Ok.
Anyway what do you make of atheism as a religion given my defintion?
Oh, I agree. But I thought perhaps others who call themselves atheists might not.
neologist wrote:
Even you, aperson.
What a good Christian you are.
aperson wrote: . . . What a good Christian you are.
I could be the caffeine killer for all you know.
Garrotucciono, anyone?
Zoso, atheism is not a religion. there is no prayer, ritual or religious law involved with atheism, and there is no supernatural and moral claims about reality, atheism is in fact quite the opposite.
existential potential wrote:Zoso, atheism is not a religion. there is no prayer, ritual or religious law involved with atheism, and there is no supernatural and moral claims about reality, atheism is in fact quite the opposite.
What ep said, but I just threw it in to placate some people.
existential potential wrote:Zoso, atheism is not a religion. there is no prayer, ritual or religious law involved with atheism, and there is no supernatural and moral claims about reality, atheism is in fact quite the opposite.
I've never known an atheist who didn't make moral claims. Perhaps you have, but I doubt it.
Religion makes moral claims about reality in such a way as to make them undisputable, that is not what atheism does.
If the teaching of morals by any religion is so effective, why is the opposite happened/happening? Many wars/terrorist activity/killings have been religious-based. None have ever claimed to be an atheist.
existential potential wrote:Religion makes moral claims about reality in such a way as to make them undisputable, that is not what atheism does.
Is your statement indisputable?
cicerone imposter wrote:If the teaching of morals by any religion is so effective, why is the opposite happened/happening? Many wars/terrorist activity/killings have been religious-based. None have ever claimed to be an atheist.
You should study the history of the Soviet Union, of Communist China, of Cambodia.
I am with ci and ep here. The thing that defines religion is belief based on faith rather than evidence.
real life wrote:cicerone imposter wrote:If the teaching of morals by any religion is so effective, why is the opposite happened/happening? Many wars/terrorist activity/killings have been religious-based. None have ever claimed to be an atheist.
You should study the history of the Soviet Union, of Communist China, of Cambodia.
real, Do you understand the difference between religion and politics? Probably not based on your non-sequitur.
Arella Mae wrote:Quote:Why is it that those that do believe in God (or whatever term you prefer) are more than willing to give Him the credit for talents, good luck, plane crash survivors etc., but are not willing to give Him any credit for anything bad? This truly puzzles me.
What about the other 299 people who died in the plane crash, Arella? Was not God equally attributable for that as was he for the 1 that survived? Why do we ignore those 299 innocent men, women and children whose families now weep with the pain of their deaths??
The rain falls on the just and the unjust alike.
Tell that to the families who have lost those most dear to them.
Besides, you've missed the point entirely. The point was that Christians only attribute good things to God, and ignore bad things.
cicerone imposter wrote:real life wrote:cicerone imposter wrote:If the teaching of morals by any religion is so effective, why is the opposite happened/happening? Many wars/terrorist activity/killings have been religious-based. None have ever claimed to be an atheist.
You should study the history of the Soviet Union, of Communist China, of Cambodia.
real, Do you understand the difference between religion and politics? Probably not based on your non-sequitur.
Which went first, CI, short term memory or comprehension?
Did you forget that you had just claimed atheists were not responsible for wars and killing?
Or did you just not comprehend the reply?
He said no one has killed in the name of atheism, which may be true in the sense that one would have no deity to appease by killing. But there are isms which some folks follow as fervently as others follow their gods.
That is not to mention the fervor with which atheistic communists attempted to cleanse their country of believers.
real life wrote:
Did you forget that you had just claimed atheists were not responsible for wars and killing?
Or did you just not comprehend the reply?
Stalin, Mao Zedong and Pol Pot were all atheists. They were also men, political leaders and communists.
If you are just looking for a common denominator, wouldn't it be just as easy to say that because they were men, they were responsible for wars and killing?
If you don't like that, then how about because they were political leaders and communists?
Suggested reading:
http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/hitlerstalin.html and
http://freethoughtpedia.com/wiki/Stalin,_Mao_Zedong_and_Pol_Pot
Pauligirl, You don't know your history or your resources. As for Stalin, he went to church school. I'm not sure about Pol Pot, but when did he confess to being an atheist? Proof, evidence, background, family history, will do.
"Pol Pot studied at a Buddhist monestry and then later at a Catholic school."
Pauligirl, Show us that the above statement is wrong from a reliable source.
