The Argument Against Arguing Against Religion

eoe wrote:

In my own humble opinion, I find the lack of tolerance on both sides to be so mired in foolishness and totally unenlightened as a species that I rarely participate in any of the so-called spiritual/religious threads.

Let those who believe believe and let those who don't don't.

Excellent advice. Everyone to his/her own. I see many arguments on the matter but nobody is going to accept anything that the other says. Live and let live.

0 Replies

eoe wrote:

In my own humble opinion, I find the lack of tolerance on both sides to be so mired in foolishness and totally unenlightened as a species that I rarely participate in any of the so-called spiritual/religious threads.

Let those who believe believe and let those who don't don't.

eoe- I have no problem with people believing in what they want. What I personally think of a particular belief, should be of no concern to them. It is purely a personal matter.

The only reason that I get into these discussions, is that in the US, people are using the tenets of their religion as a rationale for modifying laws. I am a big believer in "live and let live". I will stay out of anyone's life if they don't want me there, and I expect the same from them.

0 Replies

Well, I was christian once, and reading reasoned critiques of religion, plus my own reasoning and dawning critical thinking, led me to cease to be so.

I think that, while a lot of it is just a pastime for participants here, or sometimes a means of venting irritation with someone/s, that it IS important to keep arguing it...some people really do take such discussions seriously and change.

0 Replies

eoe wrote:

In my own humble opinion, I find the lack of tolerance on both sides to be so mired in foolishness and totally unenlightened as a species that I rarely participate in any of the so-called spiritual/religious threads.

Let those who believe believe and let those who don't don't.

Perhaps MA shouldn't have asked us for our opinion then.

0 Replies

Uh, Brandon, that would be a different thread. I don't think I asked for anyone's opinion in this one. :wink:

0 Replies

And, as Phoenix has pointed out, religious beliefs DO have an impact in the real world, not infrequently, in my view, a negative one...especially at present when we seem in the grip of a global spike in "fundamentalist" versions of various religions.....with extremely negative effects.

0 Replies

Brandon9000 wrote:

eoe wrote:
In my own humble opinion, I find the lack of tolerance on both sides to be so mired in foolishness and totally unenlightened as a species that I rarely participate in any of the so-called spiritual/religious threads.

Let those who believe believe and let those who don't don't.

Perhaps MA shouldn't have asked us for our opinion then.

She didn't

0 Replies

Intrepid wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:
eoe wrote:
In my own humble opinion, I find the lack of tolerance on both sides to be so mired in foolishness and totally unenlightened as a species that I rarely participate in any of the so-called spiritual/religious threads.

Let those who believe believe and let those who don't don't.

Perhaps MA shouldn't have asked us for our opinion then.

She didn't

She does constantly. As do others. That is why there are so many threads in this section.

0 Replies

I will point out once again that these are not equivalent activities. There is not a flurry of threads in which atheists want to "duke it out" with christians. Atheists at this site are not asking anyone to believe anything. They are rejecting the beliefs that others assert. You have one set--the imaginary friend crowd--shouting "A is true." The other group--called agnostics or atheists--are saying "I don't believe A is true, because you have no evidence."

This is definitely not a case of conflicting beliefs. It is a case of an assertion of belief, and a rejection of that assertion.

0 Replies

Questioner wrote:

Intrepid wrote:
Brandon9000 wrote:
eoe wrote:
In my own humble opinion, I find the lack of tolerance on both sides to be so mired in foolishness and totally unenlightened as a species that I rarely participate in any of the so-called spiritual/religious threads.

Let those who believe believe and let those who don't don't.

Perhaps MA shouldn't have asked us for our opinion then.

She didn't

She does constantly. As do others. That is why there are so many threads in this section.

If you check, you will find that many of the threads are started by those who do not believe. And, what does something that one posts in another thread have to do with this one?

0 Replies

Intrepid wrote:

Questioner wrote:
Intrepid wrote:
Brandon9000 wrote:
eoe wrote:
In my own humble opinion, I find the lack of tolerance on both sides to be so mired in foolishness and totally unenlightened as a species that I rarely participate in any of the so-called spiritual/religious threads.

Let those who believe believe and let those who don't don't.

Perhaps MA shouldn't have asked us for our opinion then.

She didn't

She does constantly. As do others. That is why there are so many threads in this section.

If you check, you will find that many of the threads are started by those who do not believe.

Thus the 'and others' bit of my response.

Quote:

And, what does something that one posts in another thread have to do with this one?

Why do you insist that Mesquite was referring to only this thread in his comment?

0 Replies

Questioner wrote:

Intrepid wrote:
Questioner wrote:
Intrepid wrote:
Brandon9000 wrote:
eoe wrote:
In my own humble opinion, I find the lack of tolerance on both sides to be so mired in foolishness and totally unenlightened as a species that I rarely participate in any of the so-called spiritual/religious threads.

Let those who believe believe and let those who don't don't.

Perhaps MA shouldn't have asked us for our opinion then.

She didn't

She does constantly. As do others. That is why there are so many threads in this section.

If you check, you will find that many of the threads are started by those who do not believe.

Thus the 'and others' bit of my response.

Quote:
And, what does something that one posts in another thread have to do with this one?

Why do you insist that Mesquite was referring to only this thread in his comment?

You are perhaps getting a bit weary, Questioner. It was not Mesquite that wrote that, it was Bronadon9000. Unless, you are asserting that they are one and the same.

0 Replies

Intrepid wrote:

You are perhaps getting a bit weary, Questioner. It was not Mesquite that wrote that, it was Bronadon9000. Unless, you are asserting that they are one and the same.

Fine, Brandon then. The name of the individual that wrote it doesn't change my point in the least, thank you.

0 Replies

Questioner wrote:

Intrepid wrote:

You are perhaps getting a bit weary, Questioner. It was not Mesquite that wrote that, it was Bronadon9000. Unless, you are asserting that they are one and the same.

Fine, Brandon then. The name of the individual that wrote it doesn't change my point in the least, thank you.

Perhaps not, but you must have thought it important to include a name...since you did. I am just suggesting that it may be courteous to use the right name.

0 Replies

Intrepid wrote:

Questioner wrote:
Intrepid wrote:

You are perhaps getting a bit weary, Questioner. It was not Mesquite that wrote that, it was Bronadon9000. Unless, you are asserting that they are one and the same.

Fine, Brandon then. The name of the individual that wrote it doesn't change my point in the least, thank you.

Perhaps not, but you must have thought it important to include a name...since you did. I am just suggesting that it may be courteous to use the right name.

Accepted. My apologies to any that may have been genuinely offended.

0 Replies

eoe wrote:

In my own humble opinion, I find the lack of tolerance on both sides to be so mired in foolishness and totally unenlightened as a species that I rarely participate in any of the so-called spiritual/religious threads.

Let those who believe believe and let those who don't don't.

The problem with this is that it assumes equality of position and that neither interferes with the freedoms of the other. That is blatantly not the case in much of the world. The "enlightenment" of which you speak might transcend personal psychological involvement but only provided you avoid thinking about a political process counselled by theists, or the increased liklihood of becoming a victim of religious terrorism yourself.

0 Replies

This is an interesting thread.

My participation in these threads has been when I see some assertion that I think is both wrong and somehow dangerous, and I wish to refute it, or when I am specifically answering a question that has been asked.

I don't think the assertion "I believe in God" is wrong or dangerous or worth refuting.

I do think the assertion "Gay people shouldn't have the right to marry" is wrong, dangerous, and worth refuting -- whether it is couched in religious terms or not.

I think there is an important difference there.

0 Replies

Re: The Argument Against Arguing Against Religion

Questioner wrote:

A somewhat different angle than the usual burden of proof threads . . .

Question
What point is there in arguing against religious beliefs, and how affective can such arguments possibly be?

Granted, there is a certain level of entertainment to be enjoyed while watching people scramble to justify the unjustifiable. Yet other than that, what point? Religion, by it's very nature, is bullet-proof against successful reasoning. As an example, if one points out that no one has 'seen' God, the automatic response is 'You must have faith that he exists.'

Now what kind of argument can you make to such an answer? You can call it 12 shades of ridiculousness, yet since you can't prove that God does, in fact, NOT exist you haven't a leg to stand on.

In order for an argument to be resolved, one or the other sides must be open to accepting a prospect that they currently do not. That most of those professing belief in a religion do so without any real factual evidence dictates that they will not relent their belief due to fact or logic. So the only side that could feasibly 'lose' such an argument would be the non-christian.

Thoughts?

Great post.
I have had these same thoughts many times. Why bother?
Christianity by it's very dogma places faith of a higher value than reason.
All attempts to batter down faith with reason are therefore pointless, right?
Objectively speaking..yes.
But ultimately people do what they do for their own reasons.
As I can only speak for myself, I shall do so.
I have actively taken the position of the adversary. I see religion as a self replicating thought virus invading and polluting our society. I get satisfaction from fighting against the monster.
It's fun.

0 Replies

At least we finally understand your position, Dok

0 Replies

I think it's important for those who make decisions based on faith understand that that is what they are doing, and that the rest of us are within our rights to demand a better reason when their decisions effect us.

Those who think faith is logic and scripture is knowledge are very dangerous people.

I think many of us here argue to help faith based thinkers understand that that is what they are, for the have been systematically and deliberately taught otherwise.

0 Replies

The Argument Against Arguing Against Religion

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know