest mind-set to the table. You can't help it. I would venture to say that when you speak out against chrisitanity specifically (how come no one on this site speaks out so loudly against Islam?) you bring your atheist bias to the the discussion. Again you cant really help it no more than I can. WE CANT SEPERATE OUR BELIEFS FROM OUR DAILY LIVES.

You speak of intolerance and hatred....come on. Can you tell me with a straight face that there are no atheist not intolerant towards theist? To answer yes would be ignorant as well my dear. You condem theistic views as "garbage". That sounds like its full of tolerance let me tell you.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15922
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
I dont think it "keep your

I dont think it "keep your garbage to yourself" is an accurate thing to say. It leads the bigoted fearmongers the impression that us atheists want to use goverment to opress them.

Lets get one thing out of the way before I continue.

"I think you are full of shit"

They say, "I think you are full of shit"

So it is fair. Now lets make it clear to Christians so that their is no missunderstanding.

We wouldnt give a shit less if somone believed Napolean was living in their basement. We wouldnt give a shit if someone thought they could fart a lamborginni out of their ass. So we dont care about your religion either.

The problem is when people insist on basing goverement on it. If you want us not to base goverment on atheism(whatever that would mean) then you have to apply the same logic and LEAVE IT AT THE DOOR! That is what we mean.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establisment of religion" but Christians take "Free exorsize" to mean, "Hey we can monopolize the drivers seat and stick everyone else at the back of the bus"

The First Amendment might work better in today's language, "We wont come after you, or aid you. ON YOUR OWN TIME WITH YOUR OWN DIME".

Christians, PLEASE QUIT your pathetic attempts at playing victim and stop being so self centered as to pretend that Christians are the only ones who have the right to use the Constitution.

"Keep your garbage to yourself" is something you say to atheists too. I am all for that, so when you stop writing the name Jesus in our laws, we will stop bitching.

So I do warn atheists not to give the wrong impression. And I would be against any form of goverment opression of theism.

I think we should stick to, "Keep your garbage out of our goverment and I'll do the same",

Beyond that, lets duke it out verbaly here in the non-goverment sector.

But Christians are just as delusional as any theocratic Muslim in the Middle East if they think it is a good idea to base law on religion. THAT IS WHAT WE WANT YOU TO STOP DOING!

So I dont think either the Christian or atheist or any label for that matter needs to live in fear of the other as long as all understand the differance between LAW which we all have to live under, and RELIGION which is deeply personal.

"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


JCE
Bronze Member
JCE's picture
Posts: 1219
Joined: 2007-03-20
User is offlineOffline
shortandy wrote: Sorry that

shortandy wrote:
Sorry that I am a horrible speller

No, you aren't but you keep spelling atheist wrong.

shortandy wrote:
but I am a thinker as are you. To say that we can seperate our world-view and or beliefs from our daily lives is ignorant. How can such a thing be. What we believe and our world-view are who we are. When you vote or speak on abortion, women's rights, homosexuality, etc, etc, you bring you athiest mind-set to the table. You can't help it. I would venture to say that when you speak out against chrisitanity specifically (how come no one on this site speaks out so loudly against Islam?) you bring your atheist bias to the the discussion. Again you cant really help it no more than I can. WE CANT SEPERATE OUR BELIEFS FROM OUR DAILY LIVES.

You speak of intolerance and hatred....come on. Can you tell me with a straight face that there are no atheist not intolerant towards theist? To answer yes would be ignorant as well my dear. You condem theistic views as "garbage". That sounds like its full of tolerance let me tell you.

You have been here what? 5 minutes and you know so very much about me.  Interesting!

Yes, there are atheists that are intolerant toward theism.  Can you guess why?

Maybe I am jumping the gun a little, though.  Do you subscribe to a particular religion?  Earlier you stated that rights should be respected.  On what doctrine or dogma do you base this statement? 


pariahjane
pariahjane's picture
Posts: 1595
Joined: 2006-05-06
User is offlineOffline
shortandy

shortandy wrote:
pariahjane wrote:

Well, complaining about Santa Claus would be stupid, wouldn't it? I mean, is there a law against gay marriage because of Santa Claus? No. The reason non-theists take issue with religion is because it effects people, oftentimes negatively. While I don't believe there is a god, I do believe that people have certain rights that religion tends to stand in the way of.

I'm not that women, so I don't know why she was frustrated.  Perhaps because she thought that they were avoiding her question or skirting around it.  I can only speculate.

As far as I'm concerned if religion stayed where it belonged (in the church and in the home) then there would be no reason to have a website. 

You wont find me trying to rebuttal your feelings about rights. That is valid as far as I am concerned. But I am sure that there are people of various religions that believe and wish athiesm would be kept at home then the world might be better. But can a person really seperate their beliefs from their daily lives and practices? I don't think so. A muslims beliefs are going to come out in his or her living, voting, etc, etc...just like your athiestic philosophy and world-view will come out in yours. Right now you are just out numbered. The poll that ABCf took, in reference to the debate shows that. There are way more diest than there are athiest. Right now it is survival of the fittest and the diest have it. Maybe that will change. Who really knows?

I'm not talking about feelings, I'm talking about rights. I'm also talking about the separation of church and state; which is what the founding fathers of America wanted for this country. It is what this country is based on. Religion should be kept out of politics. While everyone is entitled to their beliefs, they need to be separate from our laws.
Let's say that Muslims were the marjority and not Christians. Would you be ok with Islamic law? Or is it just Christian beliefs that you think are ok? (I don't know where you come from, but I'm American so that's what I'm referencing)

If god takes life he's an indian giver


pariahjane
pariahjane's picture
Posts: 1595
Joined: 2006-05-06
User is offlineOffline
Also, the reason

Also, the reason Christianity is the religion that is addressed most often on these forums is because most of us come from the US, where Christianity plays a large part of our lives, therefore that's what most of us are familiar with.  Other religions are covered as well.

So, you really are agnostic, huh? 

If god takes life he's an indian giver


shortandy
Posts: 41
Joined: 2007-05-23
User is offlineOffline
jce wrote: shortandy

jce wrote:

shortandy wrote:
Sorry that I am a horrible speller

No, you aren't but you keep spelling atheist wrong.

shortandy wrote:
but I am a thinker as are you. To say that we can seperate our world-view and or beliefs from our daily lives is ignorant. How can such a thing be. What we believe and our world-view are who we are. When you vote or speak on abortion, women's rights, homosexuality, etc, etc, you bring you athiest mind-set to the table. You can't help it. I would venture to say that when you speak out against chrisitanity specifically (how come no one on this site speaks out so loudly against Islam?) you bring your atheist bias to the the discussion. Again you cant really help it no more than I can. WE CANT SEPERATE OUR BELIEFS FROM OUR DAILY LIVES.

You speak of intolerance and hatred....come on. Can you tell me with a straight face that there are no atheist not intolerant towards theist? To answer yes would be ignorant as well my dear. You condem theistic views as "garbage". That sounds like its full of tolerance let me tell you.

You have been here what? 5 minutes and you know so very much about me.  Interesting!

Yes, there are atheists that are intolerant toward theism.  Can you guess why?

Maybe I am jumping the gun a little, though.  Do you subscribe to a particular religion?  Earlier you stated that rights should be respected.  On what doctrine or dogma do you base this statement? 

Listen lady, everything was going pleasant but you came across hostile...no big deal. I love the heated debate anyway. If by "guess why" you are thinking that poor atheist are mistreated then please read a thought on the other post. There are no atheist being mistreated like many theist around the world.  Also, if being an atheist is the place a person comes to after they accpet reason, then you should certainly be above the petty thoughts and opinions of the theist, shouldn't you. Afterall they just have not been enlightened by same understanding you have found.

As far as rights are concerned I base that on the same thing you do. I should be free to think what I want when I want and live my life accordingly. However, if you and I want that right then we must be willing to let others have it as well. If the Hindu wants to try to convert you, so be it. Its part of freedom. But don't get you panties in a bunch. Remember you have the choice not to be converted.

As far as government and laws are concerned, you must go back to your own evolutionary foundations of order and acceptability. You are getting out voted...deal with it! You don't have to like it and can refuse to lay down and take it. That is why you try to change things. But remember that is the same thing the theist is doing. You are at war with each other.


shortandy
Posts: 41
Joined: 2007-05-23
User is offlineOffline
jce wrote:

{Edit - triple post}


shortandy
Posts: 41
Joined: 2007-05-23
User is offlineOffline
jce wrote:

{Edit - triple post}


Tilberian
Moderator
Tilberian's picture
Posts: 1118
Joined: 2006-11-27
User is offlineOffline
shortandy wrote: [ WE CANT

shortandy wrote:
[

WE CANT SEPERATE OUR BELIEFS FROM OUR DAILY LIVES.

No one is asking you to. But when you try to have your beliefs guide other people's behaviour (ie turn beliefs into policy) you must be able to defend that belief against the challenges of other competing beliefs.

The arena for that challenge must be rationality, because it is the only mode which allows for discourse. If we abandon rationality, we are left only with violence and/or chaos. Rational examination is the only universally understood and accepted method of determining truth.

Faith-based beliefs are held regardless of evidence, so they are not rational. Therefore, they should not be used as justification for policy. Legislators that stand up and say they oppose stem cell research on the grounds that it is against God are doing a huge disservice to democracy and the people they serve, whether those people share the view or not.

Of course everyone is biased in one direction or another by irrational views. But our views should have to meet rational tests in a public forum before they get to become policy. 

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


JCE
Bronze Member
JCE's picture
Posts: 1219
Joined: 2007-03-20
User is offlineOffline
shortandy wrote: Listen

shortandy wrote:

Listen lady, everything was going pleasant but you came across hostile...no big deal. I love the heated debate anyway. If by "guess why" you are thinking that poor atheist are mistreated then please read a thought on the other post. There are no atheist being mistreated like many theist around the world.

Are you sure about this?

shortandy wrote:
As far as rights are concerned I base that on the same thing you do. I should be free to think what I want when I want and live my life accordingly. However, if you and I want that right then we must be willing to let others have it as well. If the Hindu wants to try to convert you, so be it. Its part of freedom.

Wrong. That is not what the first amendment is about. It is not about infringement, it is about the freedom to keep your own beliefs - not prostelytize or convert.

shortandy wrote:
As far as government and laws are concerned, you must go back to your own evolutionary foundations of order and acceptability. You are getting out voted...deal with it! You don't have to like it and can refuse to lay down and take it. That is why you try to change things. But remember that is the same thing the theist is doing. You are at war with each other.

Our government is set up as a representative democracy to give the minority a voice - not to be out voted. Not to get off topic, but would you feel the same way about the civil rights movement in the 1960's? They were getting out voted and were a minority. Would you have left their civil rights being imposed upon because of this?


shortandy
Posts: 41
Joined: 2007-05-23
User is offlineOffline
Tilberian wrote: shortandy

Tilberian wrote:
shortandy wrote:
[

WE CANT SEPERATE OUR BELIEFS FROM OUR DAILY LIVES.

No one is asking you to. But when you try to have your beliefs guide other people's behaviour (ie turn beliefs into policy) you must be able to defend that belief against the challenges of other competing beliefs.

The arena for that challenge must be rationality, because it is the only mode which allows for discourse. If we abandon rationality, we are left only with violence and/or chaos. Rational examination is the only universally understood and accepted method of determining truth.

Faith-based beliefs are held regardless of evidence, so they are not rational. Therefore, they should not be used as justification for policy. Legislators that stand up and say they oppose stem cell research on the grounds that it is against God are doing a huge disservice to democracy and the people they serve, whether those people share the view or not.

Of course everyone is biased in one direction or another by irrational views. But our views should have to meet rational tests in a public forum before they get to become policy. 

What you and many others are failing to understand is that we will never have a government and laws that make all of us happy until we all have the exact same views and opinions. Someone is always going made or upset. This is the way it will always be. The government is made up of people that are voted in by the majority and so far the majority is voting in people that are passing laws we are currently seeing. Maybe you and other atheist would spend your time more wisely if you quite complaining about the laws and chrisitans and you simply tried to win some converts to your cause to so you can elect people who will pass legislation that you like.  


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15922
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
I think someone in this

I think someone in this threa hinted at something that I want to expound on.

I do think people ARE capable of seperating religion and goverment. I just dont think they want to.

Why, because of a lack of introspection. Wanting control is a natural part of our evolution. I think most humans lack the introspection because of fear. If I dont have control and someone else does, then they may be a threat to me.

I think when humans gain that introspection then we will evolve beyond the Alpha Male (worldview) mentality. When we stop fearing competition of competing ideas and seek overlap in common law without using power to dictate to others, then humanity can grow.

But at this point theism does unfortunalty work through government to maintain power and as long as that is the case humaity will always divide itself into clubs and seek to dominate over those outside the majority.

Without the fear and with introspection goverments wont need to prop up any religion. We will at that point not feel the need to power grab. 

Having been a minority atheist I am comfortable being in the minority, that is not the issue. But as stated before, it is because others want to rip laws out of their holy books, that I fear them.

Ask any Iranian Christian how easy it is to be a Christian in a Muslim dominated goverment. They may be tollerated, but they are never equall.

So that is we raise our voice. Not because we want to opress you, but because we cant get ellected even though we can run for office. If A Christian is unwilling to consider an atheist born in America for office, why call them citizen? If they are not a citizen why do you take their tax dollars?

I am quite sure Christians pay taxes in Iran and in turn the fundementalist goverment uses it to prop up Islam. So I dont think it is a matter of CAN people seperate religion from law, I think they can, I just dont think they want to.

I do think it is better for all labels of all religions to demand that goverment not play favorites. We see what that does in the Middle East, so why would Christians want to replicate that here through our goverment?

Pluralism is not stable when majority on a bus tell the others they can never sit in the front.  

"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


shortandy
Posts: 41
Joined: 2007-05-23
User is offlineOffline
jce wrote: shortandy

jce wrote:
shortandy wrote:

Listen lady, everything was going pleasant but you came across hostile...no big deal. I love the heated debate anyway. If by "guess why" you are thinking that poor atheist are mistreated then please read a thought on the other post. There are no atheist being mistreated like many theist around the world.

Are you sure about this?

shortandy wrote:
As far as rights are concerned I base that on the same thing you do. I should be free to think what I want when I want and live my life accordingly. However, if you and I want that right then we must be willing to let others have it as well. If the Hindu wants to try to convert you, so be it. Its part of freedom.

Wrong. That is not what the first amendment is about. It is not about infringement, it is about the freedom to keep your own beliefs - not prostelytize or convert.

shortandy wrote:
As far as government and laws are concerned, you must go back to your own evolutionary foundations of order and acceptability. You are getting out voted...deal with it! You don't have to like it and can refuse to lay down and take it. That is why you try to change things. But remember that is the same thing the theist is doing. You are at war with each other.

Our government is set up as a representative democracy to give the minority a voice - not to be out voted. Not to get off topic, but would you feel the same way about the civil rights movement in the 1960's? They were getting out voted and were a minority. Would you have left their civil rights being imposed upon because of this?

No,no,no....right! Yes you are free to believe what you want, but I have the right in conversation, forums, blogs, etc, etc to try to change your mind. If that were illegal or a violation of the constitution then you would be breaking the law in you post to me.

I would have supported civil rights in the 60's. Until things changed and you have the right to press the issues until things change for atheist, but they may not.


pariahjane
pariahjane's picture
Posts: 1595
Joined: 2006-05-06
User is offlineOffline
shortandy wrote: What you

shortandy wrote:
What you and many others are failing to understand is that we will never have a government and laws that make all of us happy until we all have the exact same views and opinions. Someone is always going made or upset. This is the way it will always be. The government is made up of people that are voted in by the majority and so far the majority is voting in people that are passing laws we are currently seeing.
Maybe you and other atheist would spend your time more wisely if you quite complaining about the laws and chrisitans and you simply tried to win some converts to your cause to so you can elect people who will pass legislation that you like.  

And that is perfectly fine with you because you're in the marjority. Tell me, should women have just sucked it up and not fought for the right to vote because the marjority didn't want them too. Why don't you go and tell all the black Americans that fought for their rights that they should have been spending their time more wisely. After all, if the marjority didn't want them to have equality, so they shouldn't get it, right? Because that's exactly what you're saying.

If god takes life he's an indian giver


shortandy
Posts: 41
Joined: 2007-05-23
User is offlineOffline
pariahjane

pariahjane wrote:
shortandy wrote:
What you and many others are failing to understand is that we will never have a government and laws that make all of us happy until we all have the exact same views and opinions. Someone is always going made or upset. This is the way it will always be. The government is made up of people that are voted in by the majority and so far the majority is voting in people that are passing laws we are currently seeing.
Maybe you and other atheist would spend your time more wisely if you quite complaining about the laws and chrisitans and you simply tried to win some converts to your cause to so you can elect people who will pass legislation that you like.  

And that is perfectly fine with you because you're in the marjority. Tell me, should women have just sucked it up and not fought for the right to vote because the marjority didn't want them too. Why don't you go and tell all the black Americans that fought for their rights that they should have been spending their time more wisely. After all, if the marjority didn't want them to have equality, so they shouldn't get it, right? Because that's exactly what you're saying.

Easy killer...that is not what I am saying and I am not in the majority on some issues. I am saying that complaining about the govt. is getting you no where. You need to get more troops to your cause. There are just not enough atheist to change things right now. But who knows maybe you can convert enough of them to change things. Until that happens things will not change much for you because the majority doesn't think like you think....but what one moment. That would mean you would have to go out and try to change people's minds just like the mormons and Jehovah's witnesses do. What a concept!!!!


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

shortandy wrote:
What you and many others are failing to understand is that we will never have a government and laws that make all of us happy until we all have the exact same views and opinions.

First of all, no one is asking for a government that makes us all happy. Clearly this is impossible. However, given the fact that people will always disagree, there must be a common standard of truth in order for discourse to take place and disputes to be resolved without violence. This can only be rationality.

shortandy wrote:
Someone is always going made or upset. This is the way it will always be. The government is made up of people that are voted in by the majority and so far the majority is voting in people that are passing laws we are currently seeing. Maybe you and other atheist would spend your time more wisely if you quite complaining about the laws and chrisitans and you simply tried to win some converts to your cause to so you can elect people who will pass legislation that you like.

I see. So if the Christian majority in this country decided that it would be a good idea to follow the Bible a little more closely and start stoning people to death for shopping on Sunday, that would be cool with you?

There is such a thing as a political culture, and it is tremendously important in how government works. The reason democracy has such a hard time taking hold in many parts of the world is partly because it has no history in the political culture of the area. Politicians have always been corrupt, elections have always been rigged and while no one likes it, no one can really envision anything different. The UN can bust a hump trying to monitor the elections and the press can go nuts exposing corruption, but nothing changes because there's no buy-in by individuals to the democratic system.

This is the disease I see creeping into America. Somewhere in the mid-80s it became all right to justify your political stance in terms of your faith. For a long time before that, most politicians in America wouldn't go there, because they understood that there are many different faiths (and atheists) and to justify things on faith was to invite civil discord. However now there's been a shift brought on by ChristCons adopting the language of social anthropologists, of all people, in which it is now out of bounds to question someone's "traditional beliefs."  

I understand that atheists will probably never be a cohesive political power because atheism admits all views and opinions under its tent except for belief in a god. But Christians and atheists alike should, for their own good, get behind the idea that political discourse should be confined to rationality. 

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: 15922
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
pariahjane

pariahjane wrote:
shortandy wrote:
What you and many others are failing to understand is that we will never have a government and laws that make all of us happy until we all have the exact same views and opinions. Someone is always going made or upset. This is the way it will always be. The government is made up of people that are voted in by the majority and so far the majority is voting in people that are passing laws we are currently seeing. Maybe you and other atheist would spend your time more wisely if you quite complaining about the laws and chrisitans and you simply tried to win some converts to your cause to so you can elect people who will pass legislation that you like.
And that is perfectly fine with you because you're in the marjority. Tell me, should women have just sucked it up and not fought for the right to vote because the marjority didn't want them too. Why don't you go and tell all the black Americans that fought for their rights that they should have been spending their time more wisely. After all, if the marjority didn't want them to have equality, so they shouldn't get it, right? Because that's exactly what you're saying.

This is another example of "majority rule" fallacy because the lack of education in America about how our Constitution and goverment is set up.

Christians like this shout "Majority Rule" and "free speech" and "freedom of religion" but fail to read the entire Constitution which demands that ALL citizens have a right to partisipate, view and use the Constitution.

CIVICS 101.......

1. Our goverment is not "majority rule", that is "mob rule by vote". As correctly stated via example of Woman and blacks who are a minority were able to use  OUR constitution to tell a bigoted majority at the time that they COULD NOT deny them rights.

2. Nowhere in the United States Constitution does it say, "You must swear to Jesus" or any god for that matter to hold public office.

3. "to patititon the goverment for a redress of grievance"part of the First Amendment. I bet this Christian thinks that only Christians have a right to envoke that part of the Amendment.

4. "So Help Me God" IS NOT PART OF THE CONSTITUTION! That is added voluntarly by the person taking the oath. We had our first Muslim congressmen swear on a Tomas Jefferson owned Quran because our Constitution does not demand favoritism of one god over another.

5. "No Religious Test" IS IN OUR CONSTITUTION.

So if any Christian thinks that non-Christians should accept the guest house by proxy of their numbers they are not only fooling themselves, but they are being self centered and selfsih.

Every non-Christian born in America, be they Chinese, or Japanese, Buddhist, Jew or Muslim or atheist has the same rights as any Christian, including the right to run for our highest offices. Certianly no one should expect a Christian simply to vote for someone just because they havent gotten in yet.

I do think it is rediculous to vote for a person based on sex or race. It is nice to see those barriers broken in politics, but shouldnt we also extend consideration to office based on "No Religious Test".

Shouldnt it be about, "Hey, that person running likes low taxes". That person running is "for/against" the death penalty.  

I do get tired of people crying "poor me".

If this Christian says, "Compete" then they should put their money where their mouth is and be willing to consider an atheist when they have enough incommon with them rather than do bigoted bullshit and vote or exclude based on belief.

If you are challenging us to compete then live up to it and stop crying about us jumping into the ring.

I think it is because people like you dont want non-Christians, not just atheists, but all non-Christian citizens to remain happy sleeping in the guest house.

I am not your guest. I was born here and I am not under any Constitutional obligation to swear an oath to Jesus. So get off your high horse, compete like you say, and stop bitching about compititon. I think people like this lie and only like freedom when it leads to favoritism to their club.

Me, I dont want an atheist goverment or a Jesus goverment or Allah government. I am not afraid of compitition, but I dont like crybaby Christians who falsely claim we are trying to take their bibles from them merely because we want a neutral goverment that doesnt play favorites to ANYONE!

Boo hoo, not all the 300 million citizens are a clone of you. My heart bleeds.

FREEDOM, IT'S NOT JUST FOR CHRISTIANS ANYMORE! 

"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


shortandy
Posts: 41
Joined: 2007-05-23
User is offlineOffline
Tilberian wrote: shortandy

Tilberian wrote:

shortandy wrote:
What you and many others are failing to understand is that we will never have a government and laws that make all of us happy until we all have the exact same views and opinions.

First of all, no one is asking for a government that makes us all happy. Clearly this is impossible. However, given the fact that people will always disagree, there must be a common standard of truth in order for discourse to take place and disputes to be resolved without violence. This can only be rationality.

shortandy wrote:
Someone is always going made or upset. This is the way it will always be. The government is made up of people that are voted in by the majority and so far the majority is voting in people that are passing laws we are currently seeing. Maybe you and other atheist would spend your time more wisely if you quite complaining about the laws and chrisitans and you simply tried to win some converts to your cause to so you can elect people who will pass legislation that you like.

I see. So if the Christian majority in this country decided that it would be a good idea to follow the Bible a little more closely and start stoning people to death for shopping on Sunday, that would be cool with you?

There is such a thing as a political culture, and it is tremendously important in how government works. The reason democracy has such a hard time taking hold in many parts of the world is partly because it has no history in the political culture of the area. Politicians have always been corrupt, elections have always been rigged and while no one likes it, no one can really envision anything different. The UN can bust a hump trying to monitor the elections and the press can go nuts exposing corruption, but nothing changes because there's no buy-in by individuals to the democratic system.

This is the disease I see creeping into America. Somewhere in the mid-80s it became all right to justify your political stance in terms of your faith. For a long time before that, most politicians in America wouldn't go there, because they understood that there are many different faiths (and atheists) and to justify things on faith was to invite civil discord. However now there's been a shift brought on by ChristCons adopting the language of social anthropologists, of all people, in which it is now out of bounds to question someone's "traditional beliefs."  

I understand that atheists will probably never be a cohesive political power because atheism admits all views and opinions under its tent except for belief in a god. But Christians and atheists alike should, for their own good, get behind the idea that political discourse should be confined to rationality. 

My friend you are defining rational by your standards and opinions. What is deemed rational, especially in the political areana must always and will always be driven by the majority, unless you want a communist govt. The majoricty chooses what is rational, not you or me. Can things be changed? Yes but it takes time. I don't think you want a govt that please the majority you want one that pleases you. Be honest enough to admitt that. I know I want a govt that does everything I want, I can't lie and say anything else were true. 

 You also make a statement here about stoning, which you have not reserched Im afraid. I don't know a single christian that approves such a thing based on their teaching. Trust me I have asked, as I have read the bible on several occassions. The new tesatament teaching doesn't allow that old testament practice. But I do see your point however. The majority may not make it right but it does make it rational.  


shortandy
Posts: 41
Joined: 2007-05-23
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote: pariahjane

Brian37 wrote:

pariahjane wrote:
shortandy wrote:
What you and many others are failing to understand is that we will never have a government and laws that make all of us happy until we all have the exact same views and opinions. Someone is always going made or upset. This is the way it will always be. The government is made up of people that are voted in by the majority and so far the majority is voting in people that are passing laws we are currently seeing. Maybe you and other atheist would spend your time more wisely if you quite complaining about the laws and chrisitans and you simply tried to win some converts to your cause to so you can elect people who will pass legislation that you like.
And that is perfectly fine with you because you're in the marjority. Tell me, should women have just sucked it up and not fought for the right to vote because the marjority didn't want them too. Why don't you go and tell all the black Americans that fought for their rights that they should have been spending their time more wisely. After all, if the marjority didn't want them to have equality, so they shouldn't get it, right? Because that's exactly what you're saying.

This is another example of "majority rule" fallacy because the lack of education in America about how our Constitution and goverment is set up.

Christians like this shout "Majority Rule" and "free speech" and "freedom of religion" but fail to read the entire Constitution which demands that ALL citizens have a right to partisipate, view and use the Constitution.

CIVICS 101.......

1. Our goverment is not "majority rule", that is "mob rule by vote". As correctly stated via example of Woman and blacks who are a minority were able to use  OUR constitution to tell a bigoted majority at the time that they COULD NOT deny them rights.

2. Nowhere in the United States Constitution does it say, "You must swear to Jesus" or any god for that matter to hold public office.

3. "to patititon the goverment for a redress of grievance"part of the First Amendment. I bet this Christian thinks that only Christians have a right to envoke that part of the Amendment.

4. "So Help Me God" IS NOT PART OF THE CONSTITUTION! That is added voluntarly by the person taking the oath. We had our first Muslim congressmen swear on a Tomas Jefferson owned Quran because our Constitution does not demand favoritism of one god over another.

5. "No Religious Test" IS IN OUR CONSTITUTION.

So if any Christian thinks that non-Christians should accept the guest house by proxy of their numbers they are not only fooling themselves, but they are being self centered and selfsih.

Every non-Christian born in America, be they Chinese, or Japanese, Buddhist, Jew or Muslim or atheist has the same rights as any Christian, including the right to run for our highest offices. Certianly no one should expect a Christian simply to vote for someone just because they havent gotten in yet.

I do think it is rediculous to vote for a person based on sex or race. It is nice to see those barriers broken in politics, but shouldnt we also extend consideration to office based on "No Religious Test".

Shouldnt it be about, "Hey, that person running likes low taxes". That person running is "for/against" the death penalty.  

I do get tired of people crying "poor me".

If this Christian says, "Compete" then they should put their money where their mouth is and be willing to consider an atheist when they have enough incommon with them rather than do bigoted bullshit and vote or exclude based on belief.

If you are challenging us to compete then live up to it and stop crying about us jumping into the ring.

I think it is because people like you dont want non-Christians, not just atheists, but all non-Christian citizens to remain happy sleeping in the guest house.

I am not your guest. I was born here and I am not under any Constitutional obligation to swear an oath to Jesus. So get off your high horse, compete like you say, and stop bitching about compititon. I think people like this lie and only like freedom when it leads to favoritism to their club.

Me, I dont want an atheist goverment or a Jesus goverment or Allah government. I am not afraid of compitition, but I dont like crybaby Christians who falsely claim we are trying to take their bibles from them merely because we want a neutral goverment that doesnt play favorites to ANYONE!

Boo hoo, not all the 300 million citizens are a clone of you. My heart bleeds.

FREEDOM, IT'S NOT JUST FOR CHRISTIANS ANYMORE! 

You will never have a govt free from anybelief until you fill it with people who believe nothing. You can't serperate what you believe from the way you vote and legislate. Im sorry man but you will never get that. Yes we should vote for people based on what they think about taxes and death penalty but where do they get those views from...from their world-view and personal philosophy, which may not be what you or I want and we therefore have the right to place our vote accordingly. Oh and people are competing, you just sound like a sore looser.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15922
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Quote: must always and will

Quote:
must always and will always be driven by the majority, unless you want a communist govt.

Why does this juvinile garbage always pop up?

As for reasons stated over and over in this thread our founders valued individuality and dissent. Majority rule does not require any check or balance.

OUR CONSTITUTION DOES!

I suppose because Jefferson said, "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"

And because he equated the virgin birth and death of Jesus to that of Minerva being born out of the brain of Jupiter, he must be a commie?

BULLSHIT,

Because it is in our human nature that the founders made sure that the majority could only guide, but also be corrected if they tried to deny others rights. Our Consitution is not based on "give the people what they want"by itself" otherwise woman couldnt vote still today.

Our Constitution is based on human nature. We all disire freedom. When contentions pop up as to how the goverment is run, it is based on a combination of things not just voting and not just giving the majority what it wants all the time.

The three branch system of goverment is there to insure that no one party or one person or mob can become sole law giver. The majority guides, and that is the mistake people make in assuming it dictates. Our freedoms we have today also stem from dissentors questioning authority by appealing to courts through OUR Constitution.

You really dont want to live in a pure "majority rule" state. And in any case I do get quite sick of the bullshit that all atheists like communism. Thats like saying all Christians want to blow up abortion clinics. 

So the next person I see equating atheists to Communism or accuses me of not valuing their freedom, or acts like a whiny little crybaby because someone doesnt believe in Jesus, I will not be as nice as I was in this thread. 

So be warned. You want to pull that crap in this thread, do not expect me to hold back.

Freedom is a human value. Freedom, it's not just for Christians anymore.  

 

"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


shortandy
Posts: 41
Joined: 2007-05-23
User is offlineOffline
Brian don't be nice that

Brian don't be nice that fine with me my man. I can take it all day long. At least be man enough to put my name up there when you quote me.

 The majority is guiding; you just don't like the direction. And that Brian is your right. I have no problem that you don't like it and am loosing no sleep over it...trust me. We will never live in a "pure majority rule" as long as people are free to think and push what they want.

And why do keep bringing up Jesus. I am not talking about Jesus. I am talking about crying atheist.   


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

shortandy wrote:

My friend you are defining rational by your standards and opinions. What is deemed rational, especially in the political areana must always and will always be driven by the majority, unless you want a communist govt. The majoricty chooses what is rational, not you or me. Can things be changed? Yes but it takes time. I don't think you want a govt that please the majority you want one that pleases you. Be honest enough to admitt that. I know I want a govt that does everything I want, I can't lie and say anything else were true.

You also make a statement here about stoning, which you have not reserched Im afraid. I don't know a single christian that approves such a thing based on their teaching. Trust me I have asked, as I have read the bible on several occassions. The new tesatament teaching doesn't allow that old testament practice. But I do see your point however. The majority may not make it right but it does make it rational.

Wrong, wrong, wrong again. The majority does not define rationality any more than it defines right and wrong. There is an established definition of rationality and an outside observer can look at behaviour, compare it to that definition and pronounce it within or outside of the boundaries of the definition quite independently of what others think.

I already explained on the last page how beliefs held on faith alone are not rational, by anyone's definition of the word. So the majority can approve of faith-based policy making all they like, that doesn't make it, or them, rational.

Better reread your NT. Jesus calls for the old law to be observed in every jot and tittle - including the stonings. 

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


shortandy
Posts: 41
Joined: 2007-05-23
User is offlineOffline
Tilberian wrote: shortandy

Tilberian wrote:
shortandy wrote:

My friend you are defining rational by your standards and opinions. What is deemed rational, especially in the political areana must always and will always be driven by the majority, unless you want a communist govt. The majoricty chooses what is rational, not you or me. Can things be changed? Yes but it takes time. I don't think you want a govt that please the majority you want one that pleases you. Be honest enough to admitt that. I know I want a govt that does everything I want, I can't lie and say anything else were true.

You also make a statement here about stoning, which you have not reserched Im afraid. I don't know a single christian that approves such a thing based on their teaching. Trust me I have asked, as I have read the bible on several occassions. The new tesatament teaching doesn't allow that old testament practice. But I do see your point however. The majority may not make it right but it does make it rational.

Wrong, wrong, wrong again. The majority does not define rationality any more than it defines right and wrong. There is an established definition of rationality and an outside observer can look at behaviour, compare it to that definition and pronounce it within or outside of the boundaries of the definition quite independently of what others think.

I already explained on the last page how beliefs held on faith alone are not rational, by anyone's definition of the word. So the majority can approve of faith-based policy making all they like, that doesn't make it, or them, rational.

Better reread your NT. Jesus calls for the old law to be observed in every jot and tittle - including the stonings. 

Are you telling me that morality and rational thinking have always existed? In the ABC debate Kelly says that morality basically has evolved overtime just like you and I. Therefore my friend what is rational to you know may not be rational in the future. Also can you give some specific reference to you NT claim. I would love to look that up for myself for future debate.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15922
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
shortandy wrote: Brian

shortandy wrote:

Brian don't be nice that fine with me my man. I can take it all day long. At least be man enough to put my name up there when you quote me.

The majority is guiding; you just don't like the direction. And that Brian is your right. I have no problem that you don't like it and am loosing no sleep over it...trust me. We will never live in a "pure majority rule" as long as people are free to think and push what they want.

And why do keep bringing up Jesus. I am not talking about Jesus. I am talking about crying atheist.

"crying atheist"

 "Those uppity niggers should stop bitching"

 "Those stupid ho's should stop whining about wanting to vote"

We are not crying you idiot, we are competing and we are raising our voice like ever other minority has had to in the past to get their rights. That is not "crying" as you so stupidly put it.

You want us to "stop crying"? Is that what you want. Is that all.

Then it is quite simple. The rest of America can stop assuming that only Christians can be in office and that only Christians have the right to use and interpret the Constitution. I dont care if YOU didnt say the name Jesus.

But you are a damned fool if you think atheists are treated equally in this country. 

 

"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


shortandy
Posts: 41
Joined: 2007-05-23
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote: shortandy

Brian37 wrote:
shortandy wrote:

Brian don't be nice that fine with me my man. I can take it all day long. At least be man enough to put my name up there when you quote me.

The majority is guiding; you just don't like the direction. And that Brian is your right. I have no problem that you don't like it and am loosing no sleep over it...trust me. We will never live in a "pure majority rule" as long as people are free to think and push what they want.

And why do keep bringing up Jesus. I am not talking about Jesus. I am talking about crying atheist.

"crying atheist"

 "Those uppity niggers should stop bitching"

 "Those stupid ho's should stop whining about wanting to vote"

We are not crying you idiot, we are competing and we are raising our voice like ever other minority has had to in the past to get their rights. That is not "crying" as you so stupidly put it.

You want us to "stop crying"? Is that what you want. Is that all.

Then it is quite simple. The rest of America can stop assuming that only Christians can be in office and that only Christians have the right to use and interpret the Constitution. I dont care if YOU didnt say the name Jesus.

But you are a damned fool if you think atheists are treated equally in this country. 

 

Oh poor atheist, they are treated so bad. How? Oh I see those Christians are forcing laws on us. Boo hoo...the Muslims think we are infidels and are doomed for eternity. Crying, crying, crying. Thats not competing its crying Brian. Competing is spreading your message and converting people. Competing is getting people in office that will change things.


Tilberian
Moderator
Tilberian's picture
Posts: 1118
Joined: 2006-11-27
User is offlineOffline
shortandy wrote: Are you

shortandy wrote:
Are you telling me that morality and rational thinking have always existed? In the ABC debate Kelly says that morality basically has evolved overtime just like you and I. Therefore my friend what is rational to you know may not be rational in the future.

Uh, morality and rationality are not the same thing.

Our understanding of rationality has evolved and become codified into language and math. It is certainly possible that we will find out more about how the brain processes information with further impacts to our understanding of rational thought.

However none of this changes the basic nature of rationality, which is the formation of beliefs based on evidence and logic. The earliest life forms had to react to their environment in an appropriate manner or be destroyed. The amoeba that moved toward pain instead of away didn't last too long. This is fundamental rationality. 

This basic level of rational thought has never changed. But faith is different. Faith is holding to belief regardless of evidence. If our amoeba back in the earliest days had used faith instead of reason, it would have decided in advance that touching that salt crystal was a good thing to do, and continued to touch it regardless of the pain it was causing until it died. That, my friend, is a flawed method of creating belief.

shortandy wrote:

Also can you give some specific reference to you NT claim. I would love to look that up for myself for future debate.

Matthew 5:17-20

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven. 

2 Timothy 3:16-17

16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.

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