It’s the same statement. Religion is not a requirement for human beings to be happy.
Lots of poor atheists are happy. Lots of poor religious people are not.
Dawkins was responding to the very common meme that people without religious faith can’t be happy, which is obviously nonsense.
Atheism is not a faith.
Most of my encounters when it comes to the “atheist vs. religionist” debate have been reactionary-the so-called “mean streak” is on behalf of the person making the religious claim and/or fishing for a conversion.
I see faith in religion as a crutch.
The thing is, some people *need *a crutch. I wouldn’t take away a physical crutch from someone with a broken leg, so why would I do the same thing emotionally? Religious ferver is responsible for a whole host of ills, sure, so religious actions such as voting against gay rights or reproductive services is Not OK In My Book. But lighting a candle or believing some white-bearded dude has your back? Meh.
I think of my aunt as an example. The woman is doggedly religious as only a Polish Catholic can be. But, to be brutally honest, her life is in the shitter: she’s outlived her ex-husband after a messy divorce AND two of her three daughters, plus the remaining daughter has been a heroin addict for over a decade. Who can blame her for wanting to believe the crazy crap Catholics believe in, if it brings her a little comfort and peace? I’d never kick that crutch away from her, even if I do heartily believe it’s all bunk and fairytales.
I’ll happily debate and engage logically anyone who wants to use a rational argument for the existence of God, but that’s not my aunt. Thudlows comment about “pick on someone your own size” rings true for me.
OP, there’s a difference between fair but spirited debate, and just trying to show that you’re right and they’re wrong no matter what. If your GF is content to rest on unexamined beliefs, that’s her call. Whether or not you want to be with someone like that is your call.
And part of her probably wants to point out all the things she thinks are wrong with your atheism. Yet you said she doesn’t. If you push this, you will probably hurt her and piss her off. And she would have every right to be hurt and pissed off. You’d just be acting a dick. Think of it this way, what would your reaction be if she tried converting you to Roman Catholic? Why do you think she’d be any happier at you trying to convert her to atheism?
Sorry, I just don’t like people who insist they must have others convert their belief. It’s an arrogant “i know better than you” thing, with a large dose of “please inflate my ego by admitting my opinion is better than yours” tossed in. Live and let live, if she takes comfort in her beliefs then let her. Besides, who knows, maybe in the end she’ll be proven right.
To me, it’s sort of like trying to convince people to do it doggy style instead of missionary position. Some people like missionary and you’ll never make anyone prefer something they don’t prefer. I view people’s religion as privately as I view their sex lives. Which position or religion you prefer makes no difference to me whatsoever. Unless you wish to have an intimate relationship with me, which is an entirely different matter. Otherwise, it’s none of my business and my favorite positions and religion (or lack thereof as the case happens to be) is none of yours either.
I suppose the thing that gets under my skin is the fact that she is very inquisitive in other areas of her life - politics, social issues, economics, etc. But, for whatever reason, religion is off-limits. If those day-to-day issues are worth further examination, surely the grounds on which a person bases their entire worldview should be subject to intensive inquiry. No?
I don’t treat the issue with a “nyah-nyah, gotcha!” attitude. I’ve tried analogies, illustrative scenarios, and other comparison-type approaches. For whatever reason even these methods, which in other topics of study are just fine, are somehow perceived to be mean. I guess it boils down to my frustration with the special, off-limits status afforded to religious belief.
I see it as the equivalent of a just war doctrine.
First, like a just war, it should be defensive. You should not go around seeking opportunities to destroy or change somebody’s faith - no witnessing.
Second, you must weigh the consequences. Recognize that any change in a person’s faith may cause both harm and good. Even if somebody has a faith you believe is false, recognize it may be benefitting them to have it - it may provide solace or serve as an ethical guide. If it’s doing this and causing no harm, let it be. And when you’re weighing the consequences, don’t forget to add in the cost of arguing somebody into a new set of beliefs.
Third (and this one doesn’t fit in the just war analogy) maintain some humility. Don’t assume that what you believe is right and what other people believe is wrong. You’re not omniscient. Keep you mind open to the possibility that somebody’s religious beliefs might be right.
Honestly, I don’t understand the need that some atheists have to convince everyone else that there is no God, and that religion is foolish and should be abandoned. While there are certainly people whose religious beliefs lead to suffering and bigotry, there are also people whose religious beliefs are quiet and personal, and don’t affect their approach to science or equal rights or what-have-you. Attempting to sway those latter people from their faith seems to me to be a somewhat dickish thing to do.
Frankly, I have the same reaction to atheist proselytizing as I do to the real thing. When dealing with non-close friends, acquaintences, co-workers, and other such non-personal sitautions, it’s a sort of mixture of genteel disapproval and embarassment for all parties involved; after all, I was raised to believe that things such as one’s religion or lack thereof were None Of My Business. When dealing with close friends/relatives, it’s more actively annoying; I feel as though proselytizing is inherently disrespectful of the other person’s privacy, and that it comes off as rather arrogant (either morally or intellectually, depending on the situation). In forums such as this. . .well, it’s made for this sort of discourse, and I’m glad to see it, but frankly, a lot of people come off as dicks.
To me, passive religious belief is benign, and therefore doesn’t really matter. And I think that haranguing people over things that don’t matter is kind of rude. And I guess that’s what I don’t get about a lot of the atheist proselytizing–if there’s no god, and the theist isn’t being a douche because he thinks there is one, what the hell is the point of it?
Not surprising. Presumedly she bases the other beliefs in her life on reason and she bases her religious beliefs on faith. It’s two completely seperate sources for belief.
And he’s right. That claim not only assumes that faith is harmless; it assumes that the person trying to destroy that faith agrees that it is harmless. It’s just a variation on the old “atheists are all evil” line really.
Faith makes people dangerous to themselves and others; some more than others, but always dangerous. Destroying it is a benevolent act. I’m reminded of the leper from Life of Brian who complained about being healed actually; he too complained about a horrible affliction being lifted from him. It was funny in the movie…but then, people haven’t been propagandized to see leprosy as a good thing, unlike religion.
Yes. I’m not interested in living a lie. Especially since doing so would make me unhappy, so in the end I’d have neither truth nor happiness.
It seems to me that if a person loses his faith and is unhappy as a result, then that person really hasn’t lost his faith.
You have to realize that that is never going to change. If you’ve already tried all kinds of techniques, and she doesn’t like any of them, then there almost certainly isn’t some sort of “armor-piercing question” that you’ll stumble across. Assuming that she isn’t, say, crusading for a school prayer law or something like that, your best option would probably be to learn to deal with it.
Yeah, I think that’s just the way it will be.
They save a sinner from spending an eternity in hell (at least that’s their belief).
I’d like to add that not once, in my entire life, have I been approached on the street corner by an atheist handing out atheist literature. No atheists have ever knocked on my door trying to convert me, nor have I ever even heard of any atheists ever doing that. But I’ve had plenty of theists pushing their beliefs on me.
Never argue with someone about their religion
Exceptions - see #1.
Religion is in a downward spiral. It may not seem like it…but it is. It may not be going fast enough for your tastes…but that is just too bad 
Presumably, they “win” brownie points with their god-of-choice. The evangelist actually believes they are getting something out of it (plus, presumably, rescuing a non-believer from the fires of hell - so it’s win-win).
An athiest presumably is going to be of the Der Triths variety, and believe that religious belief however mundane and unexpressed is simply bad for you ab initio. They obviously are not getting "brownie points’ from anyone, and are not saving anyone from a terrible afterlife, since neither of these things exist. I would assume they are saving the other person from labouring under the burden of belief in superstitious nonsense.
I was brought up in Reform Judaism, though I’m not a believer, and so I’m simply used to thinking of prostheletism as fundamentally impolite. There are no “brownie points” for, or saving others by, prostheletism in Judaism.
I don’t know, but I do know I wouldn’t want a three-way relationship with me, her and her imaginary friend God. If she has particular ideas of what is good and what is bad that are based on the opinions of a fictional character (such as “The Holy Spirit says the Pope is never wrong, and the Pope says condoms are bad”), there is no way to discuss this without attacking the source of this misinformation.
Ah, you see putting ads on buses saying that there is almost certainly no god is aggressive proselytizing. Putting signs on churches and bumper stickers on cars, of course, is entirely different.
(I’d love for an atheist to come to my door. It would be interesting to see which arguments worked the best.)
I don’t get it. How does that thread support the notion that one gets brownie points for prostheletism in Judaism?