Atheism

http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/manufactured-landscapes/

If it's too tough for you and you feel the need to thumb it down it doesn't change the fact that it's a masterpiece.

I find it somewhat amusing that there has been literally THOUSANDS of posts in the attempt to differentiate the nuanced contradistinctions involved in a lack of belief. Atheism isn't a thing, it's not even a belief. It's just the ruckus that sensible people make in the face of untenable convictions about the nature of reality. To affirm it as something is to deprive it of the significance of what it truly is-- nothing.

Ideally you may be correct. But few of us can live without labels, dealing with the slings and arrows.

I just find it somewhat amusing that we spend so much time turning a lack of something into a whole lot of noise.

This thread was not initiated to that purpose. It was intended that atheists come here to share experiences and stray thoughts. The influx of a few trollish persons brought on all the labeling and bickering.

I was recently in Haifa, Israel, where the international home of Bahai is located. They believe that all major religions are based on one god, and that religion and science are in harmony. They believe that men and women are equals, and discrimination of any kind is wrong.

Not a bad concept - except for the "god" part.

My guess is that as long as there are categories in the universe with unexplainable phenomenon (where logic and reason can't come up with an answer at the current moment, i.e. explaining the fundamentals of gravity), humans in general won't give up the concept of greater being(s) or god/ gods. Thus for some smart people, existence of God in their belief system is reconcilable with science, reason, and logic, ultimately, in their understanding of how the world works and operates.

It is perhaps not a "bad" idea idealistically, but realistically? Equality is a silly Christian relic which doesn't allow for subtitles of human nature-- equal in what exactly? You can no more make woman equal to man than man to woman, and throughout history the task alone has seemed to almost serve towards the disenchantment of women. But I fear this is a discussion for another time, a different place. In my view, the only true atheism is Nietzchianism. An honest atheism which not only does away with the Christian god, but also the Christian concept of virtue as a direct consequence. Anything less is just Christian puppet who's denounced their master but kept his strings.

You miss the point of this thread. The intent was to discuss the experience of being an atheist in contemporary society. Flannel-mouthed creeps like Spurious have trashed this thread because of some innate idiocy of his own. It was never the intent of the thread to discuss the whys and wherefores--just the experience.

I am quite prepared to do that. Nobody else seems to be up for it apart from moaning about a Fundie knocking on the door every once in a while.

The thread is almost entirely about religion bashing which I can do better than anybody seen so far as a result of reading de Sade, Rabelais, Veblen, Huxley and suchlike and from my own experience.

Setanta is the spurious one. Notice how he refrains from answering my post about history which he thinks he knows something about when all he does know about are a few half-baked history lessons in which extreme selectivity is operative coupled with anti-educational distortions and over-simplifications and rabid emotional outbursts designed to justify the most twee infractions of Christian morality of the sort promoted by Media for the purpose which it would be bootless to mention on account of it being so obvious.

Spurious respectability is what this thread is about. I'm up for Brave New Worldism. Atheism is being given a bad name on here for intolerance, thrumming indignation and jelly-kneed illogicality.

If anybody finds planet Kolob, please post it here first. TYIA.

I found it FB. It's in Brave New World as long as you take no notice of holiday jaunts to exotic places and disgruntled 'ology majors.

I'm a Mustapha Mond (His Fordship) type. I'm in favour of velvet glove totalitarianism.

I could cuddle with a steel fist coated in cotton.

The very people whose alleged personal savior said: "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God." Isn't that ironic?


Are you sure? In my own experience, atheists are of no particular ilk at all --- just like atoothfairyists, non-stamp-collectors, non-smokers.

Another irony, and the greatest irony of "Randians" is that she hammers the idea of thinking for oneself, which is exactly what Randians are not doing when they parrot her ideas.

Good point!

Before commenting on that it is best to have some idea of what the Kingdom of God is.

It's only a good point if you can explain what thinking for yourself entails. And Setanta can't. And neither can you.

It's just a conversational self-awarded merit point. Prof Skinner would assume that anybody he heard using the expression was educationally sub-normal.

As I do.

That is a bald non sequitur. People are not subjugated by fundamentalist pronouncements because they are fundamentalist pronouncements. They accept the validity of the morality which the pronouncements are intended to reinforce.

If you examine Christian sexual morality properly you will find that it is all to the advantage of women and if you examine all the attacks on that morality you will find that they are all to the advantage of men.

Pretending otherwise is for intellectual ninnies engaged in special pleading.

You're not only deaf and dumb, you don't know how the religious in many countries have stifled equality. Your use of the English language is based on total ignorance. "Non-sequitur?" You don't even know what you're talking about.