Well then that administrator is WRONG. I don't know of many agnostics/atheists that are that ridiculous.
I agree...it's an antecdote. I wasn't trying to make a broader point with it. Just came to mind immediately after reading that post.
Except many believers want their beliefs on what is good and bad based on religious scripture turned into federal law. Preventing government endorsed prayer is not the same thing. Find a different example if you can.
Again - how is this different than someone wanting gay marriage or abortion to be legal based on whatever beliefs they have? Or wanting interracial marriage to be illegal because they grew up a racist? Or weed to be legal because they like to smoke pot. Beliefs come from all sorts of different places - most of these sources are not scientifically provable as right or wrong. Why is it different if that belief comes from religion vs any other source?
And, non-believers may not want laws based on scripture, therefore they are "collectively" trying to impose their will on believers. EDIT: non that there is anything wrong with that.
Because wanting gay marriage legal does not force a Christian to have a gay marriage but making gay marriage illegal removes a right of a homosexual to have a gay marriage?
I wasn't really putting it in the context of voting but rather how people come to their positions. That I can vote for or against someone based on their beliefs doesn't really address the issue that in the 21st century we have leaders making decisions for all of us based on a religious belief. Anyway, good discussion.
You're talking about civil rights in general, though. While there is a religious component to the argument, lots of non-Christian and non-religious societies ban gay marriage. The arguments for and against the issue go well beyond religion. I'm speaking in more general terms. Why is "I oppose gay marriage because God says so" so problematic, but "I oppose gay marriage because I find it disgusting" or "I support gay marriage because my heart tells me to" are OK? All are unprovable scientifically.
Where I am on this...I don't want anyone to feel marginalized because of what they believe. I see no examples of Jesus using intimidation to have people follow him....rather, I see him telling people to "count the cost" of following before making a decision like that, because it's difficult.
Well I never met anyone that didn't want everyone to agree with their views! In this context, I don't think non-believers don't want you to pray. I've never met a non-believer that didn't feel you had the right to pray or the right to believe in any religion you choose. It's when believers force that belief into the public sphere, into schools and into government, that's where the problem exists.
If I could go back in time, I would not have used prayer as an example. I would have used "x". My WHOLE point is that any group, believers, non-believers, clowns, teachers, policemen, methodists, blacks, asians, gays, straights want to impose their beliefs onto others in order to strengthen their position. That is how the world of politics works. Who cares why someone wants you to vote a particular way? The onus is upon you to decide who and what to support and why using your personal beliefs, thoughts, values, needs, etc.
Religion wants to do things x way because that's what it teaches, that's what god has deemed to be correct. That teaching doesn't require any fundamental basis or evidence to support it. It's the because I said so position. For example, there are some folks who don't believe in blood transfusions as a religious belief. How about if that became policy in some county or town because the mayor or town council thinks that blood transfusions run contrary to god's will. That's a hypothetical obviously but yes, I definitely care why people take positions.
No, I couldnt care less. But you do need to justify your own superstitious claims unless you do not care whether it's true or not. Before you own personal belief is justified, please stop teaching it as facts, stop selling it as facts. I do not need to prove your God does not exist, well, you can't disprove anything that hasnt been proved yet.
There are no difference if those source were actually faith based, but I dont think its the case here. Other than hinduism/Sikism which do not view homosexuality as a religious sin, all major religions do not tolerate homosexuality. However they are totally different because they did not get the idea out of a book written in bronze age. It is based on their moral value, their empathy, their ability to reason and judge what is right and what is wrong from their life experiences, their interaction/socialising with the others. It is merely a reflection of how they wanted to be treated after fully understanding the consequences on both themselves and the others based on their actions. They might be wrong, but the initiative of their actions are generally not faith based. You can't go from one extreme to another and assume they all are. Anyway I think Ive covered all your questions.
I think all these gods of various religions are not real, but serve a purpose. They teach people ethics and serve to give people comfort that there is a cosmic justice and death isn't the final end. For me, I think death is the end of "us" as we know it. But what we are made of continues on, just it has always had been. It's weird when you think about it. All these random sub atomic particles that make everything up - we view as lifeless. And yet, all our thoughts, bodies, minds, memories, are made up of these very things. And just as any single cell that makes up our body alone has no intelligence, no soul, no awareness but together create "us" so does all these weird particles. They become aware of themselves through human beings. In any case, I am an atheist. Meaning I don't believe in deities. But I do know that something very weird is going on. And there is no rational explanation to the universe. None. It's literally absurd. So you might as well believe in whatever makes you happy.
Well said. The onus is on the individual to inform him or herself enough to make good decisions. Sadly, far too many Americans seem detached from the political process, discussions of religion, and a host of other things, and don't take the time to be informed from a variety of sources, something I think is essential to making good decisions. And that applies not only to those in both camps, the Left and the Right, the religious, and those who are not, but to those with no clear political or religious persuasion. It's a huge problem in this country, in my opinion. I know I'm addressing what seems to be politics more than religion, but I think it applies to that subject, as well. Americans tend to work long hours, longer hours than in many European countries, for example, and then come home and collapse in a heap, more interested with having dinner, maybe a couple of drinks, and watching some mindless show on the TV, or an equally mindless "news" program with the usual talking heads. Can't say as I blame many of them, but I wish they would work less and think more, if that's possible.
Define Christian. And how do you rank someone's moral value? I assume htown, in this case, is defining a Christian as someone who follows the Bible's "ethical code" to a T. Personally, I do not know a single Christian who would fit under this strict of a standard, but for the sake of argument, let's define it that way. Now, if you rank someone's worth based on the number of "rules" they abide by, than you could naturally assume that a Christian would be far morally superior. IF you were comparing them to, let's say Pope...bad example even some of THEM wouldn't fit under that definition. In reality, I don't think MOST Christians differ from athiests in "moral superiorness." And the issue of faith, isn't just semantics? Definition one: Athiests believe there is no God. The believe in something, so now it's faith! Definition two: Athiests do not believe in God. If you don't believe in something, you don't have faith. Personally, if you're on the cautious side, it doesn't hurt to cover your back and avoid the CHANCE of potential fire. However, I don't think you have to be of any particular religion to get into "heaven." I consider myself a "Christian," but I, like most, would not fall under the definition above. I believe that if you are a good person, you will get into whatever paradise you call "heaven."
