Who is the atheist version of Kirk Cameron?
Well…maybe Charlie Sheen?
I don’t think so. Charlie Sheen’s god is… Charlie Sheen. So, not an atheist.
“I always believed the theory of evolution as truth, that we all just came from the slime. When we, when we died, you know, that was it, there is nothing…”
-Jeffry Dahmer
Let’s not fight the atheism wars on this board again.
I think that’s what you get if you’re pregnant and you scoop the kitty litter.
[sub]Curse you, Monkey, you stole my line![/sub]
Just look for a guy at a podium thumping a book with blank pages.
Gadzooks! He is like Der Trihs!
Religion could be said to cause every type of behavior known to man.
Among the religious people I’ve known personally in my life - a number easily into the thousands if not tens of thousands - religion fosters primarily social, non-aggressive and peaceful behaviors. I’ve seen this type of behavior time and time again amongst the various Christians, Jews and Muslims I’ve had the good fortune to know personally. In certain others I’ve seen hypocrisy, intolerance, dishonesty and cruelty - you know, the same qualities that are to be found in members of any other group of human beings (including atheists). So it’s obvious that it isn’t religion that creates these negative attributes; simply being human is all it takes.
Now if you want to argue that the functioning of the human brain itself is far from perfect, you won’t get much argument from me. But don’t cherry-pick certain negative aspects of human nature and then try blame religion for creating them. To attempt to do so is more an indicator of an improperly functioning human brain than is any belief in religion.
Further, religious belief is mostly a belief passed down from parents, neighbors and loved ones to children at a time in their lives when they by nature tend to accept what their families and loved ones tell them to be true. Then, having grown up with these beliefs, many maintain them out of a sense of loyalty to those loved ones and/or because they find arguments against religion to be self-serving, often insulting and to a large degree lacking credulity in accounting for the creation of life and nature as we know it.
The name that comes most readily to mind in order to refute this ridiculous allegation of yours is William F. Buckley, a brilliant man and a staunch believer to his dying day. Perhaps you’ve heard of him?
I’ve never seen an instance of this, so I join in with others asking for a cite.
I suspect that you are mangling the view expressed by Der Trihs at post #85 of this thread (and on many occasions previously).
Saying “the God hypothesis is so internally contradictory and vague that I can’t imagine what evidence could possibly prove it” is not the same as saying “if there was evidence that proved there was a God I still wouldn’t believe there was a God”.
A while back it was trendy for half smart theists to ask atheists what evidence would falsify their (atheists’) position, in a lame attempt to prove that the atheist view is unscientific (not falsifiable).
Even leaving aside the onus of proof issues, this isn’t a valid approach. It’s just an attempt at a gotcha yah, somewhat similar to asking a loaded question (like “when did you stop beating your wife?”).
Simply, you can’t prove or falsify gibberish. It’s like me asking you what evidence it would take to falsify your belief that I don’t have “a cat that is entirely white and is flang and is entirely black and a wibble”, and then accusing me of having an unscientific belief in the non-existence of my cat when I demur.
You may think I exaggerate, but remember that when we have had a thread asking what exactly theists believe the precise characteristics of their deity to be, every single response was substantially different, even amongst those supposedly of the same religion. Theists don’t even know what their god is; they aren’t in any position to start demanding to know what evidence atheists would have to see to prove their gods’ existence.
That’s more or less what I was going to pop in and say.
History has its fair share of religious crazies, sure, but it also has The Venerable Bede, the scribes of the Lindisfarne Gospels and the Book of Kells, and a whole bunch of dudes writing wonderful pieces of literature because they were divinely inspired.
Yeah, there were wars as well, but we managed those when we were worshipping Wotan. You might as well claim tea is The Great Evil because of the Chinese Opium Wars, ignoring all the good it’s done in the world by being a tasty beverage.
You overestimate yourself.
Sorry, confused my protagonists, there, let me try again
Der Tris, we’ve tangled quite a few times over the years about religion, but I’m beginning to suspect you are as sick of it as I am.
'Cause I have to admit, that post is pretty damn funny.
I had no views on the poster before reading this thread but them’s fighting words! Naxos do cheap CDs (£5 here) of good performances of a lot of rarely-recorded classical music and I won’t hear a word against them.*
After reading this thread, however, I agree with this pitting. I’m an agnostic and even I think “Religious people are stupid, I said it, that settles it” is a deeply offensive argument.
I concur. I think we’re hoping he’ll grow out of it. A conversion to rationality and critical thinking, if you will.
*NB: I have no professional connection to the Naxos record company. I just like their CDs.
I’m as hardcore an atheist as they come, but even I have to admit that religion has been a positive influence to humanity throughout history. It introduced accountability to a society which was technically and logistically incapable of providing it through tangible means. Without it, the wretched masses would have had no remorse in preying upon themselves. People are vicious, selfish, malign creatures at heart who can only aspire to a greater good through role playing, which religion allows them to do. That being said, I feel that the best way to encourage people to cast off the shackles of religious dogma is through education and improving societal well being. In time, reason will triumph. Of course, that will involve making difficult decisions like limiting population growth in areas of rampant poverty to avoid endless spirals of famine, disease, and violence. I fear that humanity lacks the determination to willfully accept such realities.
Also, Texas is nutters.
I don’t see it working like that at all. Religion has always been a force for moral corruption, a tool to excuse and encourage bigotry & atrocities and justify the exploitation of the weak by the strong. It’s when the government loses control that everything falls to chaos, not when religion becomes less powerful. It’s the government that is the source of social order, not religion.
Far from being a positive influence, religion has been and still is crippling.
Language is a virus from outer space.
Well, I guess I’m going to have to take my previous post back.
Can we get your take on how Buddhism is a tool to exploit the weak?
“And when the smoke cleared away, and I sought to look upon the earth, I beheld against the background of cold, humorous stars only the dying sun and the pale mournful planets searching for their sister.”
from *The Posts of Naxos
*
by
H.P. Lovecraft and Winifred Virginia Jackson
You sound like a man who’s willing to listen to reason.
Or a man who’s willing to listen to Laurie Anderson.