Atheism

Just in case y'all don't know: When bad things happen to atheist messages, it's because we're oppressors, and Christians have to fight back. Via PZ Myers's Science Blog, here is one Christian journalist's reaction when Christians vandalized an atheist sign that simply said "One Nation Indivisible":

Quote:

Never would I encourage vandalism, but in this case I think I'll let it slide. Atheists have been vandalizing my beliefs for years, so it's about time the shoe was on the other foot. When asked about the vandalism, William Warren, the spokesman for Charlotte Atheists and Agnostics, said, "It was done by one or two people off on their own who decided their only recourse was vandalism rather than having a conversation." Hmm. That's interesting, because the Charlotte Atheists and Agnostics felt its only recourse was to deliberately insult those who understand the importance of "Under God." They probably figured that because the Bible teaches Christians to turn the other cheek, we'll just take their abuse forever. We will only take so much before we stand up against our oppressors. Besides, I can't count how many times an atheist and I have had a "conversation." They're not as calm and passive as Warren suggests.

Source

2 Replies

@edgarblythe,

Quote:

Epicurus
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?

Okay - I'm putting myself out here, so please don't get mean if you don't agree with me. But this quote makes me think about why there is even a NEED for a 'God' - because human beings are so ******* unable to take responsibility for their own actions.
'Then whence cometh evil? It's 'God's' fault- yeah right- as if we don't know.

Why do you think the Christ story has Jesus being described as 'God made flesh'?
It's an allegory! The main character is the power of love 'reduced' if you will to a state that other humans can recognize and relate to.

I was reading this the other day about the power of 'God' and I think it illustrates it perfectly:

'You cannot hear me, yet I speak through YOUR voice
You cannot feel me, yet I am the power at work in your hands'

So, man himself is the determinant - is the voice you're speaking with advocating good or evil? Are you using the power in your hands for good or evil?
And yes, some Christians, Muslims, Mormons, whatever are more guilty of spreading evil, hate, negativity than anyone else, but that doesn't negate the original message.

For me, it's helpful to recognize one unifying force that will help us to want to do good unto our fellow man - you can call it Jesus, Allah, God, Goodness, Love, Shared Humanity - whatever...but I do think it's helpful to have something to hold sacred (if you can stand that word) or more dear than our own individual 'SELVES'.

0 Replies

@spendius,

Quote:

I will maintain that the preaching atheist is on a self-justifying ego trip and nothing else. The atheist who keeps his or her own counsel is another matter.

But why shouldn't the atheist be allowed to advocate what s/he believes in (or doesn't rather)?

And this 'religion as society's sexual behavior minder' is bullshit - at least from my experience. As far as I'm concerned - sex is one of life's gifts- no one at my church ever taught me to be ashamed of having sex. You're playing right into the hands (or minds) of those who decry religion for its stifling influence.

Are you trying to tell me people built all these cathedrals purely as a reminder to limit sexual activity of one sort or another?
What a waste - why didn't they just castrate everyone - it would have been cheaper.

You're confusing the hell out of me.

2 Replies

@aidan,

I like a good priest, not thîs Popy SS-er

1 Reply

@Thomas,

Christians will not fight. Good muslima's are faithfull; they'll do any-thing

1 Reply

@Pepijn Sweep,

Quote:

I like a good priest, not thîs Popy SS-er

I just said to Spendius:

Quote:

You're confusing the hell out of me.

and so are you... Laughing

(unless you're making reference to Ratzinger- then I think I get your message)

0 Replies

@Eorl,

I'm still thirty pages behind on reading this thread.

I post to just nod that I'm interested.

0 Replies

@Thomas,

Quote:

They're not as calm and passive as Warren suggests.

The preaching atheists are not calm about the matter and they don't do conversations. They do one-way megaphones and put responses on ignore unless they are those simple-minded responses they are practiced at dealing with and which they are keen to encourage to the extent that they search them out.

But the "one or two" vandals and the writer of the piece add up to two or three people and are thus an insignificant incident and have been "searched out" for their role as sitting ducks.

I am opposed to the vandalism.

0 Replies

@aidan,

Quote:

But why shouldn't the atheist be allowed to advocate what s/he believes in (or doesn't rather)?

But the atheist is allowed to advocate atheism. I never said that they shouldn't be. Prof Dawkins goes on TV advocating atheism. Quotes from Media sources are often posted on the evolution threads which are advocating atheism. In fact on those threads most of the posters are advocating atheism.

Quote:

And this 'religion as society's sexual behavior minder' is bullshit - at least from my experience.

The regulation of sexual behaviour (counter-promiscuity) is the principle function of the Christian religion. It is the principle function of many other religions as well. I refer you to Prof. Germaine Greer's writings. Your personal experience is by-the-by compared to the collective experience within highly organised societies. The Catholic Church's teachings on sexual matters have nothing to do with fundamental right and wrong. They are to do with survival. They are practical. They are connected up to a sense of right and wrong by ceremonies and other conditioners because it is impossible to legislate for them without having two tier systems such as the Communist Party and the rest. And how exciting would sex be if it wasn't "naughty"? Where would our acronyms be if Nellie wasn't naughty?

Quote:

You're playing right into the hands (or minds) of those who decry religion for its stifling influence.

In which case my contributions should be welcomed and encouraged. Religion is a stifling influence. The alternative is no stifling, which is easy to imagine in a stifled world but unthinkable in actuality or the necessary stifling is done by law which is impossible for sexual regulation. The experiment in Paris with the knickerless can-can was shut down after two nights by the police. I could provide better examples if my chaste upbringing was to be set aside. And a lot of them too.

Can you imagine the Police being tasked with regulating sexual behaviour? On warm evenings in Blackpool during the high season. Things are bad enough as things stand despite the scowls of the priests.

Quote:

Are you trying to tell me people built all these cathedrals purely as a reminder to limit sexual activity of one sort or another?

I could make the case easily enough but other factors were in play.

The mistake is to think these matters are easily understood. And explaining them to well brought up ladies, or even men, is impossible because they reach for Ignore before the end of paragraph 1a is reached.

1 Reply

@Pepijn Sweep,

Quote:

Christians will not fight.

Oh yeah!!!!!!!!!

0 Replies

People will believe Any Idiot

0 Replies

@spendius,

Quote:

The regulation of sexual behaviour (counter-promiscuity) is the principle function of the Christian religion.

Well here's where we fundamentally differ. I don't believe that.
I do believe that it may be a function of some religious teachings, but I don't believe it is THE principle function of the Christian religion.

Quote:

And how exciting would sex be if it wasn't "naughty"? Where would our acronyms be if Nellie wasn't naughty?

I also don't believe that sex is naughty. Treating people disrespectfully is naughty, hurting people is naughty, not taking responsibility for one's actions is naughty, (all of which can happen when people practice abject and out and out promiscuity) but sex is as natural as breathing. It's one of the things we're meant to do.
I like Nellie because she's a free spirit. I find her funny - I don't find her naughty.
She transcends parochial expectations.

Quote:

Religion is a stifling influence. The alternative is no stifling, which is easy to imagine in a stifled world but unthinkable in actuality or the necessary stifling is done by law which is impossible for sexual regulation. The experiment in Paris with the knickerless can-can was shut down after two nights by the police. I could provide better examples if my chaste upbringing was to be set aside. And a lot of them too.
Can you imagine the Police being tasked with regulating sexual behaviour? On warm evenings in Blackpool during the high season. Things are bad enough as things stand despite the scowls of the priests.

Well, I can see we're coming at this from opposite ends of the spectrum.
For me, religious teachings in general, have been a guide. It's never been about stifling my natural urges or judging others for theirs.

And how is teaching evolution theory directly tied up with encouraging atheism?

Now I'm going to the beach to enjoy this beautiful day.

0 Replies

Frankly, I posted those quotes to dig the theists on this thread, because some appear to be here solely to monitor the atheists. Afraid we may say something that doesn't strike them just right. I don't intend to argue on this thread. If you want to tell why atheists are wrong, go to one of the threads created for the purpose. Meantime, I will continue to post what I want.

0 Replies

I also don't understand why the atheist who speaks out is an obnoxious preacher, but the believers should go on all day without getting blame.

1 Reply

Pepijn Sweep wrote:

Can U explain me the thoughts about an Aunty Christ ?
3

Sorry, I can't. I have no thoughts about any antichrist to explain.

0 Replies

Interesting concept: The Preaching Atheist

I think I was one of these once. And as I try to think back to the reasoning behind it - or the emotions, more precisely - I believe it had to do with a feeling that the world could be made so much better if people didn't place so much of their hearts into a fantasy, rather than in earnest cooperation each other. In that place, and some youthful arrogance, I thought if I talked it enough then perhaps I could help some folks see it my way.

I don't believe that any more; folks will do what that jelly in their heads moves them to do, or moves them to believe. I haven't really preached in a long time, though I do occasionally look back at what what I wrote and chuckle at the futility of it.

Nowadays I find a certain fascination with the apparent fascination others have with the term Atheist; what its come to mean and what it represents to them. I find in these editorials, shades of medieval thought... and perhaps even shades of the seeds I myself sewed long ago.

Thanks

2 Replies

@edgarblythe,

Quote:

I also don't understand why the atheist who speaks out is an obnoxious preacher, but the believers should go on all day without getting blame.

It depends. Religion preaches love of others, the eternal life, the ways of virtue, having a place in the scheme of things. If atheism just preaches the denial of the sacred, the denial of meaning and the sole reality of material existence, then what's good about it?

2 Replies

@jeeprs,

Religion preaches all that but rarely does anything about it. I will give you point by point comments this once, but you need to quit trying to guide this thread to into a "I reluctantly accept atheists if they don't do this or say that" mode. It was not created to salve your feelings.
1. Love of others - atheists and the religious are as capable of love as the other
2. Eternal life - no proof of eternal life, not one minute speck of evidence
3. The ways of virtue - that can be construed in so many ways, even other religious folks might argue about it
4. having a place in the scheme of things - all animals and plants have a place in the scheme of things
5. we deny sacred because it was made up
6. meaning - we deny gods, if that is what you suggest
7. what is material is undeniable - what you make of it is what sets you apart from rocks, sponges and tuning forks.

Now, run along and play.

1 Reply

@Khethil,

What is an Atheist preaching?

It seems that the only way some will find tolerance of Atheists is if they remain silent.

I suppose if atheists are upset about their civil rights and what the religious do, then their real concern should be that they don't sound preachy, and understand their place.

Silence is consent.

A
R
T

1 Reply

@edgarblythe,

edgarblythe wrote:

Religion preaches all that but rarely does anything about it. I will give you point by point comments this once, but you need to quit trying to guide this thread to into a "I reluctantly accept atheists if they don't do this or say that" mode. It was not created to salve your feelings.
1. Love of others - atheists and the religious are as capable of love as the other
2. Eternal life - no proof of eternal life, not one minute speck of evidence
3. The ways of virtue - that can be construed in so many ways, even other religious folks might argue about it
4. having a place in the scheme of things - all animals and plants have a place in the scheme of things
5. we deny sacred because it was made up
6. meaning - we deny gods, if that is what you suggest
7. what is material is undeniable - what you make of it is what sets you apart from rocks, sponges and tuning forks.

Now, run along and play.

Add that last post (by failures art) to what I said.

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know