Reply
Sun 24 Dec, 2006 10:38 am
We don't need no stinkin manifesto. That's just giving a new front to the religious in their war against science and common sense.
I agree with edgar. One does not have to become defensive when dealing with nonsense, no matter how many people believe in that nonsense.
Phoenix32890 wrote:I agree with edgar. One does not have to become defensive when dealing with nonsense, no matter how many people believe in that nonsense.
Considering the ongoing damage happening in the world in the name of religion, how can you say this? I think that atheists (in manifestos, etc.) and others have to speak out on the destruction being perpetrated in the name of religion.
Advocate wrote:Phoenix32890 wrote:I agree with edgar. One does not have to become defensive when dealing with nonsense, no matter how many people believe in that nonsense.
Considering the ongoing damage happening in the world in the name of religion, how can you say this? I think that atheists (in manifestos, etc.) and others have to speak out on the destruction being perpetrated in the name of religion.
I can agree with this statement; just don't agree with the manifesto thingy.
Advocate wrote:Phoenix32890 wrote:I agree with edgar. One does not have to become defensive when dealing with nonsense, no matter how many people believe in that nonsense.
Considering the ongoing damage happening in the world in the name of religion, how can you say this? I think that atheists (in manifestos, etc.) and others have to speak out on the destruction being perpetrated in the name of religion.
And I agree with you Advocate. Its time for secularists and free thinkers to debunk the religious myths.
The thing with a manifesto is that it is more than a mere statement. A random statement will not garner much attention, but a manifesto will hopefully resound to some extent.
I recall reading recently that 80 percent in the USA believe in God, and that 40 percent regularly attend church. In the UK, about 40 percent believe, and that only 5 percent regularly attend church. Let's hope that the UK is in the vanguard of a world-wide movement.
The believers have blind faith because they never ask questions.
.
Once you start asking questions you stop believing.
Advocate wrote:The thing with a manifesto is that it is more than a mere statement. A random statement will not garner much attention, but a manifesto will hopefully resound to some extent.
I recall reading recently that 80 percent in the USA believe in God, and that 40 percent regularly attend church. In the UK, about 40 percent believe, and that only 5 percent regularly attend church. Let's hope that the UK is in the vanguard of a world-wide movement.
A survey in the Guardian yesterday (to which I am too lazy to link, but its easily found) said 80% of Brits thought religion did more harm than good.
Phoenix32890 wrote:Steve 41oo wrote:Its time for secularists and free thinkers to debunk the religious myths.
I am not concerned with debunking religious myths. My only concern is where the religionists attempt to run my life, according to their precepts.
unless you make a stand they will
It doesn't seem that AU does very much, much less has accomplishments. Does anyone have any idea what percentage of its revenue goes toward administration (such as salaries)?
I am deeply resentful that the taxpayers largely support religion through the charitable contribution deduction and exemption from all taxes. As you know, contributions to virtually every cockamamie religion are deductible. Moreover, especially with regard to Catholic schools, parents regularly (though improperly) deduct tuition payments for their children as though the payments were put on the plate during services.
Personally, I don't understand the rationale why churches don't pay taxes, and why contributions to religious groups are tax deductable.
I have no problem with churches or religions that are responsible. The state in more primitive times used religion to embed into its citizens with an internal code of behavior so as not to be problematic. Religion did that very well. With more enlightened times logic and scientific knowledge should help us to live more responsibly but science itself can open a can of worms such as the question of eugenics with the attendant racial superiority. That brings us to who should be save in a disaster scenario?
Dys, the tax code does tax unrelated business income of churches and charitable organizations. However, there are some loopholes.
To all of you, belatedly, I wish you a merry solstice.
Advocate wrote:Dys, the tax code does tax unrelated business income of churches and charitable organizations. However, there are some loopholes.
To all of you, belatedly, I wish you a merry solstice.
thanks 'cate and a merry mithras to you too.
I think this article is wonderful.
I agree with Advocate and disagree with Phoenix on this, and I think the reason is that I live in a country where the position of atheism is the (increasing) norm and fundamental religion is the aberation (although it is also on the rise).
Polarisation may be the price we pay for pushing atheism forward, but it's a price that seems reasonable to me.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace