I think the point that all too often gets lost is that, at least for me (I can only speak for myself, but suspect that many would agree), the goal isn't to simply remove god from people's lives, it's to get people to think rationally and critically and to apply that to everything in their lives. Once you do so, you will simply not need god anymore. Instead of accepting distortions and lies to rationalize seemingly pleasant thoughts, you can see what's really right and make decisions accordingly.

 If someone tells you that a particular group of people are bad, then instead of relying on propaganda and outright lies you can ask why, examine the facts, and assess the actual risks.

When a new life saving scientific discovery comes along you can look at the actual facts and make a decision based on the actual pro's and con's.

When someone tells you to strap bombs to yourself and kill yourself and as many other people as possible, you can rationally examine whether it's a good idea.

When something bad happens you can critically examine whether kneeling down, closing your eyes, and talking to yourself is really productive, or whether it would be better to actually do something.

When it comes to subjects taught to our kids in science class you can look at it and decide whether it's really scientific or if you might just wish it were scientific.

When a leader gives his credentials and opinions, you can take them for their actual value. Unfortunately the kind of faith required for religion makes it very easy for corrupt leaders to take power, manipulate his or her followers, and work towards ultimately detrimental goals.

When a leader declares war, he will need to give better reasons than "god told me to" and we can really look at whether the issue is worth killing thousands or millions of people over.

When an entire continent of people is threatened by a terminal disease, we can provide aid that is actually practical and scientificly proven to be effective, rather than what just seems less offensive.

When discussing personal opinions, the idea that someone doesn't agree with you wouldn't seem like a threat to your life and doom you to eternal torture. You could consider it rationally, like any other issue.

Differing opinions would also likely lead to fewer death threats, fewer judgements that the person is evil, and many orders of magnitude less threats of eternal torture.

Society as a whole would be more well informed and less prone to manipulation by false experts with corporate interests.

An increase in rational and critical thinking would likely result in greater numbers of brilliant minds working towards new discoveries and innovation that would ultimately benefit the whole world. 

You see, religion isn't an isolated issue, it affects the entire perspective and approach to life. There are too many issues that are not directly within the realm of religion that are affected, and result from the ways of thinking and the values that do not benefit our actual society at large (versus the idealized christian society). 

Although many theists do think rationally about other things in their lives, one thing that I have found a distinct lack of is critical thinking. This is evidenced by the fact that most theists new to the site end up with feelings hurt when they first encounter critical thinking. I know that I experience a bit of the same when I was a child, but as soon as it was explained that they were being critical of the idea and not me personally, and expected the same in return, I quickly saw the benefit. Unfortunately too many theists just can't get past it, and I can't help but think that critical thinking is simply too detrimental to faith for them to accept (despite their claims that they already do think critically). The fact of the matter is, however, that if your beliefs can't stand up to critical thinking, rely on ignorance of the facts, and/or can't be justified without distorting the facts or outright lying, then you seriously need to re-examine your beliefs. 

You should also realize that you don't need any god to be 'spiritual'. As much as theists may like to think otherwise, theism does not have a monopoly on spirituality.  

for starters, I speak only for me in this. everyone on here doesn't have the same agenda (if they have one at all). everyone is here for their own reasons.

unfortunately "in some ways" is an understatment. it has hindered it a lot, and it is still trying to do so (to be fair I don't mean all of christianity, I'm talking about creationists, etc. the really liberal xtians like bishop harries don't bother me at all). we need separation of church and state not to take away your rights, but to keep everyone's. secularism is the neutral position, so no one gets preferrential treatment.

If you don't mind me asking, why do you think it is so that religion got into science so much? I don't recall Jesus saying anything about hindering science. he wanted people to love each other and love God. I guess I don't understand how that tranlsated to getting into science, sex, etc. what is your opinion?

Quote:

are you truly seeking to eradicate beliefs or simply to improve our society? people are always going to believe what they want and if you think you are able to take that away, i feel that is a highly irrational goal. the end result could end up very badly especially when you start blaming others and slap them with a predefined burden. do you think force should be implied to these "so called" delusional and mentally disturbed people? do you think calling us delusional and mentally disturbed is an effective way to make them consider their errors?

most christians disagree with radicals like westboro. deep down inside we want to show you love even though we tend to poke you in the eye. we are not good at taking criticism or questioning ourselves and that is one reason why i feel atheism needs a voice, even though my beliefs disagree with yours.

 

honestly I think some of the "extreme" statements are done to get people's attention, and to "shock" them out of their complacency. I disagree with some of the methods, but I can understand the motivation behind them. if the "mental disorder" thing goes too far though it can backfire. I've said this before, I don't agree with the statement that ALL theists have mental disorders b/c for one, I haven't met all theists, so I certainly can't make that statement and two, it's a stereotype and I'm against those. I certainly don't think people like Martin Luther King Jr. were "delusional". I think these statements are best applied to the fundies of all religions. I certainly hope no one here advocates getting rid of belief by force, or else I sure as hell won't support it. they'd have to be delusional themselves to think they can eradicate ALL belief in ANYTHING all over the world.  It won't happen, period. what probably WILL happen is somewhere in the middle of eradicating belief and extreme religiosity, and religion might end up getting modernized as a result, and become more like straight sprituality. that would be a good thing IMHO. that being said, anyone who goes around talking about "rights" and then turns around and says "let's ban all religion" is a hypocrite IMHO (and luckily I'm not alone in this).  personally I don't care what you believe, just don't push it on me, and don't put it in the way of knowledge and science and human rights. you do all that, I have no quarrel with you. and this is true of any dogmatic belief, not just religion. religion IMHO has become too much like big business. As for Westboro, I don't think anyone likes them

 

if this truly happened on a wide scale I would be overjoyed. that would be the answer I am looking for. as to the friends question, yes, absolutely, I have friends from all backgrounds. most of my religious friends to tend to be liberal though. I have a hard time being friends with conservative ones b/c they bring it into everything. I have a hard time being friends with extreme anti-theists either b/c that is ALL they talk about.

 please please, tell the more rational and moderate xtians to start speaking out more!  that will help a lot-get in the way of the fundies and prove people who say moderates open the door to extremists (which I don't think is true across the board) wrong! this is starting to happen already with liberal catholic organizations challenging the church and crosswalk america challenging conservative christianity.I would love to see more of that. join such an organization! organize a protest to the creation museum-it seems to be mostly atheists protesting these things. let's change that! get involved in progressive organizations that bring together people of all backgrounds who seek to enforce separation of church and state, etc. and I agree with you that we can do it without taking away certain spiritual aspects. these fringe freaks who go around talking about burning down churches, beating up believers, and banning religion (thankfully they are a very small minority) to me are just as bad as the fundies. Same as these crazy "bible belt" and "reconstructionist" xtians-who unfortuantely are a majority and that needs to be changed, or at least they need to NOT have any power in our government.

live and let live. understand there are those who won't think as you, and that they have good reasons for it. show you are a good christian by living your faith and being a good person, not by evangelizing it, pushing it on people, and trying to influence government to support your own personal beliefs. teach your kids to be open to all viewpoints (that goes for everyone, not just xtians). don't threaten people with hell. don't hate someone just b/c they're an atheist or agnostic-get to know them. you might find that in many things you're not so different. if every xtian did this-well, can you imagine what would happen?

for staters, don't assume you are always smarter and more rational just b/c you are an atheist. and don't talk about rights and then talk about banning religion. it's hypocritical. that's my opinion.

separation of church and state-I cannot stress this enough. if that is truly enforced as it should be, I think things will be much better. look at Europe.

from everyone, everyone has to do their part.

 

starting a calmer dialouge and toning down extremism on both sides. the religious need to start though b/c they started the extremism in the first place. 

agreed, to coexist with it and modernize it (sorry, but stuff like creationism has gotta go, IMHO). I think also, b/c your background in religion, you are used to seeing more people think similarly to each other in religion (I know there is much diversity in christianity but still). Dawkins said it well: "getting atheists together is like herding cats". that is very true, and it's true of agnostics as well. I have never seen such a diverse group of people in my life. you get 10 atheists you will usually get 10 different opinions. the only thing they have in common is their lack of belief in a deity. that's why the rrs keeps saying they speak for themselves and not all atheists, at least that is what I gathered by watching their interviews.

this would be fine with me (the second part not the eradication!), within reason, of course. if you're sacrifcing children every full moon in your private life, there's gonna be a problem (being sarcastic but you get what I'm saying).

I respect you as a fellow human whether I agree with your religious beliefs or not, especially when you treat me with respect and try to talk to me respectfully. hell no I don't think it's rational to eradicate beliefs by force, no, NEVER. look what happened in the communist countries when communism tried it-after communism fell it came flooding back. look at the people who are willing to die for their religion in vietnam even though they are tortured (if anyone answers and says that what vietnam is doing is a GOOD thing, then you are truly sick). before everyone yells at me I am NOT equating atheism with communism at all (communism is just another type of dogma-and  they kill atheists who challenge them too), I'm using it as an example b/c that is the best one we have of trying to stamp out all religion by force.

-------------- ------------------ ------------------- -----------------

well that's good my opinion: you are bending over backwards to be nice. if all theists were like this things would be a lot better. I hope people on this board can be nice in return and be civil to you and try and talk.

 

 

when I say "you" in this reply, I don't mean you, per se, I mean you as in "anyone". hope that makes sense.

that depends what you mean by "mocked". if someone gets into a fight with you over religion, that's one thing. If they try to bring into government and education, then by all means, stand up against it. Defend yourself and destroy their argument, by all means. but if you say, walk up to someone who is wearing a religious symbol but isn't bothering you in any way (which actually happened to a friend of mine, and I was on her side on that one)-then you are harrassing people and you have NO RIGHT to do that.  yeah yeah, I know "but they do it". so you want to be like them?  If they bother you, that's one thing. but if they're not bothering you, don't bother them. if by mock you mean you mean throwing eggs at someone's lawn b/c they have a nativity scene up on their PRIVATE property (happened to my neighbor), then you become nothing more than a hoodlum (when I say "you" I don't mean you personally I mean anyone). people should have the right to not have to worry about that kind of stuff. Look at secular countries in Europe as a good example. My friends there tell me believers and non-believers are treated equally.

makes sense

Thanks for taking my name out, but I stand by everything I said. I think my points were quite clear, and I apologized several times for calling you the wrong name, and directed you to the correct post.

If bullying is trying to get you to answer clear objections to your unsubstantiated opinions, then I wear my bully badge with pride.

To be precise, you reminded me of how important it is to stay on topic, and yes, it was in the front of my brain because of our discussion.

I'm sure you don't mind admitting that this post took some inspiration from our discussion, debate, whatever, do you? So, maybe everybody's gaining from an interchange of ideas? I think it would be awesome if you stop insinuating that I think Christians are worthless and have nothing to contribute to conversations. I've said otherwise in as many words, more than once.

A complete separation of church and state. Ending tax exempt status for churches. Marginalizing religion by promoting rational thought.

I believe the former will accomplish the latter. While complete eradication of religion is impossible, I think everybody who gives up theism is contributing to the solution. Maybe one day, rationalists will be the majority. That would be really great, I think. But, it's irrational to believe there won't always be people who are too ignorant, fearful, or intellectually lazy to embrace rationality, so theism will always exist, I suspect.

Look, Sapphen, this is your 1984 scenario. Not ours. You keep alluding to this kind of thing in your posts. This board doesn't have an official political stance, but the majority of core members and mods lean libertarian. Emphasis on "liberty."

Most Christians are not so deluded that they believe anything so long as it purportedly comes from god. That's good.

I've noticed you're not good at taking criticism.

If that change involved the concession that Christianity is completely and utterly separate from government, and that Jesus/God doesn't belong anywhere outside of church and private homes, that would be a great start.

It's difficult, but not impossible for me. I have a couple of liberal Christian friends, but I think it would be pretty near impossible to keep a fundamentalist as a friend. The simple fact is, religion influences a person's beliefs so much, that it's impossible to keep it out of conversation, and as you may have noticed, I have pretty strong opinions about theism. So many things Christians are trying to accomplish, particularly in politics, really, really make me mad, and anyone who isn't opposed to that is part of the problem. It's hard not to let that become a wedge issue. Luckily, there are a lot more atheists out there than most Christians suspect, so it's not hard to find lots of friends.

We are not here to take away your spiritual concepts. How many ways can we say this? We are here to encourage you to abandon them on your own, for your own good. Please, please disabuse yourself of the notion that we're trying to force anyone to do anything. It's called "freethinking" for a reason. If you don't truly believe it, we don't want you on our side.

Technically, yes. Every atheist is an agnostic. Since god doesn't exist, it's impossible to know anything about him. Since none of us know anything about an entity that doesn't exist, we're agnostics.

Concede to complete separation of church and state. End tax exempt status for churches.

It would be nice if atheists would stop condoning religion by remaining silent. If all the atheists in the country became politically active, we'd have a voting block nearly as large as the Christian neocon far-right.

I think it would be good to completely overhaul the system of lobbying. There is too much power to be had when a small group can simply install a lobbyist with a lot of bills stuffed up his sleeve next door to a congressman, and buy votes.

I think it would be good to legislate a political separation between the white house and the surgeon general. Politicians should not be able to dictate what a scientist can and cannot say to the public.

I've mentioned it before: Ending tax exempt status for churches.

Requiring that decisions about medical procedures, research, prescription drugs, etc be decided by the scientific community, not politicians, would be really nice.

Removing god from money, court buildings, oaths, etc...

Putting scientists, not politicians, in charge of teaching curriculums for public schools.

Overhauling legislation concerning media, effectively ending the monopoly held by the major networks, FAUX News, and Clearchannel.

These would be an awesome start.

Obviously, we think this website is an awesome way to encourage others to change.

I have personal plans within the next five years or so to be able to devote a lot more of my time to active work for scientific/political organizations who support things I believe in.

Getting Neocons who believe in the bible out of the white house would sure make the world a bit more peaceful. Getting bastards like Pat Robertson off the airwaves, so he can't keep telling people that invading Iran will help Jesus come back...

I'd like to accomplish these things not by force, but by reason. Getting people to question the government and the media... to demand answers. If nobody sent Pat Robertson any money, he couldn't stay on the air. The work needs to be done from the ground up. Forcing things politically doesn't work. History demonstrates this time and time again.

That's what we're here for. To get people to think, and to help make a more peaceful world by ending the power of religion to demand blind faith.

We're angry because things are getting worse for us. You can't be an atheist and expect to get elected to public office. This is a new development. We've had atheists in the White House before, believe it or not.

Co-existing would be nice, but it's not what the Christian Right wants. They want a theocracy.

Not you, Sapphen. Your delusions.

If you believed whatever you wanted, and kept it out of my government, I think I would be happy. I'd still probably encourage those around me to think rationally and give up theism when the opportunity arose, but I'd probably not feel compelled to do so for 20 or 30 hours a week like I do now.

In short, yes. If you and yours kept your noses out of my private life and your religion out of my laws, we could probably be friends and coexist.

No. If you believed that killing all atheists was a good thing, I wouldn't love you.

Love and respect are earned. I tolerate your beliefs when they do not infringe upon mine. I will never approve of or condone your beliefs.

Hard as it may be for you to believe, I don't hate most Christians. I do have a very strong hate on for the religion and teachings, and those who intentionally misuse them to hurt others. By and large, I think most Christians are good people who are trying to make the world a better place, and I respect that attitude. It pains me to see that they are actually making the world worse, and I try to tell them so.

Believe it or not, Sapphen, I think you are a very good hearted person, and I believe you think you are doing what your invisible friend wants for the world to be a better place. I hope that one day, you will see that your religion is causing great harm in the world, and that you will abandon it, so that your desire to be a good person will be unimpeded by your delusional beliefs about god.

I'm sure you and your family have contributed good things to the world. I think you wouldn't be as happy in most other advanced countries, because they are not nearly so religious as America. Probably you should stay here.

Considering Christianity's track record for living in peace with non believers, it is difficult to comprehend.

I think it's rational to try to help people give up irrational fairy tales.

 

(psst - if you get one, can I copy it?  Sorry, I didn't do my homework.  Too busy screwing around living to write up an agenda - lol.)

**gives sapphen a big sloppy kiss!**

Me too. But I think that I can identify situations where mockery is appropiate. If you have a friend who trusts you then they could take mockery in a 'banter' type way that won't be too offensive, and will implicitly challenge their beliefs, perhaps unconsciously force them to think it over.

Another appropiate instance I can think of is when you need to bring someone down. If someone had a political power over some followers and were spewing garbage then I'd like to bring them down and mocking them can be a good way to do this. I don't think I need to go too far into this, I'm sure you yourself can think of times when mockery is appropiate, trust your judgement for the situation at hand and all that.

thank you for the awesome replies everyone.

i didn't mean to make it sound like i lumped everyone up in my second post, i just saw a few similarities but i still misstated my position.  the one thing i did learn is that everyone has their own ideas and i am sorry to have "summed" you guys up the way that i did.

i understand some of you may not have an agenda, it might have been better to ask if you have a goal or motivation.

hamby, i don't like you.  i think you are intelligent and your last post was very good.  you replied to my point rationally and i easily followed you.  you are a smart aleck and i do like that, in some ways i am the same way. in my opinion you still have some growing to do before you can understand a person and make your opinions understood.  deep down inside i think you do understand and know how to speak to others but i feel that sometimes you think it wise to undermine your opponent attacking their character other than addressing the issues.  i have my faults as well and i did learn something from your critique even if i did not take it that well.  ultimately i do respect you in what you have to offer and i appreciate your contribution.

 

It's ok, Sapphen. I don't like you either. I still reply to you and give you my honest opinions, though. My job here isn't to make friends. I don't ask that you like me. I don't think you're as mature as you think, and I think you hide behind god to keep from answering hard questions. I think there's hope for you, though.

In any case, as you've pointed out, you owe me no explanations for anything, and I can do nothing more than continue asking you to answer.

Thank you.

When someone is being honest and open with me, I am honest and open in return. This OP was asking sincere questions, so I answered sincerely. When you hide behind god and call me a bully, I will answer sarcastically because you're not acting openly or honestly with me.

You have every right to that opinion. I don't feel any obligation to tell you either my age, my experience, or my accomplishments. I've very seldom heard complaints about my ability to clearly voice my opinions. I have caught you repeatedly putting words into my mouth, and have called you on it. I suspect you expect certain opinions from me, and project them into my writing. Nevertheless, I will continue to try to improve my writing skills. It's something I'm constantly working on.

I have not, to my knowledge, attacked your character. I have attacked your arguments, your tactics, and your practice of hit and run posting. I understand that your character contributes to these actions, so indirectly I suppose you could make the leap, but I have never said, "Sapphen, you are a _________ person." I have said your arguments suck, in a slightly more eloquent fashion, but that's because many of them do. Like I've said, I believe you are a good person, and for the record, I think you probably have good character. Again, I think religion is skewing your view of the world. Not your character.

It makes me happy to hear you say that.

Good. Then everything should be fine. I'm here to help theists think their way out of religion, not to make friends. I don't ask for anything more than your consideration of my posts, and answers to my questions.

Actually, Sapphen, I should give you credit where it's due.  I admire you for dealing with me openly even though you don't like me.  Many people would have just left the boards after the kind of tongue (keyboard?) lashing I dished out, but you thought about what I said, and told me what you thought about it, without being rude or condescending.

This speaks for your character.

Like I said, all I ask for is openness and honesty.  We don't have to like each other personally to gain from discussions.

Thanks.

 

thank you for the theory paranoid. i appreciate the concern but the reasons that i am frustrated about has little to do with the issues at hand. i am more confident in my beliefs and because i think rational does not mean that it conflicts with my faith. i have always seen God as a rational being and like i stated before, i have my personal proof that He exists and that is rational enough for me.

i have some enormous personal issues that have risen, i also deal with depression and anxiety. there are a few other factors that is effecting me right now and my ability to stay concentrated on our goal here is being undermined.

i won't say that nothing has been effected by the new ideas. a part of me feels like i sacrificed my faith to God and i should praise Him more. i think that may be a little bit of religion's fault because another part is telling me that i have did God's work and i need to let the seeds grow. now i do need to bring my full attention to the matters of my home, family and friends.

i will still think about the ideas you pose and i do appreciate the concern that you have. a reach out to help another person is a fine quality.

 

...and thank you hamby, what you said means more to me than you will ever know.

the removal of religion from our schools and government.

not unless they are breaking laws and posing a serious threat to others.

i'm sure that i'm already casual friends with many xians. i see no fistfights breaking out. could i listen to someone vent about their fear of the rapture without laughing hysterically? sorry, but no, i just couldn't do it.

who gives theists these crazy ideas??? if there ever was an agnostic inside of me, i pooped him out about 25 years ago. but seriously, no there isn't. in order for us to be friends, you need to ditch this theory. it's insulting.

where do i start? good grief...

i'm straining harder than a constipated gorilla to come up with an answer, here. but it's not happening. doesn't mean there isn't one, but i don't know it, yet.

huh? well, churches shouldn't be tax exempt or receive federal funds. remove references to religion from federal documents? "in god we trust"? take "god" out of the pledge of allegiance? these seem like obvious and fair changes to me. the separation of church and state should actually be a law instead of just a polite recommendation.

it has to come from everyone, but there will always be private belief. it's foolish to think otherwise. and it would be foolish to try and prevent it.

reason. and patience.

religion as a private, personal belief. period.

no offense, but you're words on my computer screen. i don't KNOW you. i can't love you. could i? no matter what you believe? that depends on what actions your belief leads you to take.

 

I actually disagree here.
Sapphen's urge to 'run away' looks to me more like an information overload, the he's been filled with fresh information and feels worn out rather than fresh. 'Retreating' to church, (or another activity that takes mind of debate - e.g. getting stuck into a good fictional book or something) is the perfect way for the mind to clear itself, let the intuition subconsciously analyse all that has been learnt and find clarity.

My suggestion is to leave us for a while and lose yourself in your everyday life for while. In a few weeks you mind suddenly find yourself bursting, full of ideas that you want to announce to us, and the cycle can start again!

When I said running away, I did not mean from this message board. I meant from new ideas. I think leaving this site for a while is a good thing, you cannot really analise your beliefs while being forced to defend them. I also don't think church is the right place. I interpreted church to mean a service or discussion with a minister. That could only make it harder to challenge old ideas. On the other hand if 'church' just meant the building and a quiet place to contemplate things then it's not such a bad idea.

But then he said that it's not the new ideas causing discomfort anyway so this is all irrelevant 

I agree.

People who don't want their beliefs ridiculed shouldn't hold ridiculous beliefs.

true enough, but there lots of ridiculous beliefs besides religion. non-religious are not immune to stupidity (I know you didn't say that I'm just making that point). and some people are going to believe no matter what you say to them, that's just how it is. I may not agree with them but I'm not going to harrass them over it. as long as they don't have the power to influence governements, science and other imporant stuff, I think I can live with them.

Thanks!

 

I totally agree. Shaming someone to "give up their beliefs" that you don't agree with through ridicule isn't good in my opinion.  How do you know they're not just doing it to get you to leave them alone?  It has to be genuine, not "wanting to fit in". I wish more people would realize that. Ridicule and mockery is not "rational conversation".

If someone believed that spooning ice cream into computers made them work better would you respect that belief or would you rightly consider them an idiot or insane? What if someone believed that drinking drano was the ultimate good and lead someone to heaven? Neither of these beliefs are any less rational than any religious belief.

I disagree. People have spooned ice cream into computers and swigged drano, and 10 times out of 10 you end up with a busted computer and a rerouted esophagus, no exceptions.

Religious beliefs are a different beast altogether, though. While spooning ice cream into computers and drinking drano are both physical, tangible, empirical acts with equally physical, tangible, empirical consequences, religious beliefs are inward, mystical acts that have both physical and metaphysical consequences.

Religious  beliefs are certainly irrational, but spooning ice cream into a computer and drinking drano are downright stupid.  Big difference.   

I think the past 3 posts above me make good points.