Christian faith did away with the killing of those without faith with the New Testament. Nice try though.
Maybe I missed the previous pages, but I know that some UTSA students are doing some smut for smut program where they are exchanging bibles for p*rnography. It's causing alot of problems right now and even though I respect whatever people believe or don't believe, I feel this is going a bit too far. Sure, Athiests are free to express their ideas but I think it's wrong that they are essentially violating others. Athiests will probably equate this current "smut for smut" act to the way that religious people give out bibles in the street... Nonetheless I still think it's wrong to demonstrate your ideals blatantly, just to get some publicity...
In general people are offended way to fast. I do not care that there are people who show us that they are Christians or Muslims or Buddhists by the way they dress or by wearing a religious artifact, or by having a church/ mosque making a lot of sound. But those people should also not complain when other people wear clothes they like (like short skirts, or woman’s clothes), or watch movies they like, or do drugs. People should just mind there own business. I do not care what others believe, I’m respectful for all religions. However there are certain things that do annoy me. 1: People should just let me be. Do not come to my house trying to help me find the light. I do not go to houses of religious people trying to show them my interpretation of the light. 2: That some religious groups insist in having the Sunday of, and trying to make sure that there are no shops open on Sunday, even though many people do want the shops to be open on Sunday. That is just trying to force others to do as they do. I do not care if shops are open on Sunday or not, but these people make sure that I start to care and what shops to be open, just so that these people stop trying to force there ideals onto us. 3: Some religious groups condemning gays lesbians etc. They treat them like they are less human than they are. They do not want them to get married and have the same right as heterosexuals. People should accept life styles of others not condemn it. One thing I found funny on the daily show where a African American woman said that she was happy that she had the same rights as white American because not that long ago she didn’t have those rights. And she used those rights to try and make sure that gay people didn’t get the same rights she had. How ironic. 4: In my experience the people that are most negative about other religions are the people that are religious themselves. For some reason many of my Christian friends are very negative towards the Islam (even though it is all based on the same god). I do not get that, if they want us to be open minded about their religion they should also be open minded about other religions. 5: When people think that you need a religion to have moral values. I posted in this thread before about moral values. I have high moral values, and I life by them. Not because a deity tells me to, but because I think it is important to be a good person, and help others. So just because I’m an atheist does not mean I have no moral values. It also does not mean I have high moral values because I’m an atheist. Having high moral values is not correlated to being religious. 6: When people blame religion for violence. The idiotic terrorist that kill people, the people who bomb a abortion clinic, or Muslims who threaten a cartoonist. They al have nothing to do with religion. Religion is used as an excuse by idiots to do bad things. They will also do violent things without religion. 7: I also hate it when people claim that only atheist are smart, because they think for themselves, and that all religious people are stupid. Being smart has nothing to do with being religious or not. People should always think for themselves, and if they use a religious book for guidance that is fine. But they should think about what they elieve is acceptable or not. I know both religious people and atheist who do not want to think for themselves. Nothing is easier than just follow what others tell you to do, because than you feel like you have no responsibility. Like I said in general I want people to be happy, and if that is with the help of a religion that is fine, if they are happy without a religion that is also fine. I believe that when I die there will be nothing, so I will enjoy my life as much as possible.
Without religion don't you think we'd be more like the animal kingdom. I believe religion plays like a control for us (provides for a higher standard that what is presented in nature), if it didn't exist we'd be a far worse off planet. Religion has probably already played a big role in establishing your morals (indirectly or directly), its probably what gave you a standard to follow, its affects have been too vast on this planet for you to negate as though its something that hasn't shaped your morals.
The smug behavior of some people right now is terriffic evidence of a few pages ago where a bunch of people (myself included) were saying "maybe its my experience, but atheists tend to be _____" Back then, the response was "what are you talking about, that's crazy". I find it sad more than anything. It dissapoints me because there are people who can communicate their point without being so self-absorbed. Though I don't agree with someone like arno_ed, I respect his views to the fullest. He just described what he believes in, even disagreeing with basically everyone in this thread. But his style in doing so can go a long way in educating a few posters from this thread on how NOT to be egotistical and obnoxious - religious or otherwise. I'm also very much aware that there will be a slew of "what are you talking about? I'm just stating my opinion! prove me wrong! why are you intolerant! waa waa". Save the broken record.
Sorry, this part is misleading even if unintentional. It assumes that the definition of "Muslim" is unanimously agreed when it certainly is not. So it is implying that there are currently 1 billion "Muslims" and everyone else is an infidel. There are many many different opinions about what makes a Muslim and what makes an infidel and some people also believe that there is a "limbo" state between Muslim and infidel. There are people who think there are currently less than a few hundred Muslims in the world and others who believe there are 3-4 billion. To give you an example, I assure you that Osama Bin Laden is currently viewed as muslim, enlightened muslim, infidel, and "not sane enough to be a kaafir" all at the same time. Moreover, infidel is a horriffic translation of the word "kaafir". Kaafir more accurately is an adjective that means 'unappreciative non-believer' and meant disbeliever at the time the Quran was descended. It is only later that the word took on a life of its own and became a noun which is equated with "infidel". Ofcourse it is not up to any one person to define this, nor will a unanimous agreement necessarily make it binding on anyone. I'm just stating that your statement was too simplified and certainly does not apply to me or the majority of my Muslim friends/family/etc.
At the singularity, traditional concepts of time, space, physics, and conservation may not apply, or apply in the same manners. If you extrapolate backwards in time with general relativity, eventually density and temperature become infinite. General relativity ceases to apply. There is literally no way to extrapolate further backwards - this is why people like Hawking can describe the big bang only in frightfully small timeframes after the expansion began. According to your own theory, all I have to do is believe that this places the singularity outside the standard concepts of time and space and voila, creation! More to the point, your idea is totally arbitrary. It could be purple unicorns. That being said, I have no issue with the idea or it's rather pleasing simplicity. But please don't call it logical. Does that undo your conceptualization of god? No. But it does illustrate the subjectivity inherent to it. I mean, heck, what you're postulating could apply to any unknown force - dark matter is god, or even gravity. All you need is something unknown that transcends our understanding. Thus my comment on the Spinozan outlook...
If you go by the book, he isn't being misleading. Islam is particularly bad about calling for the death and punishment of atheists, among others.
A lot of people can't seem to remove their religion from their own ego. So they take offense to things, or take things personally, which are really pretty innocuous. For example, with NSS, his belief proposed is as factually sound as a belief in leprechauns or unicorns. Is it smug to point out the truth or parallels? It seems to me that with some people, if you say anything that casts doubt on what is sacred to them, no matter how you do it, they're going to hate you for it. Pride tends to get in the way here, a lot.
No I do not think so. First of all, I do not believe we are that different from the animal kingdom as regard to morals. Most people mainly look out for themselves, and their loved ones. Furthermore most people do not trust people they do not consider part of their “herd”. Of course religion has had an influence on my morals. I do not think anybody can deny that. I think that my morals are determined by what I see around me. If I see something good in a religion I make it part of what I consider being a good person. And if I see something I do not agree with in a religion I ignore it. (for example the treatment of the gay community by many different religions, What the pope said about AIDS in Africa etc.) However that does not mean that a religious person has higher morals than an atheist. It does not matter if the morals of an atheist have been influenced by religion, I believe it is good to take the good things from different religions and other life styles and incorporate them to your own morals. Why I differ from religious people is that I do not believe in a higher power. But that does not mean my morals are less. Like I said I do not need the fear of some punishment by a deity to stop me from doing bad things, my own morals make sure I do not do terrible things. I understand that this making choices by my own morals make it “scary” for religious people because they do not know what my morals are. They cannot read in a book what I believe is right or wrong. But the problem with bad people is that they do bad things regardless of what their holy book write (there are enough examples of people doing terrible things in the name of a religion). I also do not claim that religion doesn’t have its use. It might have helped the human race in its development. But that does not say anything about the current situation. It also doesn’t proof that atheists have lower moral values than a religious person.
As opposed to wishing death upon someone for drawing a cartoon? Or happily pointing out that one is doomed to an eternity of pain and suffering for not believing in x flavor of god? A tad hypocritical, methinks.
When someone prosthelytizes me I do not get annoyed. In fact, I take it as a compliment and that person earns points in my eyes. Why? Because they think they are helping/doing me a favor. In their mind, they know the truth and they are trying to make sure I know it too. If they didn't try to help me, then that would be fairly mean of them. Religions are, first and foremost, in the business of self preservation. If Christianity and Islam don't want to end up like Thorr and Zeus, then being openly accepting and tolerant of other religions is not a good idea. If you open the door for curiosity and exploration, you pretty much give up your ability say your religion is "the" religion. And last I checked, not many people want to subscribe to a religion that openly questions whether or not it's legitimate. This is not true. Especially in Islam. Having a religious dogma which teaches you that 1) death in defense of the faith is the greatest thing you can do and 2) you will be rewarded for such behavior and 3) people who are blasphemers or not of your religion deserve to die; creates a culture of hyper-violent people who would otherwise NOT be committing violent acts. There are, in fact, many studies which show the correlation between atheism and intelligence. We've had this argument many times on this BBS. Conclusion: You can be atheist and stupid as well as religious and a genius, but chances are lower for these scenarios than their counterparts.
Religion is perverse moralism. The purpose of the various religious ideals is to control and consolidate power. Not only are men (rarely women) imposing their views of sex, food, and law on others, they are absolving themselves of the responsibility for their acts oppression by attributing the source of their power to an imaginary being (which, by the way, you really don't want to piss off). So, yes...religion has played a role in establishing our morals. That's the problem!
I think religion was (and maybe still is) necessary for our development as a species. That doesn't mean a person is obligated to be religious. Morality is important, and the concept of a God gives credibility to whatever moral system we try to pass on to the next generation. When a young person asks "Why should I do that?" or "Why shouldn't I do that?" it is much easier to explain "Because God said such and such in our holy book" than to delve into a deeper moral/philosophical discourse which the younger person may or may not find convincing.
This is a good point. If an atheist asks questions such as "Well, there's as good a chance of a pink unicorn creating me, right?" or brings up, say, Russell's teapot, suddenly they're "smug" and "attacking" religion. Other than never voicing your beliefs at all, how can an atheist debate with a religious person without coming off as "smug" to that person? You could be as kind and sensitive as possible and people still get ridiculously defensive. My co-workers (the ones I'm close to) witness to me all the time. THEY draw me into debates about religion, and I try to be as sensitive as possible. But people get all huffy if you try to point out a logical fallacy in their argument. Is it because I'm "attacking" them...or because they have no answer to my question? That's when the discussion ends. Like I said earlier in the thread, it's pointless to debate this. You just get labeled an *******.
Such is the problem with the sacred. "WHAT!? You're comparing *MY* God to a UNICORN!? You classless JERK!!" Pride sucks.
