Important Announcement

See here for an important message regarding the community which has become a read-only site as of October 31.

 
Pause Switch to Standard View Things atheism is not.
Show More
Loading...
Flag mainecaptain April 20, 2012 1:33 PM EDT

Apr 20, 2012 -- 1:20PM, Sparky_Spotty wrote:



Strangely enough, I largely agree with those statements. I think on certain issues, your view on the issue of whether there is some divine purposefully entity pulling the strings can alter your world view. HOWEVER, I don't think you can make any generalizations about athiest positions on things.


I am an atheist, yet I don't approve of abortion.  I am for same sex marriages though.


I don't approve of stealing or lying, and I don't in the same breath think they are 'sins' that I will be punished for in the afterlife.


I don't support capital punishment, but I also think the justice system is sometimes overly lenient.


 


 


I guess my point is, ones position on the existence of God can affect ones world view, but not in any necessarily consistent way.




 




Being an atheist and not believing in abortion actually makes sense. If you don't believe there are any gods or a soul and an possible after life. Then it makes sense.


I am always stunned that believers, in a god, (particularly Christians)  in souls and after life are against abortion, since they should believe the soul goes to heaven, or is reborn in another body. A believer, particularly  Christians should have no problem with abortion based on that.


After all in the opinion of a Christian, no life is lost,  The souls  would instantly go to heaven to be with their Jesus, At least if they really believed what they claim to believe . Which I sincerely doubt they really do. That  is why certain types of believers come and harangue atheists.   IMNSHO.

Flag mytmouse57 April 20, 2012 2:02 PM EDT

Apr 20, 2012 -- 1:15PM, mountain_man wrote:


Apr 20, 2012 -- 12:05PM, mytmouse57 wrote:

If one think God does not exist, then one is an athiest.


No, all one needs to be an Atheist is a lack of belief in gods.  Thanks for sharing your opinion.




In other words, thinking God does not exist.


I know, "lacking a belief" sounds sexier (perhaps because it makes having belief seem like having a tumor, or something.)


But c'mon... let's be honest, and not split hairs. 


You think God does not exist. Therefore, you are atheist.

Flag mytmouse57 April 20, 2012 2:05 PM EDT

Apr 20, 2012 -- 1:20PM, Sparky_Spotty wrote:


Apr 20, 2012 -- 12:05PM, mytmouse57 wrote:


...


If you think there is no God, then that is going to affect how you view the world, life and things in general.


Likewise, if you think there is a God, ditto.


Those statement are both true in general. Specific effects will vary, person to person.


You're getting way too cranked up over simple observations. I'm not trying to make anything into anything.




Strangely enough, I largely agree with those statements. I think on certain issues, your view on the issue of whether there is some divine purposefully entity pulling the strings can alter your world view. HOWEVER, I don't think you can make any generalizations about athiest positions on things.


I am an atheist, yet I don't approve of abortion.  I am for same sex marriages though.


I don't approve of stealing or lying, and I don't in the same breath think they are 'sins' that I will be punished for in the afterlife.


I don't support capital punishment, but I also think the justice system is sometimes overly lenient.


 


 


I guess my point is, ones position on the existence of God can affect ones world view, but not in any necessarily consistent way.




 




And that was my point too. It will vary in specific instance, from person to person, from issue to issue, but cannot be applied in general principle.


Other than thinking God does not exist, no true or accurate statement can follow the declaration, "Well, atheists think:"


Flag Sparky_Spotty April 20, 2012 2:38 PM EDT

Apr 20, 2012 -- 2:02PM, mytmouse57 wrote:


Apr 20, 2012 -- 1:15PM, mountain_man wrote:


Apr 20, 2012 -- 12:05PM, mytmouse57 wrote:

If one think God does not exist, then one is an athiest.


No, all one needs to be an Atheist is a lack of belief in gods.  Thanks for sharing your opinion.




In other words, thinking God does not exist.


I know, "lacking a belief" sounds sexier (perhaps because it makes having belief seem like having a tumor, or something.)


But c'mon... let's be honest, and not split hairs. 


You think God does not exist. Therefore, you are atheist.




No, there is a difference.


THe language "god does not exist" implies a position on the same standing as The sun is fueled by quantum wigwams, or the universe is expanding.


The lack of belief on God, or that lack of a conclusion that God exists is not a positve assertion about the nature of the universe, rather its a "remaining" in a position where a particular hypothesis (God) has been discarded due to lack of evidence.


There are a zillion hypothesises (is that a word?) out there about everything. One does not have to describe himself as A-this, A-that, and A everything else just because he doesn't accept those hypothesises.  You for example are not an A-leprochaunist, are you?


Is A-leprechaunism a philosophy? Does A-leprechaunism require a burden of proof?


Can I (as a hypothetical believer in leprechauns) take a position that "leprechauns exist is a factual statement", unless you can PROVE they don't?


Why is believing in God different?

Flag steven_guy April 20, 2012 3:20 PM EDT

Apr 20, 2012 -- 2:02PM, mytmouse57 wrote:


Apr 20, 2012 -- 1:15PM, mountain_man wrote:


Apr 20, 2012 -- 12:05PM, mytmouse57 wrote:

If one think God does not exist, then one is an athiest.


No, all one needs to be an Atheist is a lack of belief in gods.  Thanks for sharing your opinion.




In other words, thinking God does not exist.


I know, "lacking a belief" sounds sexier (perhaps because it makes having belief seem like having a tumor, or something.)


But c'mon... let's be honest, and not split hairs. 


You think God does not exist. Therefore, you are atheist.




We do not "think God does not exist", rather "God does not exist" is a conclusion arrived at by the total lack of evidence and reason to support that claim that "God does exist".


Many theist weasels lamely attempt to argue that non-belief in God is some sort of peculiar belief, suggesting "If I'm one then you're one too. You're no better than us."


By this sort of cockeyed reasoning lack of believe in the existence of every god and goddess that has ever been dreamt up and all the fantasy beings, such as the Tooth Fairy, Easter Bunny, Santa Claus, pixies and leprechauns, so sort of actual belief. With an active beliefs that none of these beings actually exist and being in a state of constant denial of their existence it is wonder that atheists like me find the time to do anything each day, let alone think!

Flag Ken April 20, 2012 3:40 PM EDT

Apr 20, 2012 -- 2:38PM, Sparky_Spotty wrote:

There are a zillion hypothesises (is that a word?)



Fortunately, no. The plural is hypotheses.

Flag mytmouse57 April 20, 2012 3:53 PM EDT

Apr 20, 2012 -- 2:38PM, Sparky_Spotty wrote:


Apr 20, 2012 -- 2:02PM, mytmouse57 wrote:


Apr 20, 2012 -- 1:15PM, mountain_man wrote:


Apr 20, 2012 -- 12:05PM, mytmouse57 wrote:

If one think God does not exist, then one is an athiest.


No, all one needs to be an Atheist is a lack of belief in gods.  Thanks for sharing your opinion.




In other words, thinking God does not exist.


I know, "lacking a belief" sounds sexier (perhaps because it makes having belief seem like having a tumor, or something.)


But c'mon... let's be honest, and not split hairs. 


You think God does not exist. Therefore, you are atheist.




No, there is a difference.


THe language "god does not exist" implies a position on the same standing as The sun is fueled by quantum wigwams, or the universe is expanding.


The lack of belief on God, or that lack of a conclusion that God exists is not a positve assertion about the nature of the universe, rather its a "remaining" in a position where a particular hypothesis (God) has been discarded due to lack of evidence.


There are a zillion hypothesises (is that a word?) out there about everything. One does not have to describe himself as A-this, A-that, and A everything else just because he doesn't accept those hypothesises.  You for example are not an A-leprochaunist, are you?


Is A-leprechaunism a philosophy? Does A-leprechaunism require a burden of proof?


Can I (as a hypothetical believer in leprechauns) take a position that "leprechauns exist is a factual statement", unless you can PROVE they don't?


Why is believing in God different?




Thanks for the clarification. I see the difference now.


However, is it also not possible that in addition to "lacking belief," some athiest also think God does not exist?

Flag steven_guy April 20, 2012 3:55 PM EDT

Apr 20, 2012 -- 3:40PM, Ken wrote:


Apr 20, 2012 -- 2:38PM, Sparky_Spotty wrote:

There are a zillion hypothesises (is that a word?)



Fortunately, no. The plural is hypotheses.




That reminds me of a delightful neologism - unundulating


un·un·du·late  (nnj-lt, nndy-, -d-)


v. un·un·du·lat·edun·un·du·lat·ingun·un·du·lates



v.tr.
1. To cause to not move in a smooth wavelike motion.

2. To not give a wavelike appearance or form to.


v.intr.
1. To not move in waves or with a smooth, wavelike motion. See Synonyms at swing.

2. To not have a wavelike appearance or form.

3. To not increase and decrease in volume or pitch as if in waves.


adj. (-lt, -lt)
Not having a wavy outline or appearance: the great unundulating plains.

Flag steven_guy April 20, 2012 3:56 PM EDT

Apr 20, 2012 -- 3:53PM, mytmouse57 wrote:


Apr 20, 2012 -- 2:38PM, Sparky_Spotty wrote:


Apr 20, 2012 -- 2:02PM, mytmouse57 wrote:


Apr 20, 2012 -- 1:15PM, mountain_man wrote:


Apr 20, 2012 -- 12:05PM, mytmouse57 wrote:

If one think God does not exist, then one is an athiest.


No, all one needs to be an Atheist is a lack of belief in gods.  Thanks for sharing your opinion.




In other words, thinking God does not exist.


I know, "lacking a belief" sounds sexier (perhaps because it makes having belief seem like having a tumor, or something.)


But c'mon... let's be honest, and not split hairs. 


You think God does not exist. Therefore, you are atheist.




No, there is a difference.


THe language "god does not exist" implies a position on the same standing as The sun is fueled by quantum wigwams, or the universe is expanding.


The lack of belief on God, or that lack of a conclusion that God exists is not a positve assertion about the nature of the universe, rather its a "remaining" in a position where a particular hypothesis (God) has been discarded due to lack of evidence.


There are a zillion hypothesises (is that a word?) out there about everything. One does not have to describe himself as A-this, A-that, and A everything else just because he doesn't accept those hypothesises.  You for example are not an A-leprochaunist, are you?


Is A-leprechaunism a philosophy? Does A-leprechaunism require a burden of proof?


Can I (as a hypothetical believer in leprechauns) take a position that "leprechauns exist is a factual statement", unless you can PROVE they don't?


Why is believing in God different?




Thanks for the clarification. I see the difference now.


However, is it also not possible that in addition to "lacking belief," some athiest also think God does not exist?




Do you spend time thinking that Zeus, Thor and Aphrodite do not exist?

Flag mytmouse57 April 20, 2012 4:06 PM EDT

Apr 20, 2012 -- 3:56PM, steven_guy wrote:


Apr 20, 2012 -- 3:53PM, mytmouse57 wrote:


Apr 20, 2012 -- 2:38PM, Sparky_Spotty wrote:


Apr 20, 2012 -- 2:02PM, mytmouse57 wrote:


Apr 20, 2012 -- 1:15PM, mountain_man wrote:


Apr 20, 2012 -- 12:05PM, mytmouse57 wrote:

If one think God does not exist, then one is an athiest.


No, all one needs to be an Atheist is a lack of belief in gods.  Thanks for sharing your opinion.




In other words, thinking God does not exist.


I know, "lacking a belief" sounds sexier (perhaps because it makes having belief seem like having a tumor, or something.)


But c'mon... let's be honest, and not split hairs. 


You think God does not exist. Therefore, you are atheist.




No, there is a difference.


THe language "god does not exist" implies a position on the same standing as The sun is fueled by quantum wigwams, or the universe is expanding.


The lack of belief on God, or that lack of a conclusion that God exists is not a positve assertion about the nature of the universe, rather its a "remaining" in a position where a particular hypothesis (God) has been discarded due to lack of evidence.


There are a zillion hypothesises (is that a word?) out there about everything. One does not have to describe himself as A-this, A-that, and A everything else just because he doesn't accept those hypothesises.  You for example are not an A-leprochaunist, are you?


Is A-leprechaunism a philosophy? Does A-leprechaunism require a burden of proof?


Can I (as a hypothetical believer in leprechauns) take a position that "leprechauns exist is a factual statement", unless you can PROVE they don't?


Why is believing in God different?




Thanks for the clarification. I see the difference now.


However, is it also not possible that in addition to "lacking belief," some athiest also think God does not exist?




Do you spend time thinking that Zeus, Thor and Aphrodite do not exist?




"Which god(s)" is, from my perspective, a childish question. I'm not one to get hung up on names or conceptions, any more than I'm going to get into a fight with my neighbor because he calls his couch a sofa. 


Past that, again, we can establish that atheism, in general principle is a lack of belief. That covers all possibilities -- including a person who has never lived around others who spoke of a God or gods.


However, my question was -- in specific instance, do not some atheist also then conclude, or think, that God does not exist?


Flag mountain_man April 20, 2012 4:16 PM EDT

Apr 20, 2012 -- 1:33PM, mainecaptain wrote:

Being an atheist and not believing in abortion actually makes sense. If you don't believe there are any gods or a soul and an possible after life. Then it makes sense.


That's right. Atheists, in general, respect life and a fetus represents a potential life and as such deserves some respect. However, that respect for a potential cannot take precedence over a life that is already here. It is wrong to force a woman to continue a pregnancy against her will.


I am always stunned that believers, in a god, (particularly Christians)  in souls and after life are against abortion, since they should believe the soul goes to heaven, or is reborn in another body. A believer, particularly  Christians should have no problem with abortion based on that.


Their beliefs don't go that deep. It is popular among christians to be pro birth. After the kid is born they really don't care what happens.


After all in the opinion of a Christian, no life is lost,  The souls  would instantly go to heaven to be with their Jesus, At least if they really believed what they claim to believe . Which I sincerely doubt they really do. That  is why certain types of believers come and harangue atheists.   IMNSHO.


We scare them by not being under their control.

Flag mountain_man April 20, 2012 4:17 PM EDT

Apr 20, 2012 -- 2:02PM, mytmouse57 wrote:

In other words, thinking God does not exist.


Wrong, again. But thanks for sharing your opinion.

Flag mountain_man April 20, 2012 4:22 PM EDT

Apr 20, 2012 -- 1:20PM, Sparky_Spotty wrote:

...I guess my point is, ones position on the existence of God can affect ones world view, but not in any necessarily consistent way.


Good point. If Atheism does as some claim then all Atheists would think alike.  There are many things that form our world views. Lack of belief in gods is a minor part IF it were to play any part at all.

Flag Blü April 20, 2012 7:29 PM EDT

Ken



Why do we have to start a thread every five minutes about what atheism is? It becomes tiresome.


Because so many of our visitors want to talk about it.  And so many of the others need to have it explained.


It's one of those facts of life.

Flag steven_guy April 20, 2012 7:40 PM EDT

Apr 20, 2012 -- 7:29PM, Blü wrote:


Ken



Why do we have to start a thread every five minutes about what atheism is? It becomes tiresome.


Because so many of our visitors want to talk about it.  And so many of the others need to have it explained.


It's one of those facts of life.




Mea culpa. I get tired of these theist weasels waltzing in here and telling us what we believe and don't believe in.

Flag Ken April 20, 2012 8:40 PM EDT

They could try researching it a little before they post here.

Flag farragut April 20, 2012 8:43 PM EDT

Wouldn't it be nice if someone had the time to screen thru all these threads and compile the FAQs along with the very thorough answers that have been provided to them. Then we just feed them to all the new trolls and lurkers.

Flag mountain_man April 20, 2012 11:00 PM EDT

Apr 20, 2012 -- 8:40PM, Ken wrote:

They could try researching it a little before they post here.


You're asking a bit much aren't you? The few believers that have done their research are the ones here that, while not Atheists, are our ardent defenders. The rest come here solely to excoriate us, not to learn about anything. Have you noticed that not one of them has learned anything from posting here?

Flag teilhard April 20, 2012 11:50 PM EDT

I have observed that there is a LOT of "Excoriation-rather-than-Mutual-Learning" in these "Discussions" ... IMHO this happens often at least in Part because we often tend to "talk past each other" because we are NOT "speaking the same Language" ...


Apr 20, 2012 -- 11:00PM, mountain_man wrote:


Apr 20, 2012 -- 8:40PM, Ken wrote:

They could try researching it a little before they post here.


You're asking a bit much aren't you? The few believers that have done their research are the ones here that, while not Atheists, are our ardent defenders. The rest come here solely to excoriate us, not to learn about anything. Have you noticed that not one of them has learned anything from posting here?





Flag Blü April 21, 2012 12:02 AM EDT

Dave


Have you noticed that not one of them has learned anything from posting here?


I dare say they go home and say, I TOLD 'em about Jesus, really I did, but they wouldn't listen!


Flag chevy956 April 21, 2012 12:06 AM EDT

Apr 20, 2012 -- 11:50PM, teilhard wrote:

I have observed that there is a LOT of "Excoriation-rather-than-Mutual-Learning" in these "Discussions" ... IMHO this happens often at least in Part because we often tend to "talk past each other" because we are NOT "speaking the same Language" ...


Apr 20, 2012 -- 11:00PM, mountain_man wrote:


Apr 20, 2012 -- 8:40PM, Ken wrote:

They could try researching it a little before they post here.


You're asking a bit much aren't you? The few believers that have done their research are the ones here that, while not Atheists, are our ardent defenders. The rest come here solely to excoriate us, not to learn about anything. Have you noticed that not one of them has learned anything from posting here?






In your case, the excoriation happens because you have proven yourself singularly unwilling to learn anything from us. The fact that you don't like what we tell you doesn't constitute "talking past each other".

Flag Ken April 21, 2012 12:18 AM EDT

Apr 20, 2012 -- 11:00PM, mountain_man wrote:


Apr 20, 2012 -- 8:40PM, Ken wrote:

They could try researching it a little before they post here.


You're asking a bit much aren't you? The few believers that have done their research are the ones here that, while not Atheists, are our ardent defenders. The rest come here solely to excoriate us, not to learn about anything. Have you noticed that not one of them has learned anything from posting here?



Then let's give them a taste of their own medicine. When, for example, they say that atheists must admire Stalin, we should ask them why all Christians love Pope John XII.


en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_John_XII

Flag mountain_man April 21, 2012 12:27 AM EDT

Apr 21, 2012 -- 12:02AM, Blü wrote:

I dare say they go home and say, I TOLD 'em about Jesus, really I did, but they wouldn't listen!


Of course they would say that after finding out that we know more about their religion than they do. That also fits in with the theory that they come here so they can brag to their friends that they were picking on Atheists. They get extra points for that.

Flag mountain_man April 21, 2012 12:32 AM EDT

Apr 21, 2012 -- 12:18AM, Ken wrote:

Then let's give them a taste of their own medicine. When, for example, they say that atheists must admire Stalin, we should ask them why all Christians love Pope John XII.


As popes go he was probably one of the nicer ones.

Flag Knowsnothing April 21, 2012 10:41 PM EDT

Apr 19, 2012 -- 5:29PM, steven_guy wrote:



Atheism is not a belief.




If you lack belief in something, can call that in and of itself a belief?


Also depends on what type of atheism, seeing as how I have seen it defined rather differently and in different degrees of "strength".

Flag steven_guy April 21, 2012 10:51 PM EDT

Apr 21, 2012 -- 10:41PM, Knowsnothing wrote:


Apr 19, 2012 -- 5:29PM, steven_guy wrote:



Atheism is not a belief.




If you lack belief in something, can call that in and of itself a belief?



No. That would be idiotic. Is your lack of belief in the Tooth Fairy a belief?


Apr 21, 2012 -- 10:41PM, Knowsnothing wrote:

Also depends on what type of atheism, seeing as how I have seen it defined rather differently and in different degrees of "strength".



Baloney. One either believes in God or one does not. 


What is the degree of lack of belief in the Tooth Fairy?

Flag JCarlin April 21, 2012 11:01 PM EDT

Apr 21, 2012 -- 10:41PM, Knowsnothing wrote:

Apr 19, 2012 -- 5:29PM, steven_guy wrote:


Atheism is not a belief.


If you lack belief in something, can call that in and of itself a belief?


Also depends on what type of atheism, seeing as how I have seen it defined rather differently and in different degrees of "strength".


A belief is a positive affirmation of a truth.  An indifference to or rejection of a truth cannot be a belief simply a statement of the unimportance of the believer's truth.  Any way you interpret the a- in atheism it is simply rejecting or indifference to the truth of theism.  There are no beliefs involved.  Degrees of atheism are only important to those trying to prove atheism wrong.  If one rejects theism no matter why hesh is in the club. 

Flag mountain_man April 22, 2012 1:03 AM EDT

Apr 21, 2012 -- 10:41PM, Knowsnothing wrote:

If you lack belief in something, can call that in and of itself a belief?


Of course not. Why would you believe such a thing? It makes no sense. That would be like saying that bald is a hair color.


Also depends on what type of atheism, seeing as how I have seen it defined rather differently and in different degrees of "strength".


There is only one kind of Atheism; a lack of belief in gods. Everything after that is a personal opinion and not an attribute of all Atheists. Some like to divide Atheism up into little groups but that actually makes no sense; you either believe in gods or you do not. The how or why is irrelevant. The only thing all Atheists have in common is a lack of belief in gods. It's a default position, nothing need be said, done, or believed.

Flag Bob_the_Lunatic April 22, 2012 4:11 AM EDT

Apr 19, 2012 -- 5:37PM, mytmouse57 wrote:


Apr 19, 2012 -- 5:29PM, steven_guy wrote:


Atheism is not a philosophy.
Atheism is not a path.
Atheism is not a religion.
Atheism is not a world view.
Atheism is not a way of life.
Atheism is not a belief.
Atheism is not a rebellion against religion.

Atheism is not a rebellion against God or any other imaginary being.
Atheism is not a political stance.


Others may add to this list if they like.




Atheism might not be those things, but it can drive and/or result from them.


For example, atheism is not a world view. But being atheist surely will affect how one views the world. Atheism is not a philosophy -- but it most surely can affect philosophy.


Hence, in generalized discussions, such terms might be used. 


As is, "X" is a theistic philosophy, whereas, "Y" is an atheistic philosophy.








Theists might not be people who understand reason, but they COULD if they thought for themselves.



For example mouse:  You said it might not be a philosphy, where it appears you are using reason ... for a moment.  But then you revealed you don't really get it, when you said:  "But being atheist surely will affect how one views the world"  


It most "surely" will not.  I am a Buddhist, so I have no choice-theism doesn't work with Buddhism and is contradicted by it.  But there's no mention or chapter in my sutra about "god", "no god" or "atheism" or "theism".  As a Buddhist, I am NATURALLY an atheist.  But in no way does "atheism" itself guide any of my beliefs, or philosophies, etc.  However, BUDDHISM does.  This says you did fine up until the word "surely".  You should have stuck to the safe words in this territory you are clearly ignorant of, words like "can", "might".  Some yes, but "surely" implies all and that's where you reveal your ignorance of the true nature of "atheism".   At which point you DID suggest it must replace a religion rather than realize it can be the side effect of one, in this case Buddhism.  Since Buddhism predates Christianity, it's a pretty careless overstatement on your part.


There  is no question that one's core beliefs guide many lesser beliefs.  Bahais for example cannot even see a gay person is naturally gay-and instead suggest they understand the gay's nature better than he himself, just as they propose to understand Buddhism better than its founder and those who devote their life to its practice.  Some religions are based on arrogance, while claiming justification-and indeed..... it does indeed... affect the worldview of their adherents!


So your point is valid, until you shoved an absolute in and even if you hadn't, we also have to assume your point implicitly argued an INDIRECT relationship between these things like "philosophy" and something directly unrelated like "atheism", which has no philosophy.  But again, to reaffirm the point you obviously don't get-atheism really doesn't suggest a thing about the things on steven's list-thus the title of the thread-and posts like yours reveal the need for posts like ours to drill simple points into thick skulls.  


So... if I am atheist as a side effect of a negative religion...  Like, say I don't care for the ways that Christians and Bahais bash gays instead of adding value to a situation... sure, I might reject the Abrahamic god and become an atheist simply out of common sense-like when a girl quits dating a guy because she sees the signs of violence and abuse:  She is without him and rejecting him, quietly or loudly.   In a case like this, I might indeed develop the majority of my important beliefs around avoiding these clueless, shallow, and abusive religions and their stances.  Perhaps I might even begin finding my beliefs (since atheism doesn't tell me what they should be) by just choosing the opposite of whatever these self righteous escapists say is "right".  Seems logical:  As if they are so wrong about the nature of life (to ultimately ESCAPE it lol), they are likely wrong about anything even mildly important.  This is much more logical than basing ones beliefs on.... invisible sky monsters, or thinking you understand things you never even studied... or thinking you understand what it means to be "gay" if you are straight lol, the last is actually my favorite theist delusion.  In such a case, my beliefs (political, philisophical, etc.) may not directly stem from atheism... but they could very likely INDIRECTLY stem from atheism.  


But note the way I consider others-not assuming to know everything and thus naturally avoiding ABSOLUTES, especially when trying to understand behavior and minds of others-but even speculation requires thinking and why think when some guys wrote books and other guys claim that it was an all powerful, all knowing being speaking through them... eh?    Perhaps with certain theisms comes an inherent arrogance that since your god is all knowing,... so are his believers.


See an absolute means "No Exceptions", and the reality is, the type of atheist you describe are likely the minority, exceptions to your blind claim are everywhere.  But if an absolute is claimed, all it takes is ONE to prove his statement careless and ignorant.  But I just got here, I'm sure someone already showed you the error of thinking you understand things you really never took the time to understand.

Flag Bob_the_Lunatic April 22, 2012 5:55 AM EDT

Apr 19, 2012 -- 6:26PM, mytmouse57 wrote:


Apr 19, 2012 -- 6:19PM, steven_guy wrote:


Apr 19, 2012 -- 6:10PM, mainecaptain wrote:


Some people seem to deliberately not want to understand what atheism actually is.




I've noticed that over the years. There must be some sort of psychological need in these people to misunderstand atheism.




You must know some strange people.




The strangest I've seen was on beliefnet:  It was a bahai who redefined atheism to include "monotheism".  He intentionally interpretted the "rejecting god/s" part of the definition to mean, any gods rather than the obvious "ALL" required by atheism.  Thus by his definition... EVERYONE is an atheist as everyone rejects some gods.  And to be more specific, instead of rersearching for 5 minutes to understand the meaning of the words there, is such to include both "soft" and "hard" atheism, that is "rejection" or negative statement, vs. "affirmation" or positive statement, respectively.  But both soft and hard obviously mean to include ALL gods.  Yet, he continued to intentionally misunderstand the concept despite the childishness of his argument and of course despite being so outmatched, both in education of his opponents, and the evidence they presented.  He reaffirmed to me that ALL theisms require denial as part of their practice:  Reason never is used, and is instead considered inferior to unsubstantiated claims of holy books that derive from all powerful but invisible creatures... so again, no thinking necessary.  


It seems more logical to me to get a drug habit, as the only difference between theism and heroin on one's life is the former lacks a dopamine rush.  


Personally, it made perfect sense to me:  Bahai and its followers basically tell every other group of believers they are confused about their own teaching, and that the bahais, who haven't studied it understand it better..... so why not do the same with non-believers?  Seemed consistent.

Flag Fodaoson April 22, 2012 8:42 PM EDT

Maybe because many poster are American and the Major religion in the US is Christianity, and Christianity has had a huge influence on American society and cultures, many posters on this thread and, like ones, who state they are atheists, may be perceived as anti-Christian.  Some write with as much passion as an evangelical Christian; they display the same “knowing” as evangelicals, the same “I’m rightness” the same arrogance, some are “religious” in their atheism and  as bothersome as the “Bible Thumpers”.


IF you are not among the some many , there can be no offense and no defense needed! You are not be accused     

Flag mountain_man April 22, 2012 9:00 PM EDT

Apr 22, 2012 -- 8:42PM, Fodaoson wrote:

...IF you are not among the some many , there can be no offense and no defense needed! You are not be accused


Good, that leaves me out since I am in no way anti Christian and, in fact, have defended them many times in this and other forums. I am not anti religion. I am anti fundamentalist, anti extremist, anti ignorance, anti having their religion forced on naive, trusting, school kids, anti having religion forced into my life and the lives of others. 


If someone has a problem with that; it's their problem, not mine.

Flag steven_guy April 22, 2012 9:03 PM EDT

Apr 22, 2012 -- 8:42PM, Fodaoson wrote:


Maybe because many poster are American and the Major religion in the US is Christianity, and Christianity has had a huge influence on American society and cultures, many posters on this thread and, like ones, who state they are atheists, may be perceived as anti-Christian.  Some write with as much passion as an evangelical Christian; they display the same “knowing” as evangelicals, the same “I’m rightness” the same arrogance, some are “religious” in their atheism and  as bothersome as the “Bible Thumpers”.


IF you are not among the some many , there can be no offense and no defense needed! You are not be accused     




You really don't know what atheism is all about, do you?

Flag mainecaptain April 22, 2012 9:04 PM EDT

Apr 22, 2012 -- 9:00PM, mountain_man wrote:


Apr 22, 2012 -- 8:42PM, Fodaoson wrote:

...IF you are not among the some many , there can be no offense and no defense needed! You are not be accused


Good, that leaves me out since I am in no way anti Christian and, in fact, have defended them many times in this and other forums. I am not anti religion. I am anti fundamentalist, anti extremist, anti ignorance, anti having their religion forced on naive, trusting, school kids, anti having religion forced into my life and the lives of others. 


If someone has a problem with that; it's their problem, not mine.




Nor am I anti Christian, or anti religion. And do agree with the rest of your post

Flag mountain_man April 22, 2012 9:07 PM EDT

Apr 22, 2012 -- 9:04PM, mainecaptain wrote:

Nor am I anti Christian, or anti religion. And do agree with the rest of your post


The only anti's here are the anti-Atheists. It's funny, and sad, that they come here and TELL us Atheists what we believe, who we are, and what we do. The problem is they always get it wrong.

Flag JCarlin April 22, 2012 9:10 PM EDT

Apr 22, 2012 -- 8:42PM, Fodaoson wrote:

many posters on this thread and, like ones, who state they are atheists, may be perceived as anti-Christian. 


If you consider the board topic "Discuss Atheism" and consider the self selection of those who like to participate from the atheist side it might explain much of your quandry.  If we didn't like to argue with idiots there are much better things we could do with our time.  Then stick around for a while and watch the drive-by Christians drop a proselytizing turd in the punchbowl and you might understand why most of the posters here are perceived as anti-Christian. 

Flag teilhard April 22, 2012 9:58 PM EDT

This is so ironically funny, it's outright pathetc ...


Apr 22, 2012 -- 9:10PM, JCarlin wrote:


Apr 22, 2012 -- 8:42PM, Fodaoson wrote:

many posters on this thread and, like ones, who state they are atheists, may be perceived as anti-Christian. 


If you consider the board topic "Discuss Atheism" and consider the self selection of those who like to participate from the atheist side it might explain much of your quandry.  If we didn't like to argue with idiots there are much better things we could do with our time.  Then stick around for a while and watch the drive-by Christians drop a proselytizing turd in the punchbowl and you might understand why most of the posters here are perceived as anti-Christian. 





Flag costrel April 22, 2012 10:36 PM EDT

Apr 22, 2012 -- 8:42PM, Fodaoson wrote:

Maybe because many poster are American and the Major religion in the US is Christianity, and Christianity has had a huge influence on American society and cultures, many posters on this thread and, like ones, who state they are atheists, may be perceived as anti-Christian.  Some write with as much passion as an evangelical Christian; they display the same “knowing” as evangelicals, the same “I’m rightness” the same arrogance, some are “religious” in their atheism and  as bothersome as the “Bible Thumpers”.


IF you are not among the some many , there can be no offense and no defense needed! You are not be accused 


I'm not specifically anti-Christian, though I know that on my particularly sour days when I am a curmudgeon, I can be rather unpleasantly anti-Protestant and anti-Evangelical. Some posters have also claimed that I can be anti-Catholic, so perhaps I can also be periodically anti-Catholic. But I don't think I've ever been anti-Protestant/anti-Evangelical and anti-Catholic on the same day. 

Flag teilhard April 22, 2012 11:01 PM EDT

An important personal Spiritual Task is to "get over" being "Anti-" and just BE what one IS without worrying so much about what (different) somebody ELSE Is ... or Isn't ...


Apr 22, 2012 -- 10:36PM, costrel wrote:


Apr 22, 2012 -- 8:42PM, Fodaoson wrote:

Maybe because many poster are American and the Major religion in the US is Christianity, and Christianity has had a huge influence on American society and cultures, many posters on this thread and, like ones, who state they are atheists, may be perceived as anti-Christian.  Some write with as much passion as an evangelical Christian; they display the same “knowing” as evangelicals, the same “I’m rightness” the same arrogance, some are “religious” in their atheism and  as bothersome as the “Bible Thumpers”.


IF you are not among the some many , there can be no offense and no defense needed! You are not be accused 


I'm not specifically anti-Christian, though I know that on my particularly sour days when I am a curmudgeon, I can be rather unpleasantly anti-Protestant and anti-Evangelical. Some posters have also claimed that I can be anti-Catholic, so perhaps I can also be periodically anti-Catholic. But I don't think I've ever been anti-Protestant/anti-Evangelical and anti-Catholic on the same day. 





Flag steven_guy April 22, 2012 11:10 PM EDT

You ever gonna get over your deep dislike of atheists?


Apr 22, 2012 -- 11:01PM, teilhard wrote:


An important personal Spiritual Task is to "get over" being "Anti-" and just BE what one IS without worrying so much about what (different) somebody ELSE Is ... or Isn't ...


Apr 22, 2012 -- 10:36PM, costrel wrote:


Apr 22, 2012 -- 8:42PM, Fodaoson wrote:

Maybe because many poster are American and the Major religion in the US is Christianity, and Christianity has had a huge influence on American society and cultures, many posters on this thread and, like ones, who state they are atheists, may be perceived as anti-Christian.  Some write with as much passion as an evangelical Christian; they display the same “knowing” as evangelicals, the same “I’m rightness” the same arrogance, some are “religious” in their atheism and  as bothersome as the “Bible Thumpers”.


IF you are not among the some many , there can be no offense and no defense needed! You are not be accused 


I'm not specifically anti-Christian, though I know that on my particularly sour days when I am a curmudgeon, I can be rather unpleasantly anti-Protestant and anti-Evangelical. Some posters have also claimed that I can be anti-Catholic, so perhaps I can also be periodically anti-Catholic. But I don't think I've ever been anti-Protestant/anti-Evangelical and anti-Catholic on the same day. 









Flag Fodaoson April 23, 2012 12:26 AM EDT

Apr 22, 2012 -- 9:03PM, steven_guy wrote:


Apr 22, 2012 -- 8:42PM, Fodaoson wrote:


Maybe because many poster are American and the Major religion in the US is Christianity, and Christianity has had a huge influence on American society and cultures, many posters on this thread and, like ones, who state they are atheists, may be perceived as anti-Christian.  Some write with as much passion as an evangelical Christian; they display the same “knowing” as evangelicals, the same “I’m rightness” the same arrogance, some are “religious” in their atheism and  as bothersome as the “Bible Thumpers”.


IF you are not among the some many , there can be no offense and no defense needed! You are not be accused     




You really don't know what atheism is all about, do you?




You are right, I do not know what atheism is all about; in the year of following this board , I have read  differing  contradictory opinions by self-professed atheists, all beliefs and  non-beliefs are self-professed. Beliefs are just opinions. Is atheism a nonbelief about a nonexistent nothing?


Is atheism non-religious? Is it anti-religion?  If you are an expert in Atheism, Then  you can post clearly and concisely what atheism is a manner that all atheist will a test to.  Include atheist Buddhist, atheist Taoist, and A-theist Christians. Yes there are Christian atheist sects. Some follow the  teachings  attributed to  Jesus as recorded in the  New Testament Bible but do not believe in his divinity,  the miracles or the resurrection, there ar  A-theistic Christians  just as there are non-Trinitarian Christians.   


According to Paul  van Buren  a  Death of God theologian, the word God itself is "either meaningless or misleading".[1] He contends that it is impossible to think about God. Van Buren says that


"we cannot identify anything which will count for or against the truth of our statements concerning 'God'".[1]


Most Christian atheists believe that God never existed, but there are a few who believe in the death of God literally.[2]  Thomas J.J. Altizer is a well-known Christian atheist who is known for his literal approach to the death of God. He often speaks of God's death as a redemptive event. In his book The Gospel of Christian Atheism he speaks of how


"every man today who is open to experience knows that God is absent, but only the Christian knows that God is dead, that the death of God is a final and irrevocable event, and that God's death has actualized in our history a new and liberated humanity".[3]


  1.  Ogletree, Thomas W. The Death of God Controversy. New York: Abingdon Press, 1966.
  2. Lyas, Colin. "On the Coherence of Christian Atheism." The Journal of the Royal Institute of Philosophy 45(171): 1970.
  3. ^ Altizer, Thomas J. J. The Gospel of Christian atheism. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1966.

Flag steven_guy April 23, 2012 12:37 AM EDT

Apr 23, 2012 -- 12:26AM, Fodaoson wrote:


You are right, I do not know what atheism is all about; in the year of following this board , I have read  differing  contradictory opinions by self-professed atheists, all beliefs and  non-beliefs are self-professed. Beliefs are just opinions. Is atheism a nonbelief about a nonexistent nothing? 




I didn't bother reading any further.

Flag chevy956 April 23, 2012 12:37 AM EDT

"You are right, I do not know what atheism is all about; in the year of following this board , I have read  differing  contradictory opinions by self-professed atheists, all beliefs and  non-beliefs are self-professed. Beliefs are just opinions. Is atheism a nonbelief about a nonexistent nothing?"


.>>>>Atheism is simply a lack of belief in gods. A lack of belief doesn't count as a belief. Any additional claims made such as "There is no god/gods" are opinion, but those making that claim are still atheists.


It really isn't all that difficult. I give you credit for having the grace to admit that you didn't know what atheism is about

Flag JCarlin April 23, 2012 1:11 AM EDT

Apr 23, 2012 -- 12:26AM, Fodaoson wrote:

  If you are an expert in Atheism, The post clearly and concisely what atheism is a manner that all atheist will a test to. 


It is really simple, a- = without. -theist = believer in God, god, or gods.  It doesn't really matter why one is without god belief.  God may be dead.  God may never have existed.  There may be no credible evidence for God, god, or gods.  God may be so horrible as to be unbelievable.  You may be hiding from God to be antisocial or sinful.  There are countless more reasons to be without belief in God, god, or gods.  But if a god concept plays no part in one's life one is an atheist. 

Flag steven_guy April 23, 2012 1:32 AM EDT

Apr 23, 2012 -- 12:26AM, Fodaoson wrote:

  If you are an expert in Atheism, The post clearly and concisely what atheism is a manner that all atheist will a test to. 


 


A lack of belief in god, gods and goddesses.


Flag Fodaoson April 23, 2012 5:41 AM EDT

If that is what atheism is all about, then why are there 1100 threads and 98000 posts  in “Discuss atheism”.  If that is all of Atheism, then why my intellect, my knowledge, my opinions has been attacked and impugned .   As I have demonstrated in posts  by citing atheistic thinkers, there are atheistic religions, atheist philosophy. 


Atheism if more than just the absence of a belief,  Just as a belief influences thinking, actions social behavior, and social relationships, the absence of a belief has influences also.   


I have  not attacked anyone for being atheist. I have asked  question about it, I have pondered it.  I have not defamed anyone for being an atheist a catholic, an evangelical, a Mormon or whatever. Beliefs have a reason for being.  They allow some humans to cope with unanswerable questions or with daily life.   

Flag steven_guy April 23, 2012 5:58 AM EDT

Apr 23, 2012 -- 5:41AM, Fodaoson wrote:


If that is what atheism is all about, then why are there 1100 threads and 98000 posts  in “Discuss atheism”.  If that is all of Atheism, then why my intellect, my knowledge, my opinions has been attacked and impugned .   As I have demonstrated in posts  by citing atheistic thinkers, there are atheistic religions, atheist philosophy. 


Atheism if more than just the absence of a belief,  Just as a belief influences thinking, actions social behavior, and social relationships, the absence of a belief has influences also.   


I have  not attacked anyone for being atheist. I have asked  question about it, I have pondered it.  I have not defamed anyone for being an atheist a catholic, an evangelical, a Mormon or whatever. Beliefs have a reason for being.  They allow some humans to cope with unanswerable questions or with daily life.   




You still don't want to understand atheism.

Flag costrel April 23, 2012 9:11 AM EDT

Apr 22, 2012 -- 11:01PM, teilhard wrote:

An important personal Spiritual Task is to "get over" being "Anti-" and just BE what one IS without worrying so much about what (different) somebody ELSE Is ... or Isn't ...


First of all, Teilhard, you can keep your "personal spiritual tasks" -- I have no interest in that. Second of all, I don't value your opinions on religious and spiritual matters, especially since I still remember how you denied the existence of the abuse of children by Catholic priests and acted as if the scandal was the invention of people you considered to be anti-Catholic. 

Flag chevy956 April 23, 2012 10:16 AM EDT

Apr 23, 2012 -- 5:58AM, steven_guy wrote:

Apr 23, 2012 -- 5:41AM, Fodaoson wrote:


If that is what atheism is all about, then why are there 1100 threads and 98000 posts  in “Discuss atheism”.  If that is all of Atheism, then why my intellect, my knowledge, my opinions has been attacked and impugned .   As I have demonstrated in posts  by citing atheistic thinkers, there are atheistic religions, atheist philosophy. 


Atheism if more than just the absence of a belief,  Just as a belief influences thinking, actions social behavior, and social relationships, the absence of a belief has influences also.   


I have  not attacked anyone for being atheist. I have asked  question about it, I have pondered it.  I have not defamed anyone for being an atheist a catholic, an evangelical, a Mormon or whatever. Beliefs have a reason for being.  They allow some humans to cope with unanswerable questions or with daily life.   




You still don't want to understand atheism.


Regarding your claims of not attacking atheists, do you remember writing this?


"Some write with as much passion as an evangelical Christian; they display the same “knowing” as evangelicals, the same “I’m rightness” the same arrogance, some are “religious” in their atheism and  as bothersome as the “Bible Thumpers”.


IF you are not among the some many , there can be no offense and no defense needed! You are not be accused"     


 





Flag chevy956 April 23, 2012 10:18 AM EDT

Apr 23, 2012 -- 9:11AM, costrel wrote:


Apr 22, 2012 -- 11:01PM, teilhard wrote:

An important personal Spiritual Task is to "get over" being "Anti-" and just BE what one IS without worrying so much about what (different) somebody ELSE Is ... or Isn't ...


First of all, Teilhard, you can keep your "personal spiritual tasks" -- I have no interest in that. Second of all, I don't value your opinions on religious and spiritual matters, especially since I still remember how you denied the existence of the abuse of children by Catholic priests and acted as if the scandal was the invention of people you considered to be anti-Catholic. 




Paying attention to his opinions and commentary on religion and spiritual matters is akin to entrusting your financial portfolio to the stockbroker who is sailing past his own office window heading for the pavement.

Flag JCarlin April 23, 2012 10:52 AM EDT

Apr 23, 2012 -- 5:41AM, Fodaoson wrote:

As I have demonstrated in posts  by citing atheistic thinkers, there are atheistic religions, atheist philosophy.


Yep, there are atheist scientists, atheist poets, atheist businessmen, atheist clergymen, atheist parents, atheist everythings.  The only thing in common is that there is no God that affects or is mentioned in there work or their lives.  Another thing they have in common is they are frequently attacked by theists as being just as bad, or stupid or dangerous as the theists are.  Apparantly there is a dogmatic need for many theists to attack others who do not accept their particular dogma.  True other theists bear the brunt of their attacks, but when they can find an atheist any excuse will do for the attack.  




Flag Sparky_Spotty April 23, 2012 11:22 AM EDT

Apr 23, 2012 -- 9:11AM, costrel wrote:

First of all, Teilhard.....I still remember how you denied the existence of the abuse of children by Catholic priests and acted as if the scandal was the invention of people you considered to be anti-Catholic. 




Really?  Wow.  Sad.

Flag Fodaoson April 23, 2012 11:50 AM EDT

Apr 23, 2012 -- 5:58AM, steven_guy wrote:


Apr 23, 2012 -- 5:41AM, Fodaoson wrote:


If that is what atheism is all about, then why are there 1100 threads and 98000 posts  in “Discuss atheism”.  If that is all of Atheism, then why my intellect, my knowledge, my opinions has been attacked and impugned .   As I have demonstrated in posts  by citing atheistic thinkers, there are atheistic religions, atheist philosophy. 


Atheism if more than just the absence of a belief,  Just as a belief influences thinking, actions social behavior, and social relationships, the absence of a belief has influences also.   


I have  not attacked anyone for being atheist. I have asked  question about it, I have pondered it.  I have not defamed anyone for being an atheist a catholic, an evangelical, a Mormon or whatever. Beliefs have a reason for being.  They allow some humans to cope with unanswerable questions or with daily life.   




You still don't want to understand atheism.


I do not want to understand just your definition and application of atheism. I am tryin to learn about the academic  discipline of atheisim.  Just to reiterate I am a non- theist, self-identified as agnostic.





Apr 23, 2012 -- 10:16AM, chevy956 wrote:

Apr 23, 2012 -- 5:58AM, steven_guy wrote:


Apr 23, 2012 -- 5:41AM, Fodaoson wrote:


If that is what atheism is all about, then why are there 1100 threads and 98000 posts  in “Discuss atheism”.  If that is all of Atheism, then why my intellect, my knowledge, my opinions has been attacked and impugned .   As I have demonstrated in posts  by citing atheistic thinkers, there are atheistic religions, atheist philosophy. 


Atheism if more than just the absence of a belief,  Just as a belief influences thinking, actions social behavior, and social relationships, the absence of a belief has influences also.   


I have  not attacked anyone for being atheist. I have asked  question about it, I have pondered it.  I have not defamed anyone for being an atheist a catholic, an evangelical, a Mormon or whatever. Beliefs have a reason for being.  They allow some humans to cope with unanswerable questions or with daily life.   




You still don't want to understand atheism.




Regarding your claims of not attacking atheists, do you remember writing this?


"Some write with as much passion as an evangelical Christian; they display the same “knowing” as evangelicals, the same “I’m rightness” the same arrogance, some are “religious” in their atheism and  as bothersome as the “Bible Thumpers”.


IF you are not among the some many , there can be no offense and no defense needed! You are not be accused"     


 


That is not attacking atheist’s non-belief but just stating a fact about some posters.(atheist, agnostic, religious, partisan )   I apologize if you perceive  it as an attack








Flag steven_guy April 23, 2012 3:24 PM EDT

Apr 23, 2012 -- 11:50AM, Fodaoson wrote:


Me: You still don't want to understand atheism.


I do not want to understand just your definition and application of atheism. I am tryin to learn about the academic  discipline of atheisim.  Just to reiterate I am a non- theist, self-identified as agnostic.




There is no academic discipline of atheism. Atheism is a lack of belief in god, gods and goddesses. 


Flag Ken April 23, 2012 3:37 PM EDT

Apr 23, 2012 -- 3:24PM, steven_guy wrote:


Apr 23, 2012 -- 11:50AM, Fodaoson wrote:

I do not want to understand just your definition and application of atheism. I am tryin to learn about the academic  discipline of atheisim.  Just to reiterate I am a non- theist, self-identified as agnostic.



There is no academic discipline of atheism. Atheism is a lack of belief in god, gods and goddesses.


True. You can't take a degree in atheism.

Flag mainecaptain April 23, 2012 4:18 PM EDT

Apr 23, 2012 -- 3:37PM, Ken wrote:


Apr 23, 2012 -- 3:24PM, steven_guy wrote:


Apr 23, 2012 -- 11:50AM, Fodaoson wrote:

I do not want to understand just your definition and application of atheism. I am tryin to learn about the academic  discipline of atheisim.  Just to reiterate I am a non- theist, self-identified as agnostic.



There is no academic discipline of atheism. Atheism is a lack of belief in god, gods and goddesses.


True. You can't take a degree in atheism.




Wouldn't that be like getting a degree in not collecting stamps? Or more like getting a degree in not believing in Santa Claus?


Can you get a degree in not believing something???

Flag Idbc April 23, 2012 4:40 PM EDT

Howdy mouse57


 


Apr 19, 2012 -- 6:10PM, mainecaptain wrote:


Some people seem to deliberately not want to understand what atheism actually is.




What's to understand?


Atheist all have one thing in common. They don't think a God(s)/creator/higher power exists.



What is to understand is that what all atheists have in common is that all theists agree  is a philosophical position on a single philosophical issue.  They do not think or believe  that a god or more than one gods exist. 


They can be can be Communist.  The can be Satanist, so long as Satan is not defined as a god or one of the gods. 



Apr 19, 2012 -- 6:10PM, mainecaptain wrote:


My point simply is, thinking that can, and probably will, affect how one views or approaches any number of things. One's view of the world and life, one's philosophy, one's path... etc.



I aggree with you point.   Not have a belief in the existence of god or gods will affect how one or approaches any number of things. One's view of the world and life, one's philosophy, one's path... etc.


However having a belief in and or thinking in the existence of god or gods will ALSO affect how one or approaches any number of things. One's view of the world and life, one's philosophy, one's path... etc.


 

Apr 19, 2012 -- 6:10PM, mainecaptain wrote:


 What the effect/effects might be surely can vary from person to person. In another thread, you mistakenly tried to say I claimed atheism is a philosophy, becuase I said one particular philosophy (one type of modern Satanism) is atheistic. 



What the effect/effects from believing and or thinking in the existence of god/gods will ALSO surely vary from person to person. 


 


 

Apr 19, 2012 -- 6:10PM, mainecaptain wrote:


I'm pointing out the possibilites of instance, not general principle.


Because again, in general principle, atheism is one thing, and one thing only -- thinking there is no god(s)/creator/higher power.




But Theisim is not in general principle one thing and one thing only.   You can think/believe in the  existence of god/gods.   You can think/believe that Satan is a god that can and should be worshipped. You can also think that Satan is a god that is an enemy of god.  You can also belief that Satan is the creator god of the universe who is the enemy of a higher non-materialist god.


You can all be a theist who denies that Satan is not really real but an allegory-metaphor symbolic represntation  for all the things that the really real god is not.   


 


   




 

Flag teilhard April 23, 2012 5:13 PM EDT

No ... I never wrote any such Thing ... 


What I HAVE written -- repeatedly, consistently -- is the FACT that in my own 35+ Years in Ministry, i have known ONE(1) Priest who touched an Altar Boy inappropriately ... The Priest was removed by his Bishop, and the Situation was handled by both Ecclesastical and Legal Means ...


But ... Yes ... It IS my Observation that Anti-Catholic Folks are having a WONDERFUL Time with these such Problems ...


Apr 23, 2012 -- 11:22AM, Sparky_Spotty wrote:


Apr 23, 2012 -- 9:11AM, costrel wrote:

First of all, Teilhard.....I still remember how you denied the existence of the abuse of children by Catholic priests and acted as if the scandal was the invention of people you considered to be anti-Catholic. 




Really?  Wow.  Sad.





Flag teilhard April 23, 2012 5:14 PM EDT

Well, then ... Go in Peace (or not) ...


Apr 23, 2012 -- 9:11AM, costrel wrote:


Apr 22, 2012 -- 11:01PM, teilhard wrote:

An important personal Spiritual Task is to "get over" being "Anti-" and just BE what one IS without worrying so much about what (different) somebody ELSE Is ... or Isn't ...


First of all, Teilhard, you can keep your "personal spiritual tasks" -- I have no interest in that. Second of all, I don't value your opinions on religious and spiritual matters ...





Flag Fodaoson April 23, 2012 5:42 PM EDT

One cannot get a degree in glossolalia but it is an area of study in Religious studies  and Psychology; There is no degree in the how the Eucharist fits in religions  but it is an area study also,   there is no degree in Baptists sectarianism but  there is an areas of study in religious studies, cultural studies, and behavioral Social-Psychology.


Of course atheism  come from the Greek  a-[without] and theos [ god], but it could be used as having no god, belief in no god, disbelief in a god  or denial of gods.    There are forms of expression of atheism, secularism, humanism, secular-humanism, Taoism, Buddhism. 

Flag teilhard April 23, 2012 5:44 PM EDT

I DON'T "dislike" Atheists ...


I simply DISAGREE with Atheists re: The "God" Question ...


In FACT, a couple of my very good Friends are Atheists, one of them being a Professional Colleague with whom I have worked on several Science-Educational Projects for ca. 25 Years ...


Apr 22, 2012 -- 11:10PM, steven_guy wrote:


You ever gonna get over your deep dislike of atheists?


Apr 22, 2012 -- 11:01PM, teilhard wrote:


An important personal Spiritual Task is to "get over" being "Anti-" and just BE what one IS without worrying so much about what (different) somebody ELSE Is ... or Isn't ...


Apr 22, 2012 -- 10:36PM, costrel wrote:


Apr 22, 2012 -- 8:42PM, Fodaoson wrote:

Maybe because many poster are American and the Major religion in the US is Christianity, and Christianity has had a huge influence on American society and cultures, many posters on this thread and, like ones, who state they are atheists, may be perceived as anti-Christian.  Some write with as much passion as an evangelical Christian; they display the same “knowing” as evangelicals, the same “I’m rightness” the same arrogance, some are “religious” in their atheism and  as bothersome as the “Bible Thumpers”.


IF you are not among the some many , there can be no offense and no defense needed! You are not be accused 


I'm not specifically anti-Christian, though I know that on my particularly sour days when I am a curmudgeon, I can be rather unpleasantly anti-Protestant and anti-Evangelical. Some posters have also claimed that I can be anti-Catholic, so perhaps I can also be periodically anti-Catholic. But I don't think I've ever been anti-Protestant/anti-Evangelical and anti-Catholic on the same day. 













Flag chevy956 April 23, 2012 6:37 PM EDT

Apr 23, 2012 -- 5:44PM, teilhard wrote:

I DON'T "dislike" Atheists ...


I simply DISAGREE with Atheists re: The "God" Question ...


In FACT, a couple of my very good Friends are Atheists, one of them being a Professional Colleague with whom I have worked on several Science-Educational Projects for ca. 25 Years ...


Apr 22, 2012 -- 11:10PM, steven_guy wrote:


You ever gonna get over your deep dislike of atheists?


Apr 22, 2012 -- 11:01PM, teilhard wrote:


An important personal Spiritual Task is to "get over" being "Anti-" and just BE what one IS without worrying so much about what (different) somebody ELSE Is ... or Isn't ...


Apr 22, 2012 -- 10:36PM, costrel wrote:


Apr 22, 2012 -- 8:42PM, Fodaoson wrote:

Maybe because many poster are American and the Major religion in the US is Christianity, and Christianity has had a huge influence on American society and cultures, many posters on this thread and, like ones, who state they are atheists, may be perceived as anti-Christian.  Some write with as much passion as an evangelical Christian; they display the same “knowing” as evangelicals, the same “I’m rightness” the same arrogance, some are “religious” in their atheism and  as bothersome as the “Bible Thumpers”.


IF you are not among the some many , there can be no offense and no defense needed! You are not be accused 


I'm not specifically anti-Christian, though I know that on my particularly sour days when I am a curmudgeon, I can be rather unpleasantly anti-Protestant and anti-Evangelical. Some posters have also claimed that I can be anti-Catholic, so perhaps I can also be periodically anti-Catholic. But I don't think I've ever been anti-Protestant/anti-Evangelical and anti-Catholic on the same day. 














You keep posting this and yet no one here believes it for a second. When someone drops the "One of my best friends is a ...." in response to accusations of prejudice, one can be pretty sure that they don't have such a friend. Kind of like your pastorship.

Flag Bob_the_Lunatic April 23, 2012 6:41 PM EDT

Apr 22, 2012 -- 8:42PM, Fodaoson wrote:


Maybe because many poster are American and the Major religion in the US is Christianity, and Christianity has had a huge influence on American society and cultures, many posters on this thread and, like ones, who state they are atheists, may be perceived as anti-Christian.  Some write with as much passion as an evangelical Christian; they display the same “knowing” as evangelicals, the same “I’m rightness” the same arrogance, some are “religious” in their atheism and  as bothersome as the “Bible Thumpers”.


IF you are not among the some many , there can be no offense and no defense needed! You are not be accused     




Not really the issue, but absolutely right.  Goddamn right I'm "anti-christian", know why?  Because I'm American and the greatest threat to our Constitution has been christians.  And how ironic... the first nation neutral toward religion is the one packed with fundies trying to undo the basis of all the freedoms guaranteed therein.


But I challenge you to show how atheists like myself are "as bothersome" or as arrogant?  We're simply in favor of fairness.  Christians are the enemy of fairness in this country.  Atheists don't want special rights, they aren't ARROGANTLY trying to shove whatever their beliefs are on everyone else, via PUBLIC schools and other PUBLIC institutions.  So I challenge that claim.  Please back it up using reason.


Also-one should not assume that the cause of atheism is "anti-christianity".  Again, maybe it is for some.  But the fool's claim was everyone, as he said "surely", indicating no exceptions.


I had no beef with christianity until about 4-5 years after becoming Buddhist... slowly realizing I was a minority and how my rights were harmed by christianity.  At that point, just as if you find bugs in your house, you inspect further-and find an infestation.


Flag Bob_the_Lunatic April 23, 2012 6:47 PM EDT

And one last thing Fodaoson:  Obviously you are closer to christianity than atheism.  It's required to be blind to the fact that the rest of us aren't "pushy" or "arrogant", we're simply defending ourselves and AMERICA from christians.  The person who strikes in self defense is NOT as guilty as he who draws first blood, in reality only the first striker is guilty of battery, the 2nd one is guilty of nothing (assuming he quits once the christian is on the ground :)


So to equate the two shows a very narrow view.   For example:  Long ago I realized, that while I am equalitist, that I was blind to much of discrimination... UNLESS I was in the class being harmed.  This includes sexism, as a male, I've seen it very rarely  in my life-yet it can be right in front of me against females and I might miss it-the offense was not aimed at me.


This is the case much of the time for most of us I think.  Perhaps you should just fill in your info as your words reveal your position implicitly I think.

Flag steven_guy April 23, 2012 6:59 PM EDT

Apr 23, 2012 -- 5:42PM, Fodaoson wrote:


One cannot get a degree in glossolalia but it is an area of study in Religious studies  and Psychology; There is no degree in the how the Eucharist fits in religions  but it is an area study also,   there is no degree in Baptists sectarianism but  there is an areas of study in religious studies, cultural studies, and behavioral Social-Psychology.


Of course atheism  come from the Greek  a-[without] and theos [ god], but it could be used as having no god, belief in no god, disbelief in a god  or denial of gods.    There are forms of expression of atheism, secularism, humanism, secular-humanism, Taoism, Buddhism. 




Atheism is a lack of belief in god, gods and goddesses. Okay?


Taoism is Taoism.


Buddhism is Buddhism.


A secularist, humanist or secular-humanist may well be an atheist, but that is incidental. Most atheists I know couldn't care less about any of these things - they are simply people who do not believe in god, gods or goddesses.


SHeesh! How long is it going to take us to explain this to you?

Flag Blü April 23, 2012 7:26 PM EDT

fodaoson


I am tryin to learn about the academic  discipline of atheisim.


You obviously mean something by that.  May I enquire what?


Flag wohali April 23, 2012 7:30 PM EDT

Steven:


"SHeesh! How long is it going to take us to explain this to you?"


How long you got?

Flag steven_guy April 23, 2012 7:52 PM EDT

Apr 23, 2012 -- 7:30PM, wohali wrote:


Steven:


"SHeesh! How long is it going to take us to explain this to you?"


How long you got?




(laughing out loud) yeah! 


Actually, I am wasting time. I really should get back to work. 

Flag mountain_man April 23, 2012 10:29 PM EDT

Apr 23, 2012 -- 12:26AM, Fodaoson wrote:

You are right, I do not know what atheism is all about; in the year of following this board , I have read  differing  contradictory opinions by self-professed atheists, all beliefs and  non-beliefs are self-professed. Beliefs are just opinions.


One would think that in that time you would have learned what Atheism really is. It's only been mentioned thousands of times in that year. Atheism is a lack of belief in gods. Word games and equivocations can't change that. So, tell us why you cannot understand something so simple?


Is atheism a nonbelief about a nonexistent nothing?....


And you complain about the gibberish of others. Atheists lack a theism, a god belief. We don't have the god beliefs that some have. How is that so hard to understand?

Flag teilhard April 23, 2012 10:33 PM EDT

Well, then ...


So ...


I guess there's no Point in trying to engage in this "Discussion" Forum, eh ... ???


But, wait ... !!!  


If YOU don't believe what I write in MY Posts, why should I believe YOURS, eh ... ???  IOW, it turns out that you really truly actually DO accept the Truth of what I Post ... !!!  


EXCELLENT ... !!!


Apr 23, 2012 -- 6:37PM, chevy956 wrote:

Apr 23, 2012 -- 5:44PM, teilhard wrote:


I DON'T "dislike" Atheists ...


I simply DISAGREE with Atheists re: The "God" Question ...


In FACT, a couple of my very good Friends are Atheists, one of them being a Professional Colleague with whom I have worked on several Science-Educational Projects for ca. 25 Years ...


Apr 22, 2012 -- 11:10PM, steven_guy wrote:


You ever gonna get over your deep dislike of atheists?


Apr 22, 2012 -- 11:01PM, teilhard wrote:


An important personal Spiritual Task is to "get over" being "Anti-" and just BE what one IS without worrying so much about what (different) somebody ELSE Is ... or Isn't ...


Apr 22, 2012 -- 10:36PM, costrel wrote:


Apr 22, 2012 -- 8:42PM, Fodaoson wrote:

Maybe because many poster are American and the Major religion in the US is Christianity, and Christianity has had a huge influence on American society and cultures, many posters on this thread and, like ones, who state they are atheists, may be perceived as anti-Christian.  Some write with as much passion as an evangelical Christian; they display the same “knowing” as evangelicals, the same “I’m rightness” the same arrogance, some are “religious” in their atheism and  as bothersome as the “Bible Thumpers”.


IF you are not among the some many , there can be no offense and no defense needed! You are not be accused 


I'm not specifically anti-Christian, though I know that on my particularly sour days when I am a curmudgeon, I can be rather unpleasantly anti-Protestant and anti-Evangelical. Some posters have also claimed that I can be anti-Catholic, so perhaps I can also be periodically anti-Catholic. But I don't think I've ever been anti-Protestant/anti-Evangelical and anti-Catholic on the same day. 
















You keep posting this and yet no one here believes it for a second. When someone drops the "One of my best friends is a ...." in response to accusations of prejudice, one can be pretty sure that they don't have such a friend. Kind of like your pastorship.





Flag mountain_man April 23, 2012 10:36 PM EDT

Apr 23, 2012 -- 5:42PM, Fodaoson wrote:

Of course atheism  come from the Greek  a-[without] and theos [ god],


Actually modern Greek. The word did not appear until the mid 1500s. It means without a theology, or lack of god beliefs.


...but it could be used as having no god, belief in no god, disbelief in a god  or denial of gods.


It can, but it depends on the context. The most common context and the most commonly used definition by Atheists is; lack of god beliefs. The "denial" bit is irrelevant and often just a rude dismissive used by theists. The rest are just word games used in sophomoric arguments.


There are forms of expression of atheism, secularism, humanism, secular-humanism, Taoism, Buddhism.


Sorry, you're wrong again. Humanism can contain god beliefs. Secular Humanism does not. Our laws, and science, are secular, not Atheistic. Taoism and Buddhism both contain gods and/or beings outside of nature. Some versions of those religions have been sanitized and repackaged for sale to Westerners.

Flag costrel April 23, 2012 10:37 PM EDT

Apr 23, 2012 -- 5:13PM, teilhard wrote:

No ... I never wrote any such Thing ... 


What I HAVE written -- repeatedly, consistently -- is the FACT that in my own 35+ Years in Ministry, i have known ONE(1) Priest who touched an Altar Boy inappropriately ... The Priest was removed by his Bishop, and the Situation was handled by both Ecclesastical and Legal Means ...


But ... Yes ... It IS my Observation that Anti-Catholic Folks are having a WONDERFUL Time with these such Problems ...


So what are you trying to say then with your statement that you've only met one Catholic priest ever in 35+ years that has harmed a child? What does your personal experience in Minnesota of all places have to do with any of this? I've never known a priest who has harmed a child. Does that mean that there are not priests out there who have harmed children? Of course not. Don't be stupid. Your use of your experience is wrong and misguided concerning the Catholic sex abuse scandal. And, I would say, also immoral, and is nothing more than asserting that you don't believe that it has happened and that it is happening. We can all read through your doublespeak and know exactly what you really mean when you say that you've only known one priest who has harmed a child. You're denying that there is a problem in the Catholic Church. 


And sexual abuse of children is not funny, and it is not a laughing matter. So if you think that non-Catholics and even anti-Catholics are having a "wonderful time" confronting this issue, then you don't have a damned clue about why we are upset. Nor will you have a damned clue as to why people like me are upset with your reliance on your 35+ years of experience. And if you know a priest who has harmed a child, then you probably know the child who has been harmed as well. You at least are aware of one child who has been hurt by a Catholic priest. And where is your compassion and your empathy for that child? I don't see it. All I see is a self-righteous Lutheran minister who masquerades as a Catholic priest and who thinks that his personal experience is valid evidence that there is no Catholic clergy sexual scandal.  

Flag steven_guy April 23, 2012 11:23 PM EDT

Apr 23, 2012 -- 10:37PM, costrel wrote:

So what are you trying to say then with your statement that you've only met one Catholic priest ever in 35+ years that has harmed a child? What does your personal experience in Minnesota of all places have to do with any of this? I've never known a priest who has harmed a child. Does that mean that there are not priests out there who have harmed children? Of course not. Don't be stupid. Your use of your experience is wrong and misguided concerning the Catholic sex abuse scandal. And, I would say, also immoral, and is nothing more than asserting that you don't believe that it has happened and that it is happening. We can all read through your doublespeak and know exactly what you really mean when you say that you've only known one priest who has harmed a child. You're denying that there is a problem in the Catholic Church. 


And sexual abuse of children is not funny, and it is not a laughing matter. So if you think that non-Catholics and even anti-Catholics are having a "wonderful time" confronting this issue, then you don't have a damned clue about why we are upset. Nor will you have a damned clue as to why people like me are upset with your reliance on your 35+ years of experience. And if you know a priest who has harmed a child, then you probably know the child who has been harmed as well. You at least are aware of one child who has been hurt by a Catholic priest. And where is your compassion and your empathy for that child? I don't see it. All I see is a self-righteous Lutheran minister who masquerades as a Catholic priest and who thinks that his personal experience is valid evidence that there is no Catholic clergy sexual scandal.  




You're far more patient and tolerant than I am.

Flag mountain_man April 23, 2012 11:46 PM EDT

Apr 23, 2012 -- 10:37PM, costrel wrote:

So what are you trying to say then with your statement that you've only met one Catholic priest ever in 35+ years that has harmed a child? ...


I have absolutely no doubt that he has met many lutheran or catholic priests have have sexually abused children. Most of those that do such things don't go around bragging about it and most get away with it. I know of 6 boys from the catholic school I was kicked out of for being an Atheist. The offending priest is long dead but that church claims to have never had such a thing happen with any of their priests.

Flag Ken April 23, 2012 11:54 PM EDT

Apr 23, 2012 -- 10:37PM, costrel wrote:

And sexual abuse of children is not funny, and it is not a laughing matter. So if you think that non-Catholics and even anti-Catholics are having a "wonderful time" confronting this issue, then you don't have a damned clue about why we are upset. Nor will you have a damned clue as to why people like me are upset with your reliance on your 35+ years of experience. And if you know a priest who has harmed a child, then you probably know the child who has been harmed as well. You at least are aware of one child who has been hurt by a Catholic priest. And where is your compassion and your empathy for that child? I don't see it. All I see is a self-righteous Lutheran minister who masquerades as a Catholic priest and who thinks that his personal experience is valid evidence that there is no Catholic clergy sexual scandal.  



Some people are as vile as those they defend. Sometimes (and this is always a possibility that must be considered) they're vile in exactly the same way but haven't been exposed yet. 

Flag Blü April 24, 2012 12:16 AM EDT

Fodaoson


I do not know what atheism is all about; in the year of following this board , I have read  differing  contradictory opinions by self-professed atheists


My atheism began with simple skepticism - we never encounter real supernatural beings but if they have objective existence, we should.  Thus it's reasonable to say that on what we presently know they exist only in imagination.


Later a prior problem occurred to me - we don't even have a definition of 'supernatural being' that's useful both to theology and to reasoned enquiry, so we have no objective test to tell us whether any candidate is a supernatural being or not. The word 'god', for instance, is long on connotation, very short indeed on denotation.


So my atheism is the statement that we presently have no sound reason to think supernatural beings have objective existence.  (This, as you can see, goes further than atheism as such, and includes angels, souls, ghosts, magic, goblins, werewolves &c.  I hold a similar view of 'psi powers'.)


I've mentioned this in posts to you before.  If you have any questions, just ask,



all beliefs and non-beliefs are self-professed. Beliefs are just opinions.


One dictionary definition of 'faith' is believing something is true in the absence of evidence to support it or in the face of evidence showing it's not true.  This is commonly the meaning of 'religious faith'. 


'Faith' and 'belief' often enough get used interchangeably.  A belief that no argument can dissuade is not 'just an opinion' and needs to be distinguished.

Flag Fodaoson April 24, 2012 2:36 AM EDT

Apr 24, 2012 -- 12:16AM, Blü wrote:


Fodaoson


I do not know what atheism is all about; in the year of following this board , I have read  differing  contradictory opinions by self-professed atheists


My atheism began with simple skepticism - we never encounter real supernatural beings but if they have objective existence, we should.  Thus it's reasonable to say that on what we presently know they exist only in imagination.


Later a prior problem occurred to me - we don't even have a definition of 'supernatural being' that's useful both to theology and to reasoned enquiry, so we have no objective test to tell us whether any candidate is a supernatural being or not. The word 'god', for instance, is long on connotation, very short indeed on denotation.


So my atheism is the statement that we presently have no sound reason to think supernatural beings have objective existence.  (This, as you can see, goes further than atheism as such, and includes angels, souls, ghosts, magic, goblins, werewolves &c.  I hold a similar view of 'psi powers'.)


I've mentioned this in posts to you before.  If you have any questions, just ask,



all beliefs and non-beliefs are self-professed. Beliefs are just opinions.


One dictionary definition of 'faith' is believing something is true in the absence of evidence to support it or in the face of evidence showing it's not true.  This is commonly the meaning of 'religious faith'. 


'Faith' and 'belief' often enough get used interchangeably.  A belief that no argument can dissuade is not 'just an opinion' and needs to be distinguished.




Blü,  Your last post  was  enlightening, and I mean that positively.  The human mind  is inquisitive, it seeks understanding.  Some atheist seem to explain that because something is not that   they just accept that.  Religion began as a way to explain observed phenomenon’s existence and origin.   In early humanity   religion gave human comfort and  acceptance of nature and events.  As reasoning and knowledge grew,  and event could be rationally and eventfully scientifically explained.  This same process take place in a newborn as it grows up to be mature and possess a reasoning mind.  In our mythology, gods, goddess, spirits , etc.  were used to explain the unknown, the feared and to give hope. By our time, the area of Religion’s influence has been reduced to Death and  the afterward.  Most people fear death because it is unknown ,For most people of faith, that faith lets them overcome most of  their  fear of death and frees them from it.   


Ayou explained your atheism as a process of some philosophy( a search for knowledge and truth through reason)  and you moved to  a way of approaching life . In that manner atheism is a  knowledge acquired by “doing philosophy”, a belief in reasoned reality , a positive state of mind.  Your post  is without defensive, anger  but does contain reasoned  content.  


As Paul is purported to write a say: “When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like  a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of  childhood behind me”


Religion and “faith” are among those childish things. 



thanks for posting

Flag Sparky_Spotty April 24, 2012 8:12 AM EDT

Apr 23, 2012 -- 11:46PM, mountain_man wrote:


Apr 23, 2012 -- 10:37PM, costrel wrote:

So what are you trying to say then with your statement that you've only met one Catholic priest ever in 35+ years that has harmed a child? ...


I have absolutely no doubt that he has met many lutheran or catholic priests have have sexually abused children. Most of those that do such things don't go around bragging about it and most get away with it. I know of 6 boys from the catholic school I was kicked out of for being an Atheist. The offending priest is long dead but that church claims to have never had such a thing happen with any of their priests.




To me, the priests are only part of the issue.  heck, its quite possible many of the offenders were pedophiles already and only entered the priesthood in order to gain access to children. I don't know. To me, where the equally reprehensible actions occured, is in the catholic churches efforts to conceal their activity. To effectively condone it by merely transferring priests to another parish for example.


To keep in with the O.P. - Atheism is NOT an organization that hides the pedophilic activities of its members.




 

Flag teilhard April 24, 2012 11:43 AM EDT

Yes ... Unfortunately, it is clear that Pedophiles tend to gravitate toward Opportunties to have Contact with Children and Youth ... So ...


Scout Groups, Schools, Youth Sports Associations, etc., do seem to attract ... "Situations" ...


As a Parish Pastor I am the direct Supervisor of all Parish Activities, including Schools and Youth Activities ... Especially with increasing Awarenss of these Problems, Parish Clergy of my Acquaintence are ever more Mindful and Attentive ...


Apr 24, 2012 -- 8:12AM, Sparky_Spotty wrote:


Apr 23, 2012 -- 11:46PM, mountain_man wrote:


Apr 23, 2012 -- 10:37PM, costrel wrote:

So what are you trying to say then with your statement that you've only met one Catholic priest ever in 35+ years that has harmed a child? ...


I have absolutely no doubt that he has met many lutheran or catholic priests have have sexually abused children. Most of those that do such things don't go around bragging about it and most get away with it. I know of 6 boys from the catholic school I was kicked out of for being an Atheist. The offending priest is long dead but that church claims to have never had such a thing happen with any of their priests.




To me, the priests are only part of the issue.  heck, its quite possible many of the offenders were pedophiles already and only entered the priesthood in order to gain access to children. I don't know. To me, where the equally reprehensible actions occured, is in the catholic churches efforts to conceal their activity. To effectively condone it by merely transferring priests to another parish for example.


To keep in with the O.P. - Atheism is NOT an organization that hides the pedophilic activities of its members.




 





Flag wohali April 24, 2012 11:50 AM EDT

When did this become the pedophile priest thread?

Flag teilhard April 24, 2012 11:57 AM EDT

Here is the Post which hijacked/derailed the Thread ...


Apr 23, 2012 -- 9:11AM, costrel wrote:


Apr 22, 2012 -- 11:01PM, teilhard wrote:

An important personal Spiritual Task is to "get over" being "Anti-" and just BE what one IS without worrying so much about what (different) somebody ELSE Is ... or Isn't ...


First of all, Teilhard, you can keep your "personal spiritual tasks" -- I have no interest in that. Second of all, I don't value your opinions on religious and spiritual matters, especially since I still remember how you denied the existence of the abuse of children by Catholic priests and acted as if the scandal was the invention of people you considered to be anti-Catholic. 





Flag wohali April 24, 2012 12:02 PM EDT

Actually, it was more of a subtle reminder to return to the topic at hand rather than a request as to who first attempted derailment..............

Flag teilhard April 24, 2012 12:10 PM EDT

I agree ... Let's get BACK to The Topic ...


Apr 24, 2012 -- 12:02PM, wohali wrote:


Actually, it was more of a subtle reminder to return to the topic at hand rather than a request as to who first attempted derailment..............





Flag teilhard April 24, 2012 12:22 PM EDT

Again ... I think being POSITIVELY what one is, holding one's Views positively, is a big Step in getting over worrying about the Fact that OTHERS may hold OTHER Views ...


At our BEST, American Society embraces and embodies exactly that positive Endorsement, which helps move us away from the need to either "convert" or denigrate others ...


Apr 22, 2012 -- 11:01PM, teilhard wrote:


An important personal Spiritual Task is to "get over" being "Anti-" and just BE what one IS without worrying so much about what (different) somebody ELSE Is ... or Isn't ...


Apr 22, 2012 -- 10:36PM, costrel wrote:


Apr 22, 2012 -- 8:42PM, Fodaoson wrote:

Maybe because many poster are American and the Major religion in the US is Christianity, and Christianity has had a huge influence on American society and cultures, many posters on this thread and, like ones, who state they are atheists, may be perceived as anti-Christian.  Some write with as much passion as an evangelical Christian; they display the same “knowing” as evangelicals, the same “I’m rightness” the same arrogance, some are “religious” in their atheism and  as bothersome as the “Bible Thumpers”.


IF you are not among the some many , there can be no offense and no defense needed! You are not be accused 


I'm not specifically anti-Christian, though I know that on my particularly sour days when I am a curmudgeon, I can be rather unpleasantly anti-Protestant and anti-Evangelical. Some posters have also claimed that I can be anti-Catholic, so perhaps I can also be periodically anti-Catholic. But I don't think I've ever been anti-Protestant/anti-Evangelical and anti-Catholic on the same day. 









Flag Ken April 24, 2012 12:26 PM EDT

Apr 24, 2012 -- 11:50AM, wohali wrote:


When did this become the pedophile priest thread?



It's always been one. A refuge for pedophile priests is one of those things that atheism is not.

Flag Sparky_Spotty April 24, 2012 12:44 PM EDT

Indeed. I summed up my post with


"To keep in with the O.P. - Atheism is NOT an organization that hides the pedophilic activities of its members."



Its a valid point. Sexual abuse by priests has occurred and probably continues to occur in the catholic church. the catholic church has been proven to be complicit in concealing these crimes and thusly putting even more children at risk.


Atheism is not this.


Atheism has no organization or ruling class that attempts to conceal criminal acts of its members, because there are no 'members'. It is not an organization.


The example is being bought forward and illustrated as a response to the constant accusation from theists about atheism's supposed lack of morals.  Pot meet kettle.

Flag JCarlin April 24, 2012 1:23 PM EDT

Apr 24, 2012 -- 11:57AM, teilhard wrote:

Here is the Post which hijacked/derailed the Thread ...


Your complaint rings pretty hollow.  You know where the hijack response thread is. 

Flag Ken April 24, 2012 1:24 PM EDT

Apr 24, 2012 -- 1:23PM, JCarlin wrote:


Apr 24, 2012 -- 11:57AM, teilhard wrote:

Here is the Post which hijacked/derailed the Thread ...


Your complaint rings pretty hollow.  You know where the hijack response thread is. 



He knows where the door is too.

Flag Knowsnothing April 24, 2012 1:36 PM EDT

Ok then, can atheism be described as a stance or position? 


For example, theists or deists may take the stance that they believe in god.


Atheists take the stance that they believe in no gods.  Of course, I understand atheists wouldn't even have to take such a stance if they weren't imposed or impressed on by theists to "decide".  Since it is a lack of belief, it wouldn't cross an atheist's mind on a day-to-day basis, just like asking yourself whether you believe in the Tooth Fairy doesn't generally cross your mind unless prompted.


I think the label "atheist" wouldn't even exist if not prompted by those that claim god exists, because it would just be a non-sequitur.  However, that is not the case.


Flag teilhard April 24, 2012 1:50 PM EDT

LOL ... 


Yes ... But apparently the Hijack-Derailers DON'T ...


AND ...


In a FABULOUS Double Helping of IRONY ... YOU thus CONTINUE the Hijacking/Derailing of The Thread ...


Amazingly Ironic, eh ... ???


Apr 24, 2012 -- 1:23PM, JCarlin wrote:


Apr 24, 2012 -- 11:57AM, teilhard wrote:

Here is the Post which hijacked/derailed the Thread ...


Your complaint rings pretty hollow.  You know where the hijack response thread is. 





Flag wohali April 24, 2012 3:25 PM EDT

Knowsnothing:


"I think the label "atheist" wouldn't even exist if not prompted by those that claim god exists, because it would just be a non-sequitur.  However, that is not the case."


Indeed.

Flag teilhard April 24, 2012 3:53 PM EDT

Yes ...


The Use of a Prefix seems at some Level to ASSUME Something about that Word to which it is affixed ... (the "non" in "non-sequitur" doesn't mean ANYTHING much sans the "sequitur," eh ... ???


Apr 24, 2012 -- 3:25PM, wohali wrote:


Knowsnothing:


"I think the label "atheist" wouldn't even exist if not prompted by those that claim god exists, because it would just be a non-sequitur.  However, that is not the case."


Indeed.





Flag Bob_the_Lunatic April 24, 2012 8:20 PM EDT

Apr 23, 2012 -- 6:59PM, steven_guy wrote:


Apr 23, 2012 -- 5:42PM, Fodaoson wrote:


One cannot get a degree in glossolalia but it is an area of study in Religious studies  and Psychology; There is no degree in the how the Eucharist fits in religions  but it is an area study also,   there is no degree in Baptists sectarianism but  there is an areas of study in religious studies, cultural studies, and behavioral Social-Psychology.


Of course atheism  come from the Greek  a-[without] and theos [ god], but it could be used as having no god, belief in no god, disbelief in a god  or denial of gods.    There are forms of expression of atheism, secularism, humanism, secular-humanism, Taoism, Buddhism. 




Atheism is a lack of belief in god, gods and goddesses. Okay?


Taoism is Taoism.


Buddhism is Buddhism.


A secularist, humanist or secular-humanist may well be an atheist, but that is incidental. Most atheists I know couldn't care less about any of these things - they are simply people who do not believe in god, gods or goddesses.


SHeesh! How long is it going to take us to explain this to you?




I don't follow the difference you imply here Steven:  What you said about secular humanism is exactly true about Buddhism, Taoism, and others, like Confucianism for example.  That is, it is "incidental".  Which is much more descriptive than saying, "Secular humanism is secular humanism".  As though it is something entirely different... but is it Steven?  Isn't the whole point of the thread to reveal that atheism is NOT attached to anything in particular, or more, or less... except one thing:  Lacking any faith, in any gods.  


In that regard, the difference you've implied by putting these atheist faiths, or if you like, "Certain Eastern Philosophies"  in ONE group, and then leaving another for ...well... what is it?  "Non-religious forms of atheism"?????


See Steven, it's ironic.... SOME atheists (not myself lol) do the same thing they accuse the christians of, or nearly.  It is what it is, your statement above adding something personal to it, something that did not belong.  Just like the christians you are explaining it to.  


No harm done-just wanted to point it out as I bet you didn't realize that how you wrote it... revealed it's not really that "simple" to  you.


I'd also point out that atheists here do it frequently-it's not like the "atheists get it and the christians  don't"  and I only single out christians here as in their majority, and perhaps somewhere during the crusades-it appears they lost the belief that others (non-christians) have any rights, and thus right have severe difficulty listening to these "others", including atheists, Buddhists, secular whathaveyous, much less actually thinking and therefore being ABLE to learn from them.  Nope, atheists too are guilty-overcomplicating what it is.  Just like the christians, many of them redefine it out of convenience, or selfishness to put it honestly.  Both groups can overcomplicate this simple lack of belief in an outdated idea, long since running it's course.



But it is indeed that simple in reality:  You either DO or you DO NOT believe in 1 god or more.   And if you DO, then you are not an atheist, you are a theist of some variety.   And if you don't, then you are atheist.  And that's the end of it.  There aren't really degrees of atheism.  


And secular humanists I would argue are perhaps LESS "atheist" than Buddhists if one wishes to boil this unworthy claim down.  Normally I would make no such argument; not caring.  But since your implication brought it to the table... allow me to retort.  


EDIT:  I said quite a bit here to make this argument, which is pretty obvious if you think about it objectively... as I question these "naked atheists" at least the American ones-they don't seem to believe what they say-unless they have a group-then they appear to get something done, but on their own, I see them behave as cowards when it matters.  It's your thread-and while this is addressed to any secular humanist who talks the talk but fails to walk when the opportunity is presented,  it was your implicit but clear statement that aroused my passion to tear that claim to pieces.  Either way-I'm not gonna hijack your thread, so my reasons are in another thread-one on this subject which you can find by the time you read this :)  


  

Flag mountain_man April 24, 2012 10:01 PM EDT

Apr 24, 2012 -- 8:12AM, Sparky_Spotty wrote:

To me, the priests are only part of the issue.  heck, its quite possible many of the offenders were pedophiles already and only entered the priesthood in order to gain access to children. I don't know. To me, where the equally reprehensible actions occured, is in the catholic churches efforts to conceal their activity. To effectively condone it by merely transferring priests to another parish for example.


That the priest hood would attract those that have a need for power over others is to be expected. A certain number of those that want that power would also use it to bend children to their sexual desires. But I don't think the priesthood or any other preacher group would have a significant number of pedophiles than other groups. It's the cover-up that is the problem. The people that claim to represent a god that is "love" cared more about protecting the religion than protecting children.


To keep in with the O.P. - Atheism is NOT an organization that hides the pedophilic activities of its members.


There is no Atheist organization that would, or could, do such a thing.

Flag Fodaoson April 24, 2012 10:11 PM EDT

Bob_the_Lunatic: Steven  guy  addressed fodaoson , moi

Bob_the_Lunatic: Steven  guy  addressed fodaoson , moi

Just like the Christians you are explaining it to”[end].   A Christian is someone who places their faith for salvation in Jesus Christ .   For me Jesus is a character in an ancient book that has had and still has a huge impact on the development of Western literature and culture.  I was reared in a Judeao- Christian family, home , community ,culture and  environment.  I have practicing Christian family, acquaintances and associates. I know Christian doctrines, practices, beliefs but do not hold to them as divinely inspired or applicable to my eternal soul.  I have a Taoist leaning Philosophy,   an agnostic and reasoned belief,   So Just like the  Christians you are explaining it to does not apply.


I have stated before and have not  seen presented  a valid argument otherwise , that some  self-described atheists posting on Belief net are really ANTI theist anti-Christian- religion, not just no such thing as god atheists. Some(most?) posting atheist are real true atheists     

Flag teilhard April 24, 2012 10:24 PM EDT

In general, it seems that MANY of us have Difficulty coming to Terms with a terrible Situation that no one wants to imagine ... The same Kind of "I can't believe it ... !!!" Reaction comes up when a young Mother in Florida (apparently) killed her own beautiful Child or when Day Care Workers abuse the little ones in their Care ... it's a frightful Loss of Innocence all around ...


Apr 24, 2012 -- 10:01PM, mountain_man wrote:


Apr 24, 2012 -- 8:12AM, Sparky_Spotty wrote:

To me, the priests are only part of the issue.  heck, its quite possible many of the offenders were pedophiles already and only entered the priesthood in order to gain access to children. I don't know. To me, where the equally reprehensible actions occured, is in the catholic churches efforts to conceal their activity. To effectively condone it by merely transferring priests to another parish for example.


That the priest hood would attract those that have a need for power over others is to be expected. A certain number of those that want that power would also use it to bend children to their sexual desires. But I don't think the priesthood or any other preacher group would have a significant number of pedophiles than other groups. It's the cover-up that is the problem. The people that claim to represent a god that is "love" cared more about protecting the religion than protecting children.


To keep in with the O.P. - Atheism is NOT an organization that hides the pedophilic activities of its members.


There is no Atheist organization that would, or could, do such a thing.





Flag teilhard April 25, 2012 12:38 AM EDT

For MANY professed "Atheists," their "A-Theism" DOES seem to be a particular IDEA or CLAIM re: The "God" Question ... Therefore, it has SOME "Content" ...


Apr 24, 2012 -- 1:36PM, Knowsnothing wrote:


Ok then, can atheism be described as a stance or position? 


For example, theists or deists may take the stance that they believe in god.


Atheists take the stance that they believe in no gods.  Of course, I understand atheists wouldn't even have to take such a stance if they weren't imposed or impressed on by theists to "decide".  Since it is a lack of belief, it wouldn't cross an atheist's mind on a day-to-day basis, just like asking yourself whether you believe in the Tooth Fairy doesn't generally cross your mind unless prompted.


I think the label "atheist" wouldn't even exist if not prompted by those that claim god exists, because it would just be a non-sequitur.  However, that is not the case.






Flag Blü April 25, 2012 3:12 AM EDT

Fodaoson


Most people fear death because it is unknown


Yes, it seems they do - oddly, since death is neither unknown nor obscure.  It's just the cessation of life and it's all around us.  We're not different in any relevant way to our fellow animals.  I have apprehensions about dying, but none about being dead.


In that manner atheism is a  knowledge acquired by “doing philosophy”, a belief in reasoned reality


Our understanding of reality is reasoned (and constantly re-reasoned as we learn more).  So I'd say reality is 'reasoned about', but not of itself 'reasoned'.

Meanwhile if someone ever gives a satisfactory demonstration of a supernatural being in reality, I'll be as interested as anyone else.  I don't expect that to happen.  Much more strangely, I don't know any believers who do.


Flag Fodaoson April 25, 2012 11:39 AM EDT

Apr 25, 2012 -- 3:12AM, Blü wrote:


Fodaoson


Most people fear death because it is unknown


Yes, it seems they do - oddly, since death is neither unknown nor obscure.  It's just the cessation of life and it's all around us.  We're not different in any relevant way to our fellow animals.  I have apprehensions about dying, but none about being dead.


In that manner atheism is a  knowledge acquired by “doing philosophy”, a belief in reasoned reality


Our understanding of reality is reasoned (and constantly re-reasoned as we learn more).  So I'd say reality is 'reasoned about', but not of itself 'reasoned'.

Meanwhile if someone ever gives a satisfactory demonstration of a supernatural being in reality, I'll be as interested as anyone else.  I don't expect that to happen.  Much more strangely, I don't know any believers who do.





Meanwhile if someone ever gives a satisfactory demonstration of a supernatural being in reality, I'll be as interested as anyone else.  I don't expect that to happen.  Much more strangely, I don't know any believers who do.”


  The power and influence of the brain  on people is sometimes more powerful than some   real events.   Some “religious experiences” are  so strong as to convince  person of  the reality.  The experience may be psychologically or hysterically induced but It is still real to the person experiencing it.    PTSD suffers often have dreams that cause them to react as they did to the traumatic event.    The religious experience of being “born again” can be so strong as to cause people to really believe they have seen Jesus or have been in the presence of  “The Holy Spirit.”      

Flag Bob_the_Lunatic April 25, 2012 7:26 PM EDT

Apr 24, 2012 -- 10:11PM, Fodaoson wrote:


Bob_the_Lunatic: Steven  guy  addressed fodaoson , moi


Bob_the_Lunatic: Steven  guy  addressed fodaoson , moi,  ” Just like the Christians you are explaining it to”.   A Christian is someone who places their faith for salvation in Jesus Christ .   For me Jesus is a character in an ancient book that has had and still has a huge impact on the development of Western literature and culture.  I was reared in a Judeao- Christian family, home , community ,culture and  environment.  I have practicing Christian family, acquaintances and associates. I know Christian doctrines, practices, beliefs but do not hold to them as divinely inspired or applicable to my eternal soul.  I have a Taoist leaning Philosophy,   an agnostic and reasoned belief,   So Just like the  Christians you are explaining it to does not apply.


I have stated before and have not  seen presented  a valid argument otherwise , that some  self-described atheists posting on Belief net are really ANTI theist anti-Christian- religion, not just no such thing as god atheists. Some(most?) posting atheist are real true atheists     




I was talking to Steven, quit eavesdropping and mind your own business.

Post Your Reply
<CTRL+Enter> to submit
Please login to post a reply.
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook