# Atheist family sues Oklahoma Town



## Black (Dec 13, 2007)

Since a lot of threads seem to be getting derailed due to Religious/Atheist discussion, i thought i would start one here to save those threads from death and to let people share their ideas here.

Let me start off the thread...

An Atheist family is sueing an Oklahoma Town for Violating Separation of Church and State:
*
Article:* An Atheist Family Sues an Oklahoma Town for Violating Separation of Church and State - Associated Content

*YouTube Video:* YouTube - Nicole Smalkowski interview on The Power of Faith
*
For those who do not want to read or view the intire links:* Basically it's telling a story of how an Atheist family moved into a small Oklahoma town and their eldest daughter Nicole attended the town school. She was active on the Football and Basketball team a few years back. Trouble started when after a game both teams joined for a Lord's Prayer, Nicole being an Atheist told her coach 'I don't believe in God, i'm an Atheist' because she felt uncomfortable doing the Lord's Prayer because it was not her faith. After that day everything changed, she began to get bullied at school being called 'Satan worshiper" and lost all of her friends. Her teacher told her to leave the country if she didn't like it and she was framed for stealing and making death threats.

*To start off the discussion:* I find this extremely wrong as America is suppose to be the land of the free, or so they say. Christianity is suppos to be a good thing by Christian standards, instead here it has become a tool for hate and discrimination. You can tell that the students are extremely uneducated in anything outside of Christianity just by how they approached Nicole with the subject calling her 'Satan worshiper', Atheism is the belief (or lack there of) that there is no divine supernatural creator (good) and supernatural destroyer (evil). I believe lack of education (as in all cases of Religious disputes) is the cause for this Oklahoma Town controversy and nothing else.

Freedom of Choice, yeah, Freedom of Choice but you better choose with the majority.


----------



## guytoronto (Jun 25, 2005)

One of the hallmarks of being a Christian in the U.S. is that you act nothing like a good Christian.

I hope the family wins huge.

On the subject of religion in the U.S., watch this: YouTube - Huckabee: Divine Providence Helps My Poll Numbers

Mike Huckabee, a potential Presidential candidate says that God is helping his poll numbers. What does this mean? It means that according to Mike Huckabee, God did NOT give man free will. He blatantly states that there is no way he could have achieved a rise in poll numbers by himself (through campaigning). So by his own admission, God is directly influencing voters in his favour.


----------



## Black (Dec 13, 2007)

guytoronto said:


> One of the hallmarks of being a Christian in the U.S. is that you act nothing like a good Christian.
> 
> I hope the family wins huge.
> 
> ...


And thereby influencing his foes negatively and therefor destroys any good attributes that 'God' is suppose to have according to Christianity.

More on Huckabee.. I was watching a Q&A after a speech of Huckabee's, he was asked about Gays and their role in the Army under his republican party. He responded with exactly this "He who does not agree with the lord's wishes shall see the burning gates of hell" followed by cheering applause. Is this the kind of people that a vast majority of Americans are willing to follow? How can someone rule with such fear?


----------



## MacGuiver (Sep 6, 2002)

Black said:


> Since a lot of threads seem to be getting derailed due to Religious/Atheist discussion, i thought i would start one here to save those threads from death and to let people share their ideas here.
> 
> Let me start off the thread...
> 
> ...


I agree with you completely Black. That was entirely wrong how they treated that girl. They really weren't following the true tenants of Christianity. Shameful. 

Cheers
MacGuiver


----------



## Black (Dec 13, 2007)

MacGuiver said:


> I agree with you completely Black. That was entirely wrong how they treated that girl. They really weren't following the true tenants of Christianity. Shameful.
> 
> Cheers
> MacGuiver


When you're taught from the moment you can communicate that if you don't praise God you will go to hell, if you lie you go to hell, if you steal you go to hell, if you commit adultry you go to hell, you etc you go to hell.... you tend to be VERY afraid of hell. It is a given that if anybody you around is 'going to hell', they will be treated badly and/or looked down upon by those of faith.


----------



## guytoronto (Jun 25, 2005)

Black said:


> When you're taught from the moment you can communicate that if you don't praise God you will go to hell, if you lie you go to hell, if you steal you go to hell, if you commit adultry you go to hell, you etc you go to hell.... you tend to be VERY afraid of hell. It is a given that if anybody you around is 'going to hell', they will be treated badly and/or looked down upon by those of faith.


Too bad they often ignore the lessons of "Love Thy Neighbour" and "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone".


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

If you lose your pants in public you will go to hell.


----------



## MacGuiver (Sep 6, 2002)

Black said:


> When you're taught from the moment you can communicate that if you don't praise God you will go to hell, if you lie you go to hell, if you steal you go to hell, if you commit adultry you go to hell, you etc you go to hell.... you tend to be VERY afraid of hell. It is a given that if anybody you around is 'going to hell', they will be treated badly and/or looked down upon by those of faith.


First off, only God can determine who's going to Hell. I know lots of Christians profess to know the eternal destination of individuals but they're gravely mistaken. In fact treating people badly or looking down on them might just land you in the Hell you fear.

_"You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I say to you, love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your heavenly Father._

If the individuals that abused this poor girl were sincerely fearful of God's Judgement, they'd do well to show this girl the love Christ demands of us. Even if she was a spiteful person with nothing but malice in her heart. 
Examples of true Christianity in action; Mother Theresa dragging dying Hindu's off the streets of Calcuta to return them to health or let them dye with dignity. Pope John Paul 2 going to visit the man that shot him in jail to offer him forgiveness though he never asked for it. An Ottawa woman that had her daughter brutally assaulted and murdered turns and forgives her daughters killer. Thats the example Christians are to follow though it flies in the face of our natural instincts. Sadly many don't live by that creed and choose to live by their poorer instincts instead. 

Cheers
MacGuiver


----------



## MacGuiver (Sep 6, 2002)

Macfury said:


> If you lose your pants in public you will go to hell.


Damn Macfury don't tell me that! I've been trying hard to avoid the eternal abyss but I have to admit I did lose my pants in public once. 

Cheers
MacGuiver


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

Seems to me these townspeople were behaving in exactly in a Christian manner as it is demonstrated daily in news story after news story. The whole "love thy neighbour" thing is a complete load of crap. Christians have been slaughtering women and children since the crusades and George Bush, an avowed Christian, is still doing it. Christians supported Hitler by buying art stolen from Jewish families for pennies on the dollar. In the NFL they pray to god/christ to help them kick the crap out of opponents. The whole thing is a stupid, bad joke for which there is no evidence and which has outlived any usefulness it ever had.


----------



## guytoronto (Jun 25, 2005)

rgray said:


> The whole thing is a stupid, bad joke for which there is no evidence and which has outlived any usefulness it ever had.


Yes, it is quite sad that so many people cling onto it.

Usefulness? Some people need some glimmer of hope that there is something more after death. It's quite sad as well. We have a limited amount of time on this earth, and so many people waste it away, not doing anything really meaningful, all in a desperate attempt to "get into Heaven".

As a moral compass, any religion is quite sad. The whole "Hope for reward, fear of punishment" concept of religion doesn't make people nice. It makes them do things, not out of the kindness of their heart, but rather out of selfishness and fear.


----------



## Black (Dec 13, 2007)

MacGuiver said:


> First off, only God can determine who's going to Hell. I know lots of Christians profess to know the eternal destination of individuals but they're gravely mistaken. In fact treating people badly or looking down on them might just land you in the Hell you fear.
> 
> _"You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I say to you, love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your heavenly Father._
> 
> ...


Natural instincts should never be refered to as poorer instincts.

I live my life on raw emotion. If there is something that makes me unhappy i avoid it to keep on being happy. Using this concept it is possible to lead a happy life. This is why Religion will never come into my life at any point and i always reject it.
Ex: I have a wonderful girlfriend, if i was Religious i would not be able to do everything that i pleased with my girlfriend that makes me and her happy, that would make me *unhappy*, so why be miserable? I am not going to live my life in fear, i am not going to accept eternal damnation because i chose to be happy. This 'God' of yours sounds like a bully, 'do it my way or you're suffering forever'. Quite a way to run a group of people.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

As an atheist, brought up by atheists I'm no expert on religion, but I notice that some people need order and structure in their lives and consequently they turn to some form of spirituality. 

We could say that those that do not believe may still turn to quack self-help gurus and books. So it depends which "book" you turn to in order to get that order and structure.


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

Another thread beating up on those who believe in a higher power, yay! 

Are these to make validate your non-beliefs our is it because you're insecure about your Atheist ways?


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

no, but it does appear to be a thread on the hypocrisy of religion.

In a truly free society we are free to have our beliefs, but it seems certain groups are intent on enforcing their beliefs onto others.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

groovetube said:


> no, but it does appear to be a thread on the hypocrisy of religion.
> 
> In a truly free society we are free to have our beliefs, but it seems certain groups are intent on enforcing their beliefs onto others.


Yeah, one has to watch those non-religious guys. There are some who would bash religion of any kind, even though atheism is, in itself a form of religion (defined as a set of beliefs). They just don't recognize that fact.


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

JumboJones said:


> Are these to make validate your non-beliefs our is it because you're insecure about your Atheist ways?


Our Atheist ways? At least our ways do not include such ridiculous rhetoric as "validate you non-belief" - a non-entity cannot be validated because it does not exist by definition, the question does not even arise. Atheists are concerned with what *is* - what can actually be demonstrated - Occam's Razor applies, namely that the simplest explanation is most likely true. The theists' position is the more complex - it piles on material beyond what is necessary to describe our universe. Therefore the burden of proof rests upon the theists - it is up to the theists to "validate" their beliefs. The irony of all the pro theist ranting is that it is mere proselytising. The theists have an extremely simple option with which to put an end to the atheists - show some proof! The tiniest nearly infinitesimal particle would do. Show me, or shut up... XX) which of course brings us back to "a non-entity cannot be validated because it does not exist by definition" from the other side..... 

Next thing you'll be trying to make out that "belief" is a virtue...


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

Wow. You know you've seen it all when an Atheist argues with a religious person over blind beliefs while they themselves offer nothing substantial to prove otherwise.

:lmao:


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

SINC said:


> even though atheism is, in itself a form of religion (defined as a set of beliefs).


Sorry SINC, even by that loosest of definitions for religion (which would make every sports fan into an adherent of a new religion, among other absurdities), because atheism is the *absence* of a set of beliefs, it would be one of the only things that still couldn't be described as 'religion' under that definition.

I don't know why so many religious people feel compelled to argue that atheism and/or science are "just another religion." It seems like they know their position is philosophically weak, and want to bring rational positions down to their level by twisting the words.

Cheers


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

bryanc said:


> Sorry SINC, even by that loosest of definitions for religion (which would make every sports fan into an adherent of a new religion, among other absurdities), because atheism is the *absence* of a set of beliefs, it would be one of the only things that still couldn't be described as 'religion' under that definition.
> 
> I don't know why so many religious people feel compelled to argue that atheism and/or science are "just another religion." It seems like they know their position is philosophically weak, and want to bring rational positions down to their level by twisting the words.
> 
> Cheers


Ah, I get it now!

Simply put atheists believe in "the *absence* of a set of beliefs".

Thanks for setting me straight.

And for the record, I am not a religious person. Just an honest one with myself in my beliefs.


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

Bla bla bla, religion bad, atheist good, we get it. 

You don't like religion shoved in your face, yet you're not gunshy on throwing atheism in the face of others.


----------



## minnes (Aug 15, 2001)

I hope this thread stays up for a long time to all the possible arguments of having faith.

I asked a group of Americans if an atheist could be a US president. They said its possible, but I say prove it. Show me a list of atheist presidents who never believed in any religious, supersticious or faith? The majority don't even approve of Mormons, never mind athiests.

Why would one religion be crazy and another reasonable?
If any one of these non fact based religious groups is crazy , then aren't they all or none of them.
is this why Scientology is allowed to exist even though it is utter nonsense?

..and why do religions get a free ride? they make big money and pay no taxes, yet much of the local charity work formerly done by religions is now provided by government services.

I think Bill Mahar is working on a movie called RELIGULOUS out in a couple months.


----------



## tilt (Mar 3, 2005)

bryanc said:


> atheism is the *absence* of a set of beliefs


Please correct me if I am wrong, but I was under the impression that Atheism is actually a belief that there is no god. The absence of a set of beliefs is termed Agnosticism and not Atheism.

Am I mistaken?

Cheers


----------



## dona83 (Jun 26, 2005)

I am more or less Christian but I often keep my faith to myself. I don't go to church anymore because I am often opposed to their agenda and really hated the politics. I think people just need to be good people, no matter what they believe or don't believe in. We should all treat each other with dignity and respect, not be hurtful of one or another, and just do what's best for us and do what's best in life. I'm debating whether or not I want to bring religion into my children's lives, probably not because all they need are parents they can trust.

I'm proud to be Canadian!


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

tilt said:


> Please correct me if I am wrong, but I was under the impression that Atheism is actually a belief that there is no god.


You are wrong. 

Atheists are not stupid. To a man/woman they have considered the proposition of a theo centric universe. Atheism is not the denial of "god", it is the assertion of the proposition that the concept of god is not necessary (see Occam) to describe the universe.


----------



## MacGuiver (Sep 6, 2002)

> Natural instincts should never be refered to as poorer instincts.
> I live my life on raw emotion. If there is something that makes me unhappy i avoid it to keep on being happy.


 If you avoid things that make you unhappy, you're not following your instincts. If someone were to make you angry, you're instinct may be to beat the tar out of them. If you were truly following instinct completely, you'd likely be typing this on a computer from Kingston Pen.



> Using this concept it is possible to lead a happy life. This is why Religion will never come into my life at any point and i always reject it.
> Ex: I have a wonderful girlfriend, if i was Religious i would not be able to do everything that i pleased with my girlfriend that makes me and her happy, that would make me *unhappy*, so why be miserable


I try to live my life the best I can according to the tenants of my faith and misery isn't a factor. In fact I'd say I'm probably happier than your average Joe . Sex life is great too 



> ? I am not going to live my life in fear, i am not going to accept eternal damnation because i chose to be happy. This 'God' of yours sounds like a bully, 'do it my way or you're suffering forever'. Quite a way to run a group of people.


Actually its quite the opposite. Sin usually has a victim. Embracing sin usually ends up hurting you or someone else as a direct result. Its like considering your mother a bully for grounding you after you ignored her warnings to stay off the thin ice on the pond. She gives you rules because she loves you and doesn't want to see you hurt. A loving God could do no less.

Cheers
MacGuiver


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

rgray said:


> You are wrong.
> 
> Atheists are not stupid. To a man/woman they have considered the proposition of a theo centric universe. Atheism is not the denial of "god", it is the assertion of the proposition that the concept of god is not necessary (see Occam) to describe the universe.


*atheism* |ˈāθēˌizəm|
noun

the *theory or belief* that God does not exist.


----------



## Black (Dec 13, 2007)

To those who are calling this thread a Religious bash, look again.

This thread was started by me with an article with the wishes that it would start a religious discussion between many members, and it has. Noone here is insulting Religion or Atheism, we are discussing our views and our opinions and having them questioned by other members. For example I do not feel threatened by having my opinion questioned and am having a sharing of opinions with MacGuiver who is a Religious man, in no way are we arguing or hateful towards each other.

If you still feel in anyway that this is a religious bashing thread, you need not view this thread, search yourself for siding and then come back to this thread. I say this because I find in that when you have planted your roots so to say %100 in any opinion, you can not be insulted by other's opinion.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

SINC said:


> Yeah, one has to watch those non-religious guys. There are some who would bash religion of any kind, even though atheism is, in itself a form of religion (defined as a set of beliefs). They just don't recognize that fact.


I have a problem with any religion enforcing their beliefs on others.


----------



## Black (Dec 13, 2007)

MannyP Design said:


> *atheism* |ˈāθēˌizəm|
> noun
> 
> the *theory or belief* that God does not exist.


Yes according to the person who wrote the definition.

My Atheism is that i am comfortable with not knowing %100 in my purpose or destination, that is MY Atheism.
I find it impractical and uneducated to dedicate my life to an omnipresent being whom is mute to all my 5 senses and whose only proof of existence comes from the voice of man and things that man claims he is (special).

I find it very easy to answer all of life's problems with 'God did it'. For example the biggest question of all 'Why are we here?', it is very difficult to prove this with well proof and example yet it is much easier to simply say that a being created everything period and that's why we're here... followed up by 'if you don't believe it you're going to hell', 'visit your local church', 'donate to your local church'.

But ofcourse as greedy as man gets...i've noticed Religion is and has been used as a perfect tool. It is the perfect way to group people, make them scared, dedicate them, motivate them and ultimately (if you have wrong intention) set them out against something of YOUR choosing.
Ex: other religions (See Muslims Vs Jews, Muslims Vs Christians, Christian Fundementalism, American Christian Paranoia), other countries (Constantinople, Iraq [Muslim], etc).


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

Black said:


> To those who are calling this thread a Religious bash, look again.
> 
> This thread was started by me with an article with the wishes that it would start a religious discussion between many members, and it has. Noone here is insulting Religion or Atheism, we are discussing our views and our opinions and having them questioned by other members. For example I do not feel threatened by having my opinion questioned and am having a sharing of opinions with MacGuiver who is a Religious man, in no way are we arguing or hateful towards each other.
> 
> If you still feel in anyway that this is a religious bashing thread, you need not view this thread, search yourself for siding and then come back to this thread. I say this because I find in that when you have planted your roots so to say %100 in any opinion, you can not be insulted by other's opinion.


Well put. I am concerned about the phenomenon whereby it is accepted that theists are empowered to call atheists to task on their basic philosophies, but it is not acceptable for atheists to call theists to task. Theists have self esteem issues!


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

Black said:


> Yes according to the person who wrote the definition.
> 
> My Atheism is that i am comfortable with not knowing %100 in my purpose or destination, that is MY Atheism.
> I find it impractical and uneducated to dedicate my life to an omnipresent being whom is mute to all my 5 senses and whose only proof of existence comes from the voice of man and things that man claims he is (special).


You mean people. There are a lot of other resources that say the same thing.

The onus is up to whomever declares themselves an atheist to follow it up with an explanation of their "version". The author of the post that I replied to either has/had no idea of what Atheism is, or they forgot to clarify.


----------



## Black (Dec 13, 2007)

Completely agree.

Also, why is it acceptable for Christian oragnizations to publicly boycott movies because of Atheist content but not acceptable for Atheists to publicly boycott movies because Christian content? (The Golden Compass, DaVinci Code [spelling?])

Funny how pro-God opinion is seen as faith and pro-Atheist opinion is seen as just opinion. Freedom of Religion and Freedom of Speech are the same thing, sad how Freeom of Religion will *always* trump Freedom of Speech. Doesn't anybody notice this? i feel like i'm taking crazy pills.

The reason i feel so strongly about the above is because i enjoy using the term 'Jesus christ' as an expression for frustration. I remember back in Junior High school i used 'Jesus Christ' near a teacher, she told me to never use God's name in vain (Violating Seperation of Church and Sate, Violating Canada's freedom of speech) and i couldn't say anything. If i were to challenge her i would be suspended from school for 'Religious discrimination' yet she would not get in trouble for oppressing my opinion which is that God doesn't exist and thus my statement of 'Jesus christ' is empty and simply an expression of frustration.



MannyP Design said:


> Then the onus is up to whomever declares themselves an atheist to follow it up with an explanation of their "version". The author of the post that I replied to either has/had no idea of what Atheism is, or they forgot to clarify.


I have spoke to many Christians who variate their religion in many ways so that it is more comfortable for their lifestyle, you aren't about to tell me with your quotation of 'version' that Atheists can not NOT believe in god in any way they want. That's simply rediculous. If it is acceptable for Christians to manipulate their faith to create their own Personal Jesus, then we are permitted to created our own Personal Atheism.


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

Black said:


> Completely agree.
> 
> Also, why is it acceptable for Christian oragnizations to publicly boycott movies because of Atheist content but not acceptable for Atheists to publicly boycott movies because Christian content? (The Golden Compass, DaVinci Code [spelling?])
> 
> ...


I think we're getting God and Jesus mixed up here.


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

JumboJones said:


> I think we're getting God and Jesus mixed up here.


Beautiful!!!  

Here we go.  

When it is convenient to christians the trinity - god the father, god the son and god the holy ghost - is a unity... three in one - one and the same. Now (subtly XX) ) god and jesus should be distinguished.... <yawn> :yawn: 

If it was a used car, you'ld call it 'bait 'n' switch'..........


----------



## tilt (Mar 3, 2005)

MannyP Design said:


> The author of the post that I replied to either has/had no idea of what Atheism is, or they forgot to clarify.


MannyP, I posted the question because I was labouring under a misunderstanding and requested clarification which you kindly provided, thank you 

BTW, why do I get the feeling that people consider Christianity to be the only religion; and that if one is not an atheist, one must be Christian - or vice versa?

Cheers


----------



## SoyMac (Apr 16, 2005)

tilt said:


> ... BTW, why do I get the feeling that people consider Christianity to be the only religion; ...


It gets even better tilt. The Christians then subdivide as to what _brand_ of Christianity is the true religion.

 An oldy but a goody!:

WALKING across a bridge, I saw a man on the edge, about to jump. I ran over and said: “Stop. Don’t do it.”
“Why not?” he asked.

“Well, there’s so much to live for!”

“Like what?”

“Are you religious?”

He said: “Yes.”

I said: “Me too. Are you Christian or Buddhist?”

“Christian.”

“Me, too. Are you Catholic or Protestant?”

“Protestant.”

“Me, too. Are you Episcopalian or Baptist?”

“Baptist.”

“Me, too. Are you Baptist Church of God or Church of the Lord?”

“Baptist Church of God.”

“Me, too. Are you original Baptist Church of God, or Reformed Baptist Church of God?”

“Reformed Baptist Church of God.”

“Me, too! Are you Reformed Baptist Church of God, Reformation of 1879, or Reformed Baptist Church of God, Reformation of 1915?”

He said: “Reformation of 1915.”

I said: “Die, heretic scum,” and pushed him off.


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

Black said:


> I have spoke to many Christians who variate their religion in many ways so that it is more comfortable for their lifestyle, you aren't about to tell me with your quotation of 'version' that Atheists can not NOT believe in god in any way they want. That's simply rediculous. If it is acceptable for Christians to manipulate their faith to create their own Personal Jesus, then we are permitted to created our own Personal Atheism.


No, actually it's an intelligent way to go about having a conversation to avoid confusion. There are many kinds of marriage... it does not hold one meaning for everyone and thus you will hear people modify the term in order to communicate (clearly).

Why is it so insulting for you to take the extra step and communicate your beliefs more clearly? Must you always reciprocate the perceived injustices you encounter with equal measure?


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

rgray said:


> Beautiful!!!
> 
> Here we go.
> 
> ...


I personally think they should, many religions believe in a God or Gods, you can't lump Jesus in there and presuming these other religions believe in him as well. From what I understand he was supposed to be the son of God, so why would they be one in the same? Maybe a Christian or a Catholic can clarify.

I personally don't believe in the son of God "Jesus", so I don't think I would be a convenient Christian as you put it. But I do believe in a higher power, and I do respect the right of those to worship as they please without ridicule and objection.


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

JumboJones said:


> But I do believe in a higher power, and I do respect the right of those to worship as they please without ridicule and objection.


So why does the same courtesy not apply to atheists? We just want to be atheists *without ridicule and objection*.....


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

yes but we're ramming atheism down their throats. Or something.

right?


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

rgray said:


> So why does the same courtesy not apply to atheists? We just want to be atheists *without ridicule and objection*.....


I haven't done either, I object to the countless beat up sessions in threads that keep on occurring. For not believing in religion you sure like to talk about it.


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

We live in a religious society... by far the majority of people live in what Sagan called a "demon-haunted world" and this profoundly affects their behavior and attitudes.

It's sort of like being a mac user in a world dominated by PCs... you can't help but be affected by it, and it's pretty hard to keep from commenting on it when you see such obvious solutions to what appear to be intractable problems for most of society.

Cheers


----------



## guytoronto (Jun 25, 2005)

Hey, I don't mind bashing religion at all. I could go all day.

If somebody wants to bash Atheism, go for it. I haven't heard any really solid reasons for not being an Atheist.

I've heard arguments such as "How can you have morals without a guiding spirituality / fear of God / lessons of Jesus / etc?". I base my morals on what I believe is right and just. I don't base my morals on a book (i.e. The Bible). I don't base my morals on a fear of going to hell. I don't base my morals on my hope of getting into heaven. I base them in response to the world around me.

If I knew about a child being molested, should I try to cover it up? The Catholic Church did.

Should I stone to death people who work on the Sabbath? The Bible says to.

Should I burn cities to the ground because some people have "sinned"? God did that in the Bible.

Nope. I live by my own moral compass. But if there is a valid reason for NOT being an Atheist, I would love to hear it.


----------



## BigDL (Apr 16, 2003)

Black said:


> Completely agree.
> 
> Also, why is it acceptable for Christian oragnizations to publicly boycott movies because of Atheist content but not acceptable for Atheists to publicly boycott movies because Christian content? (The Golden Compass, DaVinci Code [spelling?])


 Better organised? i.e. can get the bodies out



Black said:


> Funny how pro-God opinion is seen as faith and pro-Atheist opinion is seen as just opinion. Freedom of Religion and Freedom of Speech are the same thing, sad how Freeom of Religion will *always* trump Freedom of Speech. Doesn't anybody notice this? i feel like i'm taking crazy pills.


 If you don't have any faith them how can your comments be called anything but opinion and be given any greater value?



Black said:


> The reason i feel so strongly about the above is because i enjoy using the term 'Jesus christ' as an expression for frustration. I remember back in Junior High school i used 'Jesus Christ' near a teacher, she told me to never use God's name in vain (Violating Seperation of Church and Sate, Violating Canada's freedom of speech) and i couldn't say anything. If i were to challenge her i would be suspended from school for 'Religious discrimination' yet she would not get in trouble for oppressing my opinion which is that God doesn't exist and thus my statement of 'Jesus christ' is empty and simply an expression of frustration..


 Please show any Canadian statute of law, constitutional article or amendment that separates church and state in this country. I seemed to have missed the memo on that one.



Black said:


> I have spoke to many Christians who variate their religion in many ways so that it is more comfortable for their lifestyle, you aren't about to tell me with your quotation of 'version' that Atheists can not NOT believe in god in any way they want. That's simply rediculous. If it is acceptable for Christians to manipulate their faith to create their own Personal Jesus, then we are permitted to created our own Personal Atheism.


Which creation myth is en vogue with Atheists these days. Is it still the big bang theory or is it string theory, that Atheists have faith in or is there a diversity of opinion?


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

bryanc said:


> We live in a religious society... by far the majority of people live in what Sagan called a "demon-haunted world" and this profoundly affects their behavior and attitudes.
> 
> It's sort of like being a mac user in a world dominated by PCs... you can't help but be affected by it, and it's pretty hard to keep from commenting on it when you see such obvious solutions to what appear to be intractable problems for most of society.
> 
> Cheers


Yes but there are those who go out of their way to say PC's suck and like to list the many reasons why at any and every opportunity, without accepting that most choose to use them.


----------



## guytoronto (Jun 25, 2005)

BigDL said:


> Which creation myth is en vogue with Atheists these days. Is it still the big bang theory or is it string theory, that Atheists have faith in or is there a diversity of opinion?


It's the one with more scientific evidence to support it, as opposed to the "Invisible, undetectable, omnipotent God snapped his fingers, and the universe came into being". I still have not heard a valid rebuttal of the point "If the Universe is so complex that it REQUIRED a designer, i.e. God, then God himself would need to be as complex as the Universe, and therefore require a designer himself. So, who created God?"


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

guytoronto said:


> Hey, I don't mind bashing religion at all. I could go all day.
> 
> If somebody wants to bash Atheism, go for it. I haven't heard any really solid reasons for not being an Atheist.
> 
> ...


I can see how anyone can doubt in the writings of books that have received countless revisions over the centuries. But I do question blindly saying that we are the be all and end all of this Universe and believe that there isn't anything else in the works here.


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

guytoronto said:


> It's the one with more scientific evidence to support it, as opposed to the "Invisible, undetectable, omnipotent God snapped his fingers, and the universe came into being". I still have not heard a valid rebuttal of the point "If the Universe is so complex that it REQUIRED a designer, i.e. God, then God himself would need to be as complex as the Universe, and therefore require a designer himself. So, who created God?"


Good ol' science, it solves everything doesn't it.


----------



## BigDL (Apr 16, 2003)

guytoronto said:


> It's the one with more scientific evidence to support it, as opposed to the "Invisible, undetectable, omnipotent God snapped his fingers, and the universe came into being". I still have not heard a valid rebuttal of the point "If the Universe is so complex that it REQUIRED a designer, i.e. God, then God himself would need to be as complex as the Universe, and therefore require a designer himself. So, who created God?"


The Christian Creation Myth is as valid as the Big Bang Creation Myth or any other Creation Myth you choose to put your faith in. If people choose to invest a considerable amount of belief into a theory and choose not to ram it down your throat, they should be respected. The fact that people choose to believe in answers to the big questions these folks should not be ridiculed. There seems to me to be a need for all humans to have answer to the big questions. 42 might be right.


----------



## Black (Dec 13, 2007)

I respect you for challenging me, although often jumping to conclusions about my belief.

I do not hold the finding of Science in very high esteem, for i am not a scientist.
I do not claim to know anything about God, i am not Religious.

All i know is that i am comfortable with being an animal. A common, sex driven, hungry, tired, wild Animal driven by basic survival instincts. I am comfortable with not knowing where i come from and why. I am happy with this and it will never change. I denounce the existence of Magical powers, I am an Atheist. After telling you this, you may find it amazing that i have high self esteem.

*Note: I perform long belly laughs at the human ego when it is clear something is strange about humans when they are the only animal in existence that will kill for fun.


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

BigDL said:


> Which creation myth is en vogue with Atheists these days. Is it still the big bang theory or is it string theory, that Atheists have faith in or is there a diversity of opinion?


One of the interesting things about atheists is that there is no rule book, so there is always a diversity of beliefs. I wouldn't even be surprised if there are some atheists with "faith" in some things... people are weird like that.

As for what's in vogue regarding the origins of the universe, I suspect you're being facetious, but I'll take your question at face value. The answer is that I don't know. Another one of the curious things about science and philosophy in general is that if you actually want to know the truth about something you have to be willing to admit when you don't know. I know that there are lots of theories, and that there are varying degrees of support for some of these theories, and I know which one seems to me to be the most plausible, but because these theories are based on empirical evidence, there will never be proof that any of them are true. There will only be proof that some of them are false. 

When my theories are falsified, I often feel momentarily disappointed, but then I remember that discovering 'one more thing that isn't true' is progress, so it's not bad to find out you were wrong.

When I've discussed these sorts of things with my religious friends, they are often bemused and claim not to be able to understand how I can be so comfortable with uncertainty. I guess I'm just different. But as Mark Twain said, "It's not the things we don't know that are the problem, its the things we do know that ain't so."

Cheers


----------



## Black (Dec 13, 2007)

bryanc said:


> One of the interesting things about atheists is that there is no rule book, so there is always a diversity of beliefs. I wouldn't even be surprised if there are some atheists with "faith" in some things... people are weird like that.
> 
> As for what's in vogue regarding the origins of the universe, I suspect you're being facetious, but I'll take your question at face value. The answer is that *I don't know*. Another one of the curious things about science and philosophy in general is that if you actually want to know the truth about something you have to be willing to admit when you don't know. I know that there are lots of theories, and that there are varying degrees of support for some of these theories, and I know which one seems to me to be the most plausible, but because these theories are based on empirical evidence, there will never be proof that any of them are true. There will only be proof that some of them are false.
> 
> ...


I respect people a great deal for saying what i have made bold/underlined in your quote bryanc. It takes a surprising amount of courage and certainty for the uncertain to make that statement. Not many people can truthfully do that without Religion or Science in the back of their minds.


----------



## Deep Blue (Sep 16, 2005)

*Why God is NOT Great!!*



MacGuiver said:


> First off, only God can determine who's going to Hell."
> 
> I think I may just laugh my pants off at the silliness of that comment and the whole American Christian bullying thing...but then I may be arrested for lewd and unchristian behaviour.
> 
> ...


----------



## MacGuiver (Sep 6, 2002)

Black said:


> *Note: I perform long belly laughs at the human ego when it is clear something is strange about humans when they are the only animal in existence that will kill for fun.


My brother's cat kills mice all the time just for fun. Never eats them and seems to be enjoying himself as he traps the mouse only to release it again so he can give him a few more swipes. He'd play that game for hours if the mouse would last. 

Cheers
MacGuiver


----------



## MacGuiver (Sep 6, 2002)

> My idea of Hell is a Britney Spears concert on never-ending loop with no rear door to exit by.


LOL!!!
At least we can agree on something. 

Cheers
MacGuiver


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

An interesting argument that some atheists make, like Dawkins, is that theists are almost always atheists themselves in one way or another. If you're a Christian you deny the theism of Hindu gods and goddesses by definition. If you're a Hindu you deny the theism of Christian gods. Some religious people may have ways around this and have a way of not denying other gods while worshipping their own.

As was illustrated in the earlier joke in this thread, some Christians deny the theism of others versions of their own Christian god. I have an evangelical relative who is part of a sect that believes that other Christians are going to hell because they don't believe what his group believes. I find it interesting that Jews, Christians and Muslims all claim to believe in the same biblical god, just different versions I guess.

As an atheist myself I am still very much interested in spiritual matters, since I believe scientific knowledge at this point in history doesn't begin to explain everything in the universe. I tend to think that the universe has to be far stranger than we can imagine with our intelligence. But in the absence of not knowing I don't jump to unsupportable and subjective conclusions as fact. 

I find that I'm very offended when someone proselytizes at me, as if I've never done any thinking about this subject. I also find that some who call themselves atheists have a tendency to proselytizing also. I don't believe anything I could say to someone with deeply religious convictions could really sway them, if they weren't open to having the discussion in the first place, so any effort in an attempt at discussing atheism with them would be fruitless and simply lead to antagonism. The same would apply to someone who insisted on proselytizing at me, and JWs at my door get the quick boot and the message to never come back. I think some mutual respect in these matters is important, sadly that doesn't often occur on internet forums.

Something I viewed recently on Google Video was a 2 hour recording of a discussion with the 4 leading atheist writers, Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens. The Four Horsemen - Hour 1 & The Four Horsemen - Hour 2

These guys seem to be quite considerate and not raving or hostile against religion, in some cases quite complimentary. While Hitchens comes off as somewhat of a self-important ass (I disagree with his politics), I found the others very reasonable. I'm probably closer to Sam Harris in temperament, I'll have to check out his books.


----------



## martman (May 5, 2005)

GratuitousApplesauce said:


> If you're a Hindu you deny the theism of Christian gods.


This is incorrect. Hindus believe that the "Christian God" is indeed God. Hindus tell me that the Heaven Christians seek is indeed part of God's spiritual realm.
Those who worship Krishna are hoping to re-incarnate in Krishna-Loka but they tell me Christians are looking to go to a lower planet in the spiritual realm. I forget the name of it.


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

martman said:


> This is incorrect. Hindus believe that the "Christian God" is indeed God. Hindus tell me that the Heaven Christians seek is indeed part of God's spiritual realm.
> Those who worship Krishna are hoping to re-incarnate in Krishna-Loka but they tell me Christians are looking to go to a lower planet in the spiritual realm. I forget the name of it.


I was just providing an possible example not necessarily a specific one. I'm sure Dawkins explains it better.

But if a Hindu (and I'm sure they would be anything but monolithic in their beliefs) was to see the Christian god as one of many, they would be denying the Christian belief of their god as the one and only deity, something I think that many Christians might find hard to accept.

There are other examples that could be made here. If I'm a Christian I might be an atheist concerning Wiccan beliefs, or maybe Scientology. I was trying to make the point that every believer is probably an atheist from some other believer's perspective.


----------



## martman (May 5, 2005)

Most modern Hindus are taught that the Gods and Goddesses are aspects of the one true (or super-God). Who this God is, is a matter of contention. The main candidates for this Godhead, as it is sometimes referred to, are: Vishnu, Shiva, and Brahma. The polytheism is just a way to try and describe something as complex as God to those trapped in the material universe (Maya). You want something from God you can direct the energy towards an aspect that deals directly with your intent or need. As an example you might choose to worship Ganesh in order to get more luck.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

guytoronto said:


> One of the hallmarks of being a Christian in the U.S. is that you act nothing like a good Christian.


No, that's not true. Lots of christ-like Christians in the states. Just none on the teevee. 



> I hope the family wins huge.


Me too. Hopefully the court case will force some of those "christians" to look at their behaviour again and ponder how "christ-like" they really are.



> Mike Huckabee, a potential Presidential candidate says that God is helping his poll numbers.


I wonder what Huckabee will say when he does NOT get the nomination? Will he BLAME god? George Carlin once pointed out that god/jesus get all the credit when good things happen, and NONE of the blame when bad things happen.

Or what if he got the nomination, and then got CRUSHED in the general election? What would THAT say about god -- that He can't pick a winner? Or that Satan (who is presumably backing the democrats) is stronger? Or perhaps people would begin to understand that people who think god speaks directly to them, or intercedes directly on their behalf, are suffering from a form of mental illness?

Naw...


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

BigDL said:


> Which creation myth is en vogue with Atheists these days. Is it still the big bang theory or is it string theory, that Atheists have faith in or is there a diversity of opinion?


String theory is not a substitute for the big bang theory. The BB theory only discusses the possible CREATION of the universe; string theory is a possible explanation for the STRUCTURE of the universe.

But fundamentally (ha!), aethists DO have a belief. They believe in following the facts wherever they lead. This often causes revisions along the way as the knowledge base increases.

The religious are different. They have a solid story that explains everything. It doesn't change, so it has a huge advantage in that it is very consistent, which becomes more and more valuable to people as they age. Indeed, the only thing wrong with the religious explanation for the universe is that it's wrong, apart from that it's got a lot of attractive qualities.


----------



## Black (Dec 13, 2007)

MacGuiver said:


> My brother's cat kills mice all the time just for fun. Never eats them and seems to be enjoying himself as he traps the mouse only to release it again so he can give him a few more swipes. He'd play that game for hours if the mouse would last.
> 
> Cheers
> MacGuiver


Cats don't intentionally kill Mice, they play with Mice and in turn the Mice die. What i was saying that no other animal except us intentionally sets out to kill another animal for only the purpose of entertainment. I have a cat too who kills mice, birds and sometimes moles (don't ask me how) and she seems extremely confused and keeps playing with them even after they are dead, meaning she did not intentionally kill it because if she did she would stop playing with it after it died.


----------



## Black (Dec 13, 2007)

chas_m said:


> *
> I wonder what Huckabee will say when he does NOT get the nomination? Will he BLAME god? George Carlin once pointed out that god/jesus get all the credit when good things happen, and NONE of the blame when bad things happen.*
> 
> Naw...



This is the backbone of what i was talking about before in terms of Personal Jesus/Personal God. A lot of Christians seem to manipulate their God in an attempt to make it suitable for their lives.

I had a friend named Chris in High school who recently moved away, he was extremely christian (his parents named him Chris after Christ). He became my friend because he dated my friend named Katie. Katie was not Christian. As all young women do when they are mature they want to have sex, but Chris couldn't because he needed to be married first. A short time after they started dating Katie told me she wasn't a virgin, i said 'what? isn't Chris going to 'hell' then?' and i lol'd, she said 'no, he said that he told god that he was going to marry me anyways and therefore it didn't matter when we had sex' and that 'god gave him permission'. I found this extremely funny considering *they broke up* a few months later.

If Christians can create and manipulate their Religion to suit themselves and still call themselves Christians, then anybody is entitled to do so with themselves and their believes and still tag themselves to a specific group.

Although this tactic does not make a whole lot of sense. *Scenerio*: it's kind of like taking an exam to get into a certain course. The exam rules are that you can't talk, it's 2 hours long and that you need a pencil. Well i'll just pull a Christian and stay for 4 hours, talk to my friend beside me and use a pen, but i'm allowed because i was given permission by the teacher, even though noone else is allowed. I finish the exam with cheating and i am still allowed to pass the course.

The above example sounds relative but stupid and pointless, that's absolutely correct. It's dumb, but relative. Now use that example with Religion and it's significance to the Religious person, he is basically cheating his way into heaven. If you want to talk about Sin and Satanism my friends, talk about that.


----------



## MasterBlaster (Jan 12, 2003)

.


----------



## MacGuiver (Sep 6, 2002)

MasterBlaster said:


> The current barbaric farce called Christianity has no resemblance and nothing to do with anything originally taught by its founder.
> 
> The ******** in that town and George Bush are all too typical of the actions that are carried out by these brain dead self righteous fanatics.
> 
> ...


Wow MasterBlaster! Thats a pretty broad brush you paint with. Lots of that going on in this thread though. 

I agree many of the key principles of Christianity would match with left wing ideology but the left has no monopoly on genuine Christian morality. In fact many leftist values are in direct conflict with Christ's teachings. Jesus could very well have a union card but I couldn't see him passing the knife to an abortionist. 

Cheers
MacGuiver


----------



## BigDL (Apr 16, 2003)

Big tenant of Christianity is all people are sinners “he without sin cast the first stone” recognised by Jesus himself. Other tenants are people should do on to others, as to one’s self and be tolerant of others.

Gotta love a religion that allows for anyone to do anything with the escape clause, before you die you believe in Jesus and truly ask for forgiveness for all your sins and you will be forgiven and your in the Pearly Gates. If you do this there will be more rejoicing in heaven for the repentant wayward sinner than for 9 righteous people. 

Jesus might fit in with better with hippies and lefties but not so much with the rich, powerful or the moral majority fundamentalists. :clap:


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

MacGuiver said:


> In fact many leftist values are in direct conflict with Christ's teachings.


Yep... that Christ dude was definitely a "tax-breaks for the rich; and to hell with the poor kind of guy".

I've never really understood how the linkage of the Christians and the Economic conservatives got established, apart from them both having such deep-rooted hypocrisies that they could support each-others fantastic justifications for not looking at the obvious contradictions in their fundamental philosophies that they some how managed to get along.

Cheers


----------



## MasterBlaster (Jan 12, 2003)

.


----------



## Black (Dec 13, 2007)

MasterBlaster said:


> He did push over the tables of the money changers didn't he?
> 
> It is clearly written in the doctrine that to be in the church you must first be a married family man, preferably with children. I think the verse goes to the likes of if you can't run your own family, how can you run the family of God.
> 
> ...


I'm confused, are you disagreeing with Religion or are you Religious but disliking today's modern Christian Religion? 

I feel too that the church is getting more corrupt... in the way that it is getting harder and harder to keep reason, thinking and knowledge from the church going population.

Many giant Mono and Polytheistic Religions of the ancient world that reached monumental heights like Christianity now are now seen as 'Myth'. Judging by how disposable religion is, you could say that in the next few thousands years Christianity will be a blip in history forever known as Myth. I wish i could live to see the day... although by then I'm sure the stupidity of man will once again find something to control the masses.


----------



## MasterBlaster (Jan 12, 2003)

.


----------



## Black (Dec 13, 2007)

MasterBlaster said:


> I am by no means religious in the traditional sense. I am an occultist. I seek real truth and power. I extract everything useful from religion, science, and philosophy and discard the garbage.
> 
> In Genesis it says to study the Tree of Life. That is what my signature is. Through Jewish Mystical Kabbalistic studies I learn about it and how to use it to improve my life. I am not Jewish. I am a Viking. I practice and study ritual magick from a variety of faiths and cultures, create my own stuff and my own path.
> 
> ...


That is extremely unique. It's good to see people with great control over their own lives as opposed to people dedicated to 1 thing and only ever 1 thing.


----------



## MasterBlaster (Jan 12, 2003)

.


----------



## MacGuiver (Sep 6, 2002)

MasterBlaster said:


> He did push over the tables of the money changers didn't he?
> 
> It is clearly written in the doctrine that to be in the church you must first be a married family man, preferably with children. I think the verse goes to the likes of if you can't run your own family, how can you run the family of God.
> 
> ...



WOW!!:yikes: 
Are you just playing stupid in some vain attempt to stir the pot or do you seriously interpret scripture that way?  
Thats the most twisted, yet creative distortion of scripture I think I've ever read. Ron Jeremy is Jesus, who knew?

Cheers
MacGuiver


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

actually I thought that was a relatively sane post.

<ponders what could have been had Ron Jeremy actually been Jesus...>


----------



## jamesB (Jan 28, 2007)

Black said:


> *Note: I perform long belly laughs at the human ego when it is clear something is strange about humans when they are the only animal in existence that will kill for fun.


How would you explain a pack of domestic dogs out for a night of fun, randomly killing several, maybe many sheep, then just leaving them once they are all dead and moving on?
This is something that happens wherever you have sheep farms.

jb


----------



## MasterBlaster (Jan 12, 2003)

.


----------



## MasterBlaster (Jan 12, 2003)

.


----------



## MasterBlaster (Jan 12, 2003)

.


----------



## Black (Dec 13, 2007)

MasterBlaster said:


> Jesus is more like a carbon copy of the Egyptian God Horus:
> 
> Jesus as a reincarnation of Horus
> 
> The story of Horus is almost identical to that of Jesus and thousands of years older. The Christian Religion is fraudulent and the largest ongoing scam in Human history.


Not to mention he's a copy of countless other Monotheistic Gods/Gods in Polytheistic religions. There are even some copies in the old Greek religions and the creators of modern Christianity previously had the nerve to create a prototype for Jesus whose name is a short variation of the word Jesus (i can not remember the variation).

To what MasterBlaster was saying about how they change the scripture to suit those in power whenever they needed too, it is absolutely true. Remember Yahweh? haha, the homophobic, perverted, racist, lying, hypocritical asshole Yahweh? Well how do you see him fitting into the 20th century? you don't, that's why they created the new God for Christianity which by our terms now is a lot less more of a dick than Yahweh.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

MasterBlaster said:


> Jesus is more like a carbon copy of the Egyptian God Horus:
> 
> Jesus as a reincarnation of Horus
> 
> The story of Horus is almost identical to that of Jesus and thousands of years older. The Christian Religion is fraudulent and the largest ongoing scam in Human history.


Ancient people "borrowed" heavily from each other's myths. The Hebrew religion for example, borrows heavily from Summarian texts. If you've ever read anything by Joseph Campbell or seen the Power of Myth on PBS you'd see how Campbell had to tone it down and pussy-foot around some of it so as to not become too controversial.


----------



## MacGuiver (Sep 6, 2002)

MasterBlaster said:


> You call it scripture. To me they are words in a book changed many times throughout history to serve the needs of those in power in their day.


How ironic then that you've quoted it in a vain attempt to support your Ron Jeremy Jesus. 



> What ******* part of Oklahoma are you from?


 Ask your spirit guide Obi Wan.

Cheers
MacGuiver


----------



## MasterBlaster (Jan 12, 2003)

.


----------



## DP004 (Mar 9, 2005)

I feel sorry for that family.
It is amazing that a simple typo way back then caused all of this:
Sports are meant to play.
Sports are not meant to pray.

Meanwhile, I am still trying to figure out if Christians are the Muslims of the West, or if Muslims are Christians of the East.

Intolerance is still universal though.


----------



## Black (Dec 13, 2007)

DP004 said:


> I feel sorry for that family.
> It is amazing that a simple typo way back then caused all of this:
> Sports are meant to play.
> Sports are not meant to pray.
> ...


Atheists publicly alienate Christian = religious hate crime and therefore can sue in court of law

Christians publicly alienate Atheist = intolerance, can not sue in court of law

That's Religious bigotry at it's finest.


----------



## MacGuiver (Sep 6, 2002)

​"intolerance"
I love when pot calls kettle black. 
This very thread, and many of others like it here on ehmac are expressions of intolerance of religion, Christianity in particular. I always get a chuckle when someone then goes on to accuse religion of intolerance after pages of postings intolerant of religion.

That said, I think tolerance is overrated. Often talked about but rarely practiced. The quote below sums it up nicely.



> Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions.
> Gilbert K. Chesterton


And we have many truly convicted anti-christians on this board.

Cheers
MacGuiver


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

MacGuiver said:


> "Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions."
> Gilbert K. Chesterton


Great quote. I've added it to my file.

I agree that tolerance is overrated. While I think it's extremely important in a world so crowded with people with some many diverse and mutually incompatible beliefs to be respectful of each other's rights to believe as we feel compelled to, there is no need to respect each other's actual beliefs.

Just because I think what you believe is silly doesn't mean I think you shouldn't be allowed to have or express such beliefs, or even that I don't enjoy and appreciate your contributions to society.

Cheers

P.S. Just so you know, I only pick on Christianity because it's the form of religion I'm most familiar with... it's not that I think any of the other religions are any less crazy.


----------



## Black (Dec 13, 2007)

You can't call disagreeing intolerance.

"I will never agree with Religion", that is disagreeing.

"I will flag out, insult and condemn people of faith", that is intolerance.

There is a difference, don't confuse the two.


Again if you wish to call disagreeing intolerance than i can and will always invoke Freedom of Speech.


----------



## guytoronto (Jun 25, 2005)

Black said:


> "I will flag out, insult and condemn people of faith", that is intolerance.


Unless the actions and beliefs of a faith are intolerable. Then is it completely justified.


----------



## Black (Dec 13, 2007)

guytoronto said:


> Unless the actions and beliefs of a faith are intolerable. Then is it completely justified.


It's only intolerable if it's your opinion. Opinion should never be confused with proven fact. Opinions should never be battled with in a court of law. Ex: "He said my Religion is evil, that is a hate crime and i'm sueing him.", it's the man's opinion, how can he be charged for his opinion under Freedom of Speech/Expression/Opinion?

It's based on opinion, however when you have one group with more people they tend to win.

Say a hate crime case involving 1 atheist backed by his family and 1 church member backed by the entire church, the church always wins.


----------



## MacGuiver (Sep 6, 2002)

Black said:


> Say a hate crime case involving 1 atheist backed by his family and 1 church member backed by the entire church, the church always wins.


Do you actually have some real life examples of this or is it just your perception or theory? I've seen hateful things written and said against Christianity regularly but I'm unaware of any atheist doing time for it and rarely are they even brought to court over it. If you're aware of any cases, please share.

Cheers
MacGuiver


----------



## guytoronto (Jun 25, 2005)

Black said:


> It's only intolerable if it's your opinion.


Intolerable can also be judged based on community standards and laws.

In our society, women ands gays are given equal rights. Some religions consider women second-class citizens, and gays as having no rights at all. This is intolerable in our society.

In our society, we judge based on the rule of law. Some religions consider the rule of law second to their religious laws. This is intolerable in our society.

In our society, we allow people to believe whatever they want, and practice their religion in a personal way. We do not allow them to impose their religious beliefs on others. When they do, this is intolerable.

I'm a pretty tolerant person, but when somebody tries to wedge their Bible or holy scripture or messiah into my day-to-day life, I become pretty intolerant.


----------



## MacGuiver (Sep 6, 2002)

guytoronto said:


> I'm a pretty tolerant person, but when somebody tries to wedge their Bible or holy scripture or messiah into my day-to-day life, I become pretty intolerant.


Guy gets it, he's intolerant. So am I and so is just about every other poster I've read on this forum. It just shows you have conviction in your beliefs. There are things in this society I just can't tolerate. Abortion would be one of them.
So please guys, look hard in the mirror before you scream intolerance.  

Cheers
MacGuiver


----------



## Black (Dec 13, 2007)

MacGuiver said:


> Guy gets it, he's intolerant. So am I and so is just about every other poster I've read on this forum. It just shows you have conviction in your beliefs. There are things in this society I just can't tolerate. Abortion would be one of them.
> So please guys, look hard in the mirror before you scream intolerance.
> 
> Cheers
> MacGuiver


I can agree with you on everything there but the abortion part.

Do you also dislike when people say 'Religious bashing thread?' 'Atheist bashing thread'? as if we are purposely trying to dismantle someone else's beliefs? that's what really makes me mad as it portraits someone who is passionate about their beliefs as a bad person.


----------



## MacGuiver (Sep 6, 2002)

Black said:


> I can agree with you on everything there but the abortion part.
> 
> Do you also dislike when people say 'Religious bashing thread?' 'Atheist bashing thread'? as if we are purposely trying to dismantle someone else's beliefs? that's what really makes me mad as it portraits someone who is passionate about their beliefs as a bad person.


Hi Black
I didn't expect you to share my intolerance for abortion. Its just an example of my intolerance.
To answer your question regarding labeling threads as Religion/Atheist bashing. I think some thread participants do use threads to bash. Its not about dialog and debate as much as its a vent for deep feelings of resentment or bitter hatred. Those individuals tend to wield a broad brush when they attack their opponent. But not all posters fit that description. I've had great debate and discussion with many atheists while others are like kids on the school yard hurling whatever barbs and insults they can muster. And that my friend, is a two way street. I've heard religious people do no less. 
Nobody is immune to hatred, beliefs or no beliefs included. I prefer we discuss and debate our ideas without it becoming a mud slinging fest.

Cheers
MacGuiver


----------



## Black (Dec 13, 2007)

MacGuiver said:


> Nobody is immune to hatred, beliefs or no beliefs included. I prefer we discuss and debate our ideas without it becoming a mud slinging fest.
> 
> Cheers
> MacGuiver


Then we agree.

Now let the disagreeing begin!


----------



## MasterBlaster (Jan 12, 2003)

.


----------



## guytoronto (Jun 25, 2005)

MasterBlaster said:


> Facts are just somebodies opinions.
> 
> Reality is an individual perception, not a universal fact.


And rambling is often ignorance. Spouting philosophical crap doesn't change reality or facts.



MacGuiver said:


> There are things in this society I just can't tolerate. Abortion would be one of them.


You are more than welcome to be intolerant of abortion. However, in our current society, women have the choice, and the law protects that choice. If you want to voice your opinion, that is one thing. 

If you want to stand in front of an abortion clinic and shout profanities at women entering the facility, that I would not tolerate. Just as I do not stand outside a church yelling profanities at people as they baptize their children.


----------



## MacGuiver (Sep 6, 2002)

guytoronto said:


> If you want to stand in front of an abortion clinic and shout profanities at women entering the facility, that I would not tolerate. Just as I do not stand outside a church yelling profanities at people as they baptize their children.


I'd agree hurling insults at women going into a clinic isn't right. I wouldn't tolerate it either. Truly she's as much a victim of a culture of death as her unborn child. However, peaceful protest is a right of every citizen whether we like it or not. Thats freedom of expression. Some people protest eating meat, chopping down trees, wars or drilling for oil as evil yet these things are perfectly legal. Legality doesn't deny them their right to protest what they see as wrong. Some believe killing fluffy white seals is evil, for me its defenseless unborn children. 

I'm glad you're above yelling profanities at people in church though many don't seem to share your reservation. Desecration and vandalism have recently become a common occurrence. Each Christmas we're seeing more and more nativity scenes vandalized, churches spray painted with occult symbols and profanity. Happened to my own church last year. We also had an attempted arson the year before. Sadly we've had to install video surveillance equipment to counter the problem. A group of radical feminists invaded Mary Queen of the World Cathedral in Montreal. They painted "No God, no masters" on one of the altars, overturned flowerpots, and stuck sanitary napkins—some soiled—to pictures and walls. Sick individuals. Sadly, the numbers of these acts of hate are growing each year. 

Cheers
MacGuiver


----------



## Black (Dec 13, 2007)

MacGuiver said:


> A group of radical feminists invaded Mary Queen of the World Cathedral in Montreal. They painted "No God, no masters" on one of the altars, overturned flowerpots, and stuck sanitary napkins—some soiled—to pictures and walls. Sick individuals. Sadly, the numbers of these acts of hate are growing each year.


I find that pretty entertaining. As long as nobody was hurt or killed it's all comedic to me. I am however disapointed that these acts seem to have been done out of hate and not out of sheer concern for society. Hate + Hate does not = Love.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

I'd like to see how entertaining and comedic it would be to you if it were your building. Perhaps then you might not be so lofty in your indifference.


----------



## MacGuiver (Sep 6, 2002)

Black said:


> I find that pretty entertaining. As long as nobody was hurt or killed it's all comedic to me. I am however disapointed that these acts seem to have been done out of hate and not out of sheer concern for society. Hate + Hate does not = Love.


Black, I don't know how to respond to that post?  
If you find that deplorable act somehow "entertaining and comedic" I think thats my cue to exit this debate. 

Take care
MacGuiver


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

MacGuiver said:


> However, peaceful protest is a right of every citizen whether we like it or not. Thats freedom of expression.


Yep. And more power to 'em. I'd love to see some people providing memetic vaccinations to church go-ers. I might even start doing that myself. 



> Desecration and vandalism have recently become a common occurrence. Each Christmas we're seeing more and more nativity scenes vandalized, churches spray painted with occult symbols and profanity. Happened to my own church last year.


While I can relate to the disgust at the lionization of the irrational worship of bronze-age deities, and the lampooning of the crazy ritualism, I have to agree that vandalism is reprehensible and inexcusable. Certainly not making any useful statements or improving society in any way at all.

Cheers


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

MasterBlaster said:


> Reality is an individual perception, not a universal fact.


Oh really?  I guess that explains the abject failure of science and philosophical objectivism in general with respect to predicting and explaining the nature of observable reality.

Cheers


----------



## guytoronto (Jun 25, 2005)

bryanc said:


> I guess that explains the abject failure of science and philosophical objectivism in general with respect to predicting and explaining the nature of observable reality.


Check out the big brain on Brett!


----------



## Black (Dec 13, 2007)

Max said:


> I'd like to see how entertaining and comedic it would be to you if it were your building. Perhaps then you might not be so lofty in your indifference.


I don't have a building because i don't belong to a group of people who share similar ideas.

Don't think I'm a bad guy, in my personal opinion people who claim the earth started in a certain way don't automatically deserve my respect (why would they? it doesn't even make any sense to have a thinking pattern like that. Btw i'm talking about Atheists aswell, nobody deserves automatic respect for having an opinion).

Furthermore I doubt those who find this a 'terrible act of evil' would not find it 'a terrible act of evil' if it was a normal house or 'god forbid' an Atheist's home.


----------



## MasterBlaster (Jan 12, 2003)

.


----------

