@Smileyrius,
Smileyrius wrote:
By belief system I was not limiting it to a belief in God. I have yet to meet an Atheist who does not have a belief system, a working model of how the universe came about or the origin of man even if he adopts the beliefs of another.
I very much appreciate that atheists do not necessarily "believe" that there is no God, they merely build their belief system without anything resembling a deity.
Regardless of intent, I apologise to anyone I offended.
It does actually go both ways, misunderstandings and strawmen are popping up everywhere, in my original version of the OP I included a few examples, including the one you highlighted. But I felt it was wordy enough as it was. Perhaps it would have been useful to have left it in.
The word "atheist" is specifically about a lack of belief in gods, not about a lack of beliefs in cosmology or evolution. You've muddled your notions thereof.
There is no such thing as an atheist any more than there is such a thing as a non-alchemist-believer, non-unicorn-believer, non-tooth-fairy-believer, or non-Thor-believer.
As for the utter tripe called religion, any reasonable amount of logic combined with evidence easily demonstrates it to be delusional. Worse than that, the suspension of logic combined with ignoring evidence allows religions to promote horrendous obscenities and immoralities.
I don't give a rat's ass what favored superstitious bullshit a person wants to believe, but don't force it on children, don't make moral judgments based on it, don't impose it on politics, don't impose it on finances, don't impose it on sexual behavior, don't impose it on education, in fact don't impose it on any aspect of society in any way. Regionalists must keep their delusions entirely to themselves in order to make the world a better place.
There are far-far better ways to make moral decisions, far-far better ways to make decisions about children, far-far better ways to make decisions about education, far-far better ways to make political decisions, far-far better ways to make financial decisions, far-far better ways to make sexual decisions, in fact there are far-far better ways to make any kind of decision as compared to the rubbish called religion.
@Chumly,
Quote:I don't give a rat's ass what favored superstitious bullshit a person wants to believe, but don't force it on children, don't make moral judgments based on it, don't impose it on politics, don't impose it on finances, don't impose it on sexual behavior, don't impose it on education, in fact don't impose it on any aspect of society in any way. Regionalists must keep their delusions entirely to themselves in order to make the world a better place.
Unfortunately, all the things you listed have already happened and continues on. There is no way for the minority of atheists to stop this delusion.
And I have further bad news: it's going to continue for many more decades to come.
@cicerone imposter,
I was talking to my dentist (he keeps tabs on my interest in this topic) and he sagely advised "Fight the good fight". I religiously believe all the toothpaste advertisements in their portrayal of dentists as credible
@Chumly,
I religiously believe in world travel.
@cicerone imposter,
There is reasonable evidence that many animal species exhibit altruistic traits, and altruism as I figure you already know, is a cornerstone of moral behavior. I'm not aware of any elephants that read the bible.
There is also interspecies altruism!
I know atheists whom I consider moral people, and so-called christians I w0uldn't trust as far as I could throw.
@Smileyrius,
Smileyrius wrote:By belief system I was not limiting it to a belief in God. I have yet to meet an Atheist who does not have a belief system, a working model of how the universe came about or the origin of man even if he adopts the beliefs of another.
On a day to day basis, most people function on a belief system called Naturalism. They expect the ground to be solid, that cars will hurt if you get hit by them and that magical fairies won't pop out of thin air and fly into their face. That's a belief system; Naturalism. And very few people who are still alive challenge it. The next layer of understanding, like how the universe came about or the origin of man, are not a belief systems. Those are derived knowledge based on the original belief system of Naturalism. Specifically it's Methodological Naturalism which underpins the Scientific Process.
Oddly, there are some people who live their physical lives in a purely naturalistic way, but then they will claim that Jesus walked on water or rose from the dead or some other impossible thing. Why is that?
@Chumly,
Quote:I don't give a rat's ass what favored superstitious bullshit a person wants to believe, but don't force it on children
Since you are saying 'force' is a suitable word to describe what believers in God actually do, then I suppose it would be appropriate to take their children from them.
Or were you just seething?
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:
In the early years of this site, there was a period that i think of as the religious wars. Believers and non-believers went after one another hammer and tongs. It lasted for at least a few years, and there is a strong residue of mistrust and enmity. There has never been a shortage of god-botherers coming here, right up to the present, apparently for no other purpose than to pick fights with evil atheists. I'm more than happy to oblige, convinced that i'm giving them what they wanted. As you know, i don't have to, and sometimes do not take that attitude. But if someone spits on me, i'm likely to spit back.
I participated in those wars and I was a sorry ass about it, as were a number of us.
@snood,
snood wrote:
I know atheists whom I consider moral people, and so-called christians I w0uldn't trust as far as I could throw.
Could god make an elephant so heavy that he himself could not throw it? If god could make an elephant so heavy that he himself could not throw it, could god trust such an elephant, or would such an elephant be under the influence of the fallen angel?
@Chumly,
Yeah, that was a chuckle, but I have no idea why you wrote it as if in response to me.
@Leadfoot,
Indoctrinating innocent children with morally bankrupt Abrahamic mumbo-jumbo is tantamount to child abuse. The answer is patently obvious (although apparently not to you). It's called an evidence-based education.
@snood,
I was on the topic of animal altruism and I felt some non sequitur humor coming on.
@Leadfoot,
I have found that tea tree oil stops my scalp from itching, but reduces amorous activity as the scent deters the lovely Mrs. Chum, but not to fear because the bible has the moral response to that vis-à-vis Onan.
@Chumly,
Quote:I'm not aware of any elephants that read the bible.
That doesn't mean you can't believe that there are such elephants. You need to keep an open mind.
Quote:Could god make an elephant so heavy that he himself could not throw it?
Yes.
Quote:If god could make an elephant so heavy that he himself could not throw it, could god trust such an elephant, or would such an elephant be under the influence of the fallen angel?
Fear of said elephant falling under the influence of the fallen angel is not the reason the god will not make an elephant so heavy that even he can't lift it. The real reason is that the god has a deep-seated fear of making such an elephant, and then later finding it lying dead on the ground some forty or fifty yards from its last footprint.
@Glennn,
Your oracle-like precision in expressing the subtleties of elephantine religious doctrine is only exceed by your great beauty and wisdom.
@Chumly,
That goes without saying, but it's better when said.
