I’m an atheist too. I’ve had this conversation before with family, friends etc, atheists, agnostics, and theists, and those who profess to be theist, but can’t be because they don’t follow any religion, but claim to believe in a god.
In raising my children, I’ve always considered that some religion in their upbringing couldn’t hurt as long as it was supplied by someone trusted. (Mom, friends, relatives etc.) If it were supplied by me, then they came to realize by true beliefs (disbelief) they may take me for a hypocrite.
I refused to argue my points of view in front of them until they were into their teen years.
I do believe that especially in this day and age, religious teaching is an important tool for establishing a conscience. Sometimes parents can’t do this by themselves.
There has been much harm done to the earth and to people in the name of religion, but I’ve come to realize that simply a belief in god doesn’t hurt anyone unless it is real. If one follows the bible or any other doctrine, to the letter, one has no choice but to become a fanatic. Most people don’t.
I truly believe religion is man’s answer to the unanswerable and I don’t waste my time studying fairy tales. I’m willing to die with this disbelief in these fairy tales.
I’ve been accused of being agnostic by my decision is to not make this choice for my impressionable children or other impressionable ones I may influence.
If I’m wrong, I’ll go to hell, but I can’t make that choice for them. I’ve been wrong before!
I would like to think you are right, but even the recent looting in Iraq shows how people act when there is no authority to stop them. Also spiritually has always been an ally of government. Many countries use religion or spirituallity to control the populace in bad times. Countries that have banned religion, can’t think of many, Russia (USSR) was one, have not done well.
Atheists use as much faith as Theists do. God can not be proved or disproved, so both become believers in their “religion” through faith. One day Atheistism will be recognized as just another religion. On that day I hope both can be heard equally on issues of what to teach our children in school. It is way lopsided right now in favor of the Atheists.
Love
Leroy
Why not stop beating around the bush and just advocate a conscience period?
I would, and have. This is the only life I’ve got, which makes it a whole lot more important to be diligent and good.
This is a really horrible and scary philosophy of life. It really scares me that people think this way, and yet, I know they do. The idea that the only thing that can make people be nice is fear of punishment shows such a low opinion of humanity that I’m tempted to blow the whole planet up.
I’m nice to people because that way, I create a better world. I don’t murder, rape or steal because I prefer a world in which there is no murder, rape or theft. If only people would see these simple truths instead of looking to other beings and realms of which we know nothing.
That’s the world I want too. Why we need to ignore Occam’s Razor and postulate fantastic possibilities is beyond me.
I agree that religion shouldn’t be there to scare people that they will be punished in an afterlife. Threats and blackmail usually are a very bad way to go about achieving one’s goals.
Plus, I still believe that my regard for others and the will to do good stems from the “believe” of a lack of an afterlife. If I was sure that people would live on after they die, it wouldn’t be so objectionable to kill people anymore. After all, they may enjoy a better life and I might actually do them a favour by killing them.
But no, I am convinced we only have this one life and that’s what makes it precious. Certainly I wouldn’t mind living longer, but that’s something I don’t intend to achieve by dying.
Your reasoning is sound too, but it is a point of view I do not share and there are good reasons on both sides of the fence.
I speak from my own experiences and personal history in regard to religion.
I was a Catholic and had a very good Catholic formation in doctrines and in morals. I think I was a good Catholic, better than most (Lord, forgive me for self-adulation). I call myself a postgraduate Catholic now and live as one.
I appreciate all the good things in the Catholic Church: good philosophy, good theology, arts, architecture, monuments, literature, pomp and pageantry, music, etc. I want my children to marry in a church wedding and I expect my family to buriy me in a religious ceremony.
What I want you to know is that whenever a doctrine or moral teaching or disaciplinary imposition of the Catholic Church goes against my better judgment, I do not give it any importance. I follow my intelligence, my reason, and my spirit of free inquiry with a very critical methodology.
My kids are growing up and I tell them about my values when they ask me; otherwise I let them go their ways in the good religious schools I sent them to.
What is my advice to you? Teach them to be good and honest and kind and well-behaved and refined and civilized and to love mankind (including of course and specially women, the mothers of all humanity) and to appreciate nature and value it. You can even put them in good religious schools; but when they have a question or two or many, answer them according to your intelligence, reason, free inquiry, and critical attitude; so that they will know that religion is all right, but don’t let religious leaders and systems and establishments and institutions and organizations and movements run their lives.
Susma Rio Sep
Now that is something we all can hopefully agree on. At least I completely agree with it (Hmmm, are “me too” posts still being frowned upon?) 
Some people, but by no means most. In a city with 5 million people, you only need a couple thousand acting naughty to make the entire city population look bad.
That’s true, but then it only takes a small number acting badly to do a lot of damage. Unfortunately, this happens also anywhere there is some kind of disaster, people just take advantge when they shouldn’t.
Religion if taught correctly brings people to a inward discipline and makes outstanding citizens of them. But we don’t live in a perfect world, so religion is not perfect, but it is still very much needed by those lacking self-discipline. Otherwise society would suffer. The police or military state is not desirable. I have begun to understand all things are important learning tools, even bad things. The world is only a schoolroom and we are not expected to cure all it’s problems. We need to mainly work on our own.
Love
Leroy
Iekatt said:
Incorrect. A theory is scientific explanation of facts that interrelate to one another. Not a guage of possibility. Under this criteria, creationism is not a theory, but mere speculation. You are using the term ‘theory’ in the vernacular, and in this case, it is inappropriate. Creationism attempts to disguise itself as a theory so as to level the playing field in an attempt to push religious doctrine on people by using the state as a mechanism to deliver the message.
How sad that humanity is still caught in this stage of development. I strive to achieve goals because I can make changes in the world around me now. This will better the environment I live in, as well as the environment of others. As far as your ‘teenager’ comment goes, teenagers rebelling or sliding by in school is hardly a new development.
Atheists do not require faith. This is another strawman that attempts to put atheism and theism on an even playing field so as to give theism legitimacy, and undermine atheism. I lack a belief . This is not the same as holding a belief, any more than ‘bald’ is a hair color. Religion by definition is the worship of a supernatural entity as creator and ruler of the universe. I do not worship nor believe in said entity. Therefore I do not subscribe to religion.
Schools are NEUTRAL on the subject of religion. The public school system is not ‘atheistic’. By NOT teaching or supporting a particular view does this mean you are in favor of it? Of course not. You have not mentioned a thing about infidelity here in this thread, so you must support it right? See how your argument doesn’t work? The constitution specifically forbids the government endorsing any one religion over another. Since obviously there is no time in education to teach every possible creation myth, every religious belief that people adhere to, the school as a representative of the US government takes a neutral stance by being silent on the issue.
And which religion would that be? What are the criteria for determining if the religion is being taught “correctly”? Where is your data showing that religious people on average show more of the moral qualities we hold as virtues and more self discipline than those without religion?
A blanket statement followed by an unsupported assertion. I have seen many religious zealots, and I grant you, they do indeed seem to have a great deal of self- discipline. I also note that there are many, many people in the world who show self discipline and good morality without religion. Non religious, or atheist people are the third largest majority in the world next to Christianity and Islam. Numbers do not seem to support your assertion that religion equals morality. In fact, in the past, when virtually everyone was religious, there seemed to be an awful lot of immorality running rampant.
My suggestion would be for you to rethink your prejudices and presupposed assumptions before you indirectly insult people by telling them they cannot be moral or have hope in their life if there is no religion involved in their world view. If YOU are unable to find meaning in your life without a deity, and are only motivated to have self discipline and behave morally with religion, then that seems a shortcoming of your own, and not one you should impose on everyone else.
Cheers,
Ron
Hi Ron
I won’t try to convince you of anything, I know it would be impossible. Almost everything man does, he does on faith. Assuming things will be ok. From trusting that the stuff in the bottle is really soda, to trusting the toothpaste is not poison. If you did not trust (have faith in) nearly everything you do it, or believe, would be impossible to live in this world. Atheists trust (have faith) that God doesn’t exist, but they don’t know for sure. Atheistism is as much a “calling” as anything else. You put yourself on a higher pedestal than others out of ego, not logic or fact. People that give themselves to causes such as God, or non-God also give up their ability for free thinking.
Love
Leroy
Posted by lekatt
Not true. Don’t assume. If you provide evidence, I will be happy to change my position based on that evidence. Above all I must remain honest to myself. To ignore evidence would not be the moral thing to do if I wish to remain honest.
I do not agree. This is equivocation. Faith and Trust aren’t interchangeable. It is true that one must trust to a certain degree to move through their life in this world. But trust is earned, and belief in and of itself is from repeated observation. I may trust that the soda really is soda and that the toothpaste isn’t poison, but my trust isn’t complete. We hire people and make laws that inspect that soda and toothpaste to make sure it’s safe. We have tamper proof materials to protect them until they get to the consumer. I trust my toothpaste isn’t poisoned. If I opened the tube, and the tamper seal is missing, my trust is broken. Faith would be to continue to brush my teeth with this product despite the fact that the tamper seal is gone, hoping and/or believing I will not be hurt. Trust is validated and invalidated every day. I trust the sun will come up tomorrow. Why? Because repeated observation has shown this to happen time and again. Now to truly believe that when it rose it would be green instead of yellow would be faith.
I thought I had explained this adequately before. I will try to make it clear. I LACK a belief in god. I never asserted that there is no god. It is my position that because there is no evidence to indicate said god, I am justified in my lack of belief in such a deity. Do you understand? This is the viewpoint of most atheists I daresay. Once again, I think some people want to believe that an atheist has faith there is no god, because that puts the atheist and the theist on the same intellectual level. The person can say “We both have faith, the atheist just has a different kind of faith.” This makes them feel better. It’s much harder to say “I believe this because I want to, whereas the atheist relies on reason to choose his belief or lack of it.”
I am sorry if you feel I am on a pedestal above you. I am sorry if you feel I have an ego problem. How did you come up with these broad generalizations anyway? Could it be that your presuppositions are getting in the way of your judgement? Is this the “free thinking” your talking about?
No evidence can be given in either direction, God or non-God, you say you base your choice on reason or lack of it, but there is no evidence or proof either way, so how can your decision be better than the Theist? I don’t believe it can be any different or better.
One makes a choice, if one decides not to make a choice, then that is still a choice. I don’t see any grounds to believe that faith in God or non-God is different.
A few points to consider.
-
If we define this 'god" then we come much closer to being able to confirm his existence. If we define god as having certain characteristics, and then confirm that conditions exist that run contrary to those characteristics then that is a pretty good indicator that said deity as described does not exist.
-
I cannot prove that there aren’t Little Green leperchauns orbiting Apha Centauri, so does this mean I should withold judgement? I look around at the world, I see what is likely based on past observations. I use this experience and combine it with the fact that there is no evidence to support the claim of little green leperchauns around Alph Centauri and I come to the conclusion. I do not believe in little green leperchauns orbiting Alpha Centauri. Lack of evidence + experience = Justified in not having belief. Now if I have faith that these beings exist, I am ignoring my experience and choosing to believe in something simply because I want to. This is not rational. This does not mean I think that someone who believes in little green leperchauns orbiting Alpha Centauri is stupid, or that they’re less of a person, or that I am on a pedestal above them. It simply means they hold an irrational belief.
These mean some very different things to some people. So much so they wish to enforce belief as law, or deny people certain rights because of what they do or do not believe in. That seems very important to me.
Is there any reason that authority has to be a religion? I could point to Al Qaeda and say “this is how people act when religion isn’t stopped” and it would be just as logical, I think. Are you implying that people can’t even control themselves without religion? I’ve been an atheist for a long time and never killed anybody, not even once. That holds true for all the atheists I know, actually. Weird!
Often to very bad purposes. See the Inquisition, the Crusades…
I certainly won’t argue that religion is a way to control people.
The USSR, Cuba, North Korea. Yes, they’re all doing/did badly. Of course, I could easily come up with a large list of theocracies that aren’t doing well. Virtually the entire Middle East comes to mind.
You’ve got a bunch of faith, and apparently not a lot of knowledge go to with it. 
Great combination.
I assure you from personal experience that atheism doesn’t require any of that. In my case, I’ve made a long and concerted effort not to have faith in other things once I’d given up on god.
There are atheists with faith (just not in a god) and there are plenty without. If Atheism (I’m not going to mangle the language as you did) is a religion, tell me about it. What are its rules and precepts? What is its view of the universe? What are its moral and social codes?
The answer is there aren’t any, because atheism is not a system of beliefs. It’s one idea: the lack of belief in god. Atheism is no more a religion than Theism. It’s a classification. There are atheistic religions, i.e. Buddhism, and there are atheist ideas, beliefs and such that are not religions or organized. Likewise, Theism is not a religion. There are people who believe in god who don’t belong to any religion. I don’t go around asking “What’s the Theistic position on [X topic]?” I could ask for the views of various sects of Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, etc. Otherwise the question wouldn’t even be answerable, let alone sensible.
The rest of the above confuses atheism with the separation of church and state. The two are quite distinct and separate, I find generally that it’s only really religious people who confuse the two. Wanting, say, schools, or science, or the government to be secular is something I would say most atheists want, but many theists do as well. After all, the guys who came up with the idea were Deists.
Doesn’t this sound like the perfect time to bring up Invisible Pink Unicorns? lekatt, I’m sure you’ve been told about these useful creatures a multitude of times, so I won’t reiterate. But why is belief in God a more reasonable belief than belief in Invisible Pink Unicorns?