Probably not. As Spouse Weasel once said, “I could never believe in a god who was less ethical than me.”
Yeah, exactly.
I suppose I take “Step A” for granted — that any thinking person started out with “well if there’s anything to this ‘religion’ crap it sure as hell isn’t THAT” and discarded all those notions of God and looked for meaning and significance and central core truths wherever they might find them. Like y’all often say, “An atheist is just a person who disbelieves in one more God than you theists do”. I am theistic but yeah, I had the same obvious “HELL no” reaction to the babytalk Sky Patriarch that I assume you had.
I may be terrified enough to be extorted into worship.
It’s easier if you don’t have to come up with your own ethics, and simply have them dictated to you by people who have been dead for thousands of years
I don’t know if it’s the worst thing, but: my father is an atheist, and — for reasons I’ve never fully understood — people often tell him false statements about foxholes.
When anyone tells me there are no atheists in foxholes, I tell them that’s great news, as I’d like to avoid being in a foxhole.
I think you’re misunderstanding that aphorism.
It means foxes, like other non-human animals, can’t be atheists because they don’t have the mental capacity to either believe in or not believe in a deity.
Given that religious fervor is often used as a motivatioal tool for our warriors, perhaps there is another reason that foxholes have a deficit of atheists. “Fight for the glory of what, you say?”
Or maybe there is no deficit of atheists in foxholes at all, so no reason is needed?
It’s also worth mentioning Dennis Miller’s point that no one seems to find Jesus on prom night.
I’ve never been in a foxhole, but I’ve been shot at and near a few IEDs when they went off and it never occurred to me to believe in the man in the sky.
Same here. My considerable time in bunkers with rockets and mortars coming in had no impact on my atheism.
In fact, it kind of reinforced my sense that maybe religious people were a bunch of idiots.
I was giving some thought to the notion that religious people are idiots. In a way, it is kind of offensive and bigoted, ignoring the fact that some rather highly-respected minds have belonged to religious types (e.g., Newton). Yet, it is difficult to not view it as some sort of defect – even religious people see believing the wrong stuff to be stupid.
In looking back at my own personal experience, I can authoritatively say that religion can make a person feel really good. Yes, in an emotional sense, but also, in the literal physical sense. As though belief were acting as some sort of seratonin-oxytocin-dopamine-cocktail-like delivery system. It likely correlates strongly with the social environment, with the doctrine/mythos part acting as a backdrop (in other words, it would not matter which religion/denomination, just any belief system would serve).
One can also obtain positive physiological effects from booze, weed, sex, heroin or street racing, and there is a tendency to return to the behaviors that yield a good feeling. Which is to say, it would be sensible to group religious belief/devotion into the same category as addictive behavior. From an unbiased perspective, the actions and effects are fundamentally indistinguishable.
But, you say, religion by contrast leads to good things. Which is true, to some extent (would one not do those things without the faith, and if so, what kind of person is that?), but it also leads to bad things, just as those other behaviors do. And the scale of the ills of religion can greatly surpass the ill effects of other types of joy-seeking.
The time has come to put promoters of faith level with drug pushers and pimps. I have no problem with a person holding those beliefs, but, just hold them, do not encourage them to be pissed all over everybody else.
It’s easy to think of them as idiots when your caught up in a war started by American radical Christians.
I think I’m pretty close to endorsing this myself.
I had my Experience and came out with that above-described combo of Answers and Yes It Matters and Yes It Fits the General Topic Matter of What We Designate as Religion, and, yeah, since it rang all those bells for me, my first inclination was to try to share all of that — since it made my life better, presumably it would do so for other people, yes?
No, or mostly no. The thing is, I went searching for answers and found mine, but I was only now putting them into words. And before long came up against the realization that everyone ELSE who’d had this kind of experience had gone forth trying to put this shit into words, too, and most of the subsequent history for each of them that’s available for us to read about is either “nobody ever understood WTF that nut was on about” or else “A whole bunch of people ended up identifiying as followers and after a few generations were blindly reciting verbatim that person’s Holy Words without any indication of the kind of understanding that would have enabled them to express any of it in their OWN words. And then they proceeded to shove these Holy Words down other people’s throats. For their own good”.
I’ve come to think that it doesn’t share well. That it’s valid but only accessible to the person who needs to seek and find it on their own. And also that, no, not everybody needs to. What’s a lot more shareable are the nuts and bolts perspectives on specific issues and concerns. And to share those, you don’t need to beat a goddam drum and tell everyone you had a relevation from God telling you this. Wisdom is as light and its source shines of its own accord. If you have to say “Hello people, over yonder is a bright light!”, and point to it, it must not be so freaking bright. Just point. If there’s light, they’ll see it.
those holy warriors are not idiots, they are assholes
well put
That’s the equivalent of having a twin brother. It’s not the same thing. If all of my memories are gone after I die, then having an “exact replication” is pointless. I’m dead, just like I was before I was conceived. Religion preys on this fact. As Elmer Gantry said, People everywhere are the same in one thing - they’re all afraid to die.
I posed that scenario firmly tongue-in-cheek. Even if I believed exact replication was possible (which I don’t…much), I don’t believe the copy would be me in any sense that matters to me. It is simply someone who looks like me, acts like me, and who stole my memories. It may as well be a twin, or a random guy, or a chicken—I have no future in any of them.
And they would look at you and feel the exact same way about you.
Of course. And we’d both marvel at how smart and sexy the other one was. 