Seriously....? How can peoples be so wrong?

[TygerLili]

Why promote atheism? That kind of seems like promoting depression, or a negative attitude. I suppose technically atheists have as much right to promote their beliefs as anyone else, and I hate having anyone try to push their beliefs on me, but it just seems pointless to try to convert people to not believe in anything.

I don't consider myself an atheist, but I did when I was younger, and I felt that way because I was completely disillusioned with people and the world, not because I thought it was a cool clique to join. I didn't really care if one single other person on this planet felt the way I did.

If anything, promote free thinking.

[ttogreh]

Atheism is the lack of belief. Nihilism is the belief in nothing. In other words, nihilists feel that there is no point in existence. Atheism is simply not taking things at face value, and assuming that the simplest answer is the most likely one.

[the eternal]

Why promote atheism? That kind of seems like promoting depression, or a negative attitude. I suppose technically atheists have as much right to promote their beliefs as anyone else, and I hate having anyone try to push their beliefs on me, but it just seems pointless to try to convert people to not believe in anything.

I don't consider myself an atheist, but I did when I was younger, and I felt that way because I was completely disillusioned with people and the world, not because I thought it was a cool clique to join. I didn't really care if one single other person on this planet felt the way I did.

If anything, promote free thinking.

OK, I usually really like your posts, and agree with you on most things, but this post really bugged me.

I found it intolerant and unfair.

I'm as open about my g-dfearingness as anyone on this board.

I practically paint a J on my forehead when I'm in religious threads, but I would never imply that my atheist friends are disillusioned or liken their beliefs to depression or negative attitudes.

Even if you didn't mean it that way, by using those terms you are making an unfair association, drawing a straight line between those that don't believe and those that are troubled.

Atheists are not troubled, they have decided that they don't believe in a supernatural being.

And they are ridiculed and mocked in mainstream society for doing so.

The poster above, was a result,

for one of stupidity, since s/he used primarily agnostics and questioning Christians,

but also because atheists are completely reviled in this society.

Half of America wouldn't even consider voting for an atheist.

When polled, Americans would be more comfortable voting for a Muslim than an atheist,

and we're bred, esp after 9/11, to believe that Muslims are terrorists.

SO,

Americans are more comfortable voting for someone who they think could blow us up, than someone who doesn't believe in an invisible man in the sky.

Now, I personally love my invisible man/woman/being but I think you're missing the point.

The reason why you see posters and other tracts about atheism is not to:

"convert" people or

"promote" atheism,

it's to fight back against the intolerance of the believers against those who don't believe.

No one thinks atheists are stupid.

They just think they are:

--misguided

--directionless

--ignorant (of the savior)

--heathens

--hedonistic

--without values

--without morals

AND

--going to hell

Not to brag, but Jews used to get most of these monikers too.

And it's not easy.

And sometimes some of them react by making stupid posters that betray their point.

But that doesn't change that they're unfairly maligned.

And I've never come across an atheist that tried to convert me or make me see the light.

But, I've had plenty not understand why their worldview is not nearly as respected as the Judeo-Christian one,

and let's face it,

it never will be.

Edited May 21, 2009 by the eternal

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

However, we must remember most of these men WERE against ORGANIZED religion

Against might not be the right word.

I've read Franklin's auto-biography... last week was my latest read of it. I have also read just about everything else he wrote. Against is not the right word. Organized religion was not right for him for SOME of his life.

What he was against was anyone telling him he had to go to Church... or that he HAD to do anything thing else for that matter.

Sagan was not against organized religion either. He thought it was a natural and necessary part of human evolution.

"There is no question that religion provides a solace and support, a bulwark in times of emotional need, and can serve extremely useful social roles." Carl Sagan

Lincoln was known to read the Bible daily up to the day he died. Historians consider him a Diest but with the actions of a Baptist. Figure that one out and you get a cookie.

My point is.. none of these men were AGAINST orginized religion. They just didn't feel it was for them.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

They just think they are:

--misguided

--ignorant

Funny, those are the exact words athiests use about people who beleive in God.

[the eternal]

Well, they're wrong.

[TygerLili]

OK, I usually really like your posts, and agree with you on most things, but this post really bugged me.

I found it intolerant and unfair.

I'm as open about my g-dfearingness as anyone on this board...

*cut down your post to save others from having to scroll down a huge amount of space*

I didn't mean to come across as intolerant of atheists, just intolerant of those who felt the need to display this poster. I have nothing against atheists, as I said, I used to consider myself one, and my beliefs today probably fall closer to atheism that traditional Judeo-Christian beliefs. I'm sorry if what I said offended you, and I think it was due more to me not expressing myself very clearly than anything else, so I will try to clarify.

The poster bothered me, and not just because of what Rev and others in this thread pointed out about it's inaccuracies. I've always felt that, regardless of what your spiritual beliefs are, you shouldn't try to foist them on others. I am cool with any religious group that will let me believe what I believe without intervention. I do think that atheism is a rather negative view to hold. Not negative as in "bad" or "wrong," just negative as in not positive. That was my reason for comparing it to depression. There's nothing wrong with depression, it's a human emotion, I just would never encourage someone to become depressed if that's not what they were feeling already. For that reason, as much as it annoys me when religious groups try to convert others to believe in their "god", I can rationalize it a bit that in their misguided logic they really are trying to do something positive for the ones they are trying to convert. I simply can't see any positive agenda in trying to convince a religious person to become an atheist.

And maybe I'm not even interpreting the poster correctly, but even if I'm not, they don't win any points with me for being vague. I hope that's clearer, and if not, please cut me some slack because it's late and I'm not feeling my sharpest at the moment.

[Rev.Reverence]

Against might not be the right word.

I've read Franklin's auto-biography... last week was my latest read of it. I have also read just about everything else he wrote. Against is not the right word. Organized religion was not right for him for SOME of his life.

What he was against was anyone telling him he had to go to Church... or that he HAD to do anything thing else for that matter.

Sagan was not against organized religion either. He thought it was a natural and necessary part of human evolution.

"There is no question that religion provides a solace and support, a bulwark in times of emotional need, and can serve extremely useful social roles." Carl Sagan

Lincoln was known to read the Bible daily up to the day he died. Historians consider him a Diest but with the actions of a Baptist. Figure that one out and you get a cookie.

My point is.. none of these men were AGAINST orginized religion. They just didn't feel it was for them.

Lincoln did somethin' really cool...he did his WILL...he believed that G*D made all this...but that the world was a lesson/test..& that G*D ain't gonna' intercede..SO..he sucked it up & did what he thought he had to....Baptists are probably where he learned his moral foundation from.

Can I haz cookie??

What Ben was......a really good example of a FreeMason.....he did not want ANYONE tellin' him how to do shit!

Sagan...I don't know at all...but he was on PBS...I liked all the quotes I have seen though...

[Rev.Reverence]

OK, I usually really like your posts, and agree with you on most things, but this post really bugged me.

I found it intolerant and unfair.

I'm as open about my g-dfearingness as anyone on this board.

Atheists are not troubled, they have decided that they don't believe in a supernatural being.

And they are ridiculed and mocked in mainstream society for doing so.

The poster above, was a result,

for one of stupidity, since s/he used primarily agnostics and questioning Christians,

but also because atheists are completely reviled in this society.

Half of America wouldn't even consider voting for an atheist.

When polled, Americans would be more comfortable voting for a Muslim than an atheist,

and we're bred, esp after 9/11, to believe that Muslims are terrorists.

SO,

Americans are more comfortable voting for someone who they think could blow us up, than someone who doesn't believe in an invisible man in the sky.

Now, I personally love my invisible man/woman/being but I think you're missing the point.

The reason why you see posters and other tracts about atheism is not to:

"convert" people or

"promote" atheism,

it's to fight back against the intolerance of the believers against those who don't believe.

No one thinks atheists are stupid.

Over half of America is only half educated.

I would never do such a thing...each man (or woman) should be weighed on their own...THIS is the foundation of this great experiment...look around the world...I'm willing to bet that you find there are FAR worse places to proclaim atheism...FREEDOM OF RELIGION, that means you can choose non-religion...even non-spirituality...

Um...yeah...most athiests are fuckin' dumb!

They are ALL over the place...sayin' that if you don't believe in a man in the sky...you are an athiest...UM..that's fuckin' dumb! Also, it is insulting to anyone that KNOWS G*D as a non-persona-entity...atheists nearly always assume that because you believe in G*D you believe in some dude in a white robe & beard standing on a cloud.

[Rev.Reverence]

NEW POST*

They just think they are:

--misguided

--directionless

--ignorant (of the savior)

--heathens

--hedonistic

--without values

--without morals

AND

--going to hell

Misguided...yes...though many Christians are not Christ-like...& there are some Muslims that have no kind of mercy.

Directionless...this has no bearing (ha!) on whether or not the are atheists...I know there are Docs & Lawers out there..with plenty of direction..& motivation as well...

ignorant...hm...there are plenty of ignorant everythings (from atheists to Jew to Christian & Muslims..& even Pagans)...but with your parentheses you made it a true statement.

(by the way..not ALL monotheists, nor even all the followers of Christ believe in Christ as Savior..some say he was just a really cool man...now..everyone is a little less ignorant.)

heathens...um...by default, yeah...they are heathens.

hea⋅then

  /ˈhiðən/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [hee-thuhn] Show IPA noun, plural -thens, -then, adjective

–noun

1. an unconverted individual of a people that do not acknowledge the God of the Bible; a person who is neither a Jew, Christian, nor Muslim; pagan.

2. an irreligious, uncultured, or uncivilized person.

hedonistic...hm...you know..most peoples I KNOW are hedonists...I think that "the American Dream" is the just about the most hedonistic shit ever.....& why there is a credit crisis...& so much greed on the wall street...

he⋅don⋅ist

  /ˈhidnɪst/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [heed-n-ist] Show IPA

–noun

1. a person whose life is devoted to the pursuit of pleasure and self-gratification.

Without values...hey, it happens...but I think that that is a personal choice to be a loaf...

Without Morals...well...many are dude...a great many...a very great many...surely not ALL...but the majority of this minority...has no (or very few) morals.

...going to hell?

Read more Kabbalah Bro...Hell a the state of being when one is separation from the Divine....by choosing to not believe in the Divine..atheists "turn their back to the Light"...by proper definition...they are in hell...& that may explain somethings to them about their lifes...if they believed in that kind of stuff.....

So...you see..that I do agree with more of that list than not...but I'ld throw most peoples upon those fires...

....looks like someone just picked on atheists for being Human...& since they were probably of some religion or another...they are hypocrites if they did not berate themselves for their own more human tenancies.

I am not picking on atheists in general...I know several...& I EVEN like 3 or 4 of them

(I don't LIKE most peoples..the Sages & Prophets say to LOVE your Brother...don't say shit about LIKE.)

I am picking on some ignorant, lying, whiners...that are to stupid/lazy to think about it...to lazy to do anything that is not fun...

There is no arguing that there are a great many atheists who simply say they are atheists out of sheer rebellion.

These are anathema to the "serious-thinkers" whom fly the banner of atheism...

[Slogo]

Damn it, when are me and my fellow agnostics going to get some attention?

[Rev.Reverence]

Damn it, when are me and my fellow agnostics going to get some attention?

When you sit down & make up your mind....

OR...when you wright a thick book on why you "don't-know"...

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

Damn it, when are me and my fellow agnostics going to get some attention?

It's really hard to discuss something when one side can only say "I don't know." or "I'll get back to you when I make up my mind."

[Slogo]

It's really hard to discuss something when one side can only say "I don't know." or "I'll get back to you when I make up my mind."

What's wrong with admitting you don't know something?

I have made up my mind. I believe that I don't know.

I don't have enough info. If a bush or tree talks to me (when I'm not on acid). Or I find a 2000 year old book of scribblings that sounds credible to me. Or if I die and nothing happens. I will then have enough info to proceed.

It's like voting. You wouldn't want to vote blindly or uninformed. I don't believe blindly or uninformed.

Edited May 21, 2009 by Slogo

[Rev.Reverence]

What's wrong with admitting you don't know something?

Nothing. ...there are several things I am unsure about..or uneducated about....but it does put you at an extreme disadvantage in an argument/debate...for instance, I can not debate the myspace/facebook situation, I have far to little knowledge about a facebook...you see?

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

What's wrong with admitting you don't know something?

I have made up my mind. I believe that I don't know.

I don't have enough info. If a bush or tree talks to me (when I'm not on acid). Or I find a 2000 year old book of scribblings that sounds credible to me. Or if I die and nothing happens. I will then have enough info to proceed.

It's like voting. You wouldn't want to vote blindly or uninformed. I don't believe blindly or uninformed.

Not a damn thng wrong with it. I have a long list of things that I can only say "I don't know" to. When someone asks me what I think of it and I respond that I don't know that kinda ends the conversation.

[Slogo]

No it doesn't.

To me, there is not enough evidence for the existence of some metaphysical force

Likewise, to me, there is not enough evidence for the non-existence of some metaphysical force

However, I find a lot of evidence that there isn't enough evidence for either

[Rev.Reverence]

No it doesn't.

To me, there is not enough evidence for the existence of some metaphysical force

Likewise, to me, there is not enough evidence for the non-existence of some metaphysical force

However, I find a lot of evidence that there isn't enough evidence for either

...this thing be it termed 'Belief' 'Knowing' 'Faith'...it can not be taught...

....if you want to know about painting minis I can teach that...

..........the best thing I could do is spit out 1001 riddle-esque sayings & Mantras...

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

What about Physics? If the laws of physics somehow hinted that a metaphysical being had to exist, would that mean anything to you?

[StormKnight (1)]

What's wrong with admitting you don't know something?

Sometimes, you can save a life by stating you don't know.

[Rev.Reverence]

What about Physics? If the laws of physics somehow hinted that a metaphysical being had to exist, would that mean anything to you?

Hinted?

Shit..if you believe there are infinite possibilities in existence (I think physics backs that) then there is no way that there is not a higher-intelligence aka a Universal Being aka G*D.

That one?

[bean]

What's wrong with admitting you don't know something?

I have made up my mind. I believe that I don't know.

I don't have enough info. If a bush or tree talks to me (when I'm not on acid). Or I find a 2000 year old book of scribblings that sounds credible to me. Or if I die and nothing happens. I will then have enough info to proceed.

It's like voting. You wouldn't want to vote blindly or uninformed. I don't believe blindly or uninformed.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

Hinted?

Shit..if you believe there are infinite possibilities in existence (I think physics backs that) then there is no way that there is not a higher-intelligence aka a Universal Being aka G*D.

That one?

Nope, but that works. I was thinking the Big Bang.

See... about 15billion years ago there was one Super particle. Everything in the universe compressed into a super atom of infinite density and mass. All else was Void. Then it exploded. Why? It had to be perfect to even exist. All laws of physics (and all the theorys) say it should have stayed that way. Something else had to interact with it and throw off the balance.

[Rev.Reverence]

Nope, but that works. I was thinking the Big Bang.

See... about 15billion years ago there was one Super particle. Everything in the universe compressed into a super atom of infinite density and mass. All else was Void. Then it exploded. Why? It had to be perfect to even exist. All laws of physics (and all the theorys) say it should have stayed that way. Something else had to interact with it and throw off the balance.

Right...I don't think about that one often...I like the simple math

SO...is that why they are making the experiments with the super-collider?

OR..is that the next step for Science?

[prick]

I hate when groups use false information to trick us. Peta has been known to use false info. they were trying to ban bear hunting in Michigan by showing old films of bear hunts that were shot in southern states and tried to pass it off as Michigan hunts. Just shows that media lies kids. Dont think one paper or news broadcast is honest and one is not.