Atheism

[DarkAngel_]

after this video was made and released many band members were threated and virbally attacked.

"when the song was originally released as a single many record shops refused to stock the track, fearing a religious backlash." (via wikipedia)

And one man who DJed this song on his radio station was almost struck on a news program on CNN... my issue is i am atheist and I'm being prosecuted by civil insult, threats, hate, the contradiction of a god, his son, and the holy ghost and communion there of. Christ had a great message not many follow especially the Christians, just as Buddha. the Muslim belief is frightful but... respectable if not taken literally and if taken as an honorable religion. Jews have an ancient doctrine that has obedience but as we see is changing... all of them are, and those that do not modernize (abolish dogma) will diminish. the cause of freedom outweighs dogma.

the problem is; is it ethical to prosecute these atheists for voicing 'weak' atheism, should outraged Christian's who attack, be prosecuted. (my opinion, no and no.)

[kimmy]

the problem is; is it ethical to prosecute these atheists for voicing 'weak' atheism, should outraged Christian's who attack, be prosecuted. (my opinion, no and no.)

I guess it depends what you mean by "prosecute" and "attack".

In both Canada and the United States, people have the right to their religious beliefs, and the right to speak their mind. There should be no "prosecuting" involved in any of this, unless the "attack" is in the form of violence rather than words.

-k

[GostHacked]

I guess it depends what you mean by "prosecute" and "attack".

In both Canada and the United States, people have the right to their religious beliefs, and the right to speak their mind. There should be no "prosecuting" involved in any of this, unless the "attack" is in the form of violence rather than words.

-k

Agreed. Religion to me is a personal thing, and should remain personal. I consider myself agnistic/athiest. No other individual can share your relationship with God .. if there is one. Beleive what you want to beleive and leave others alone.

I will listen to the tune later!! Can't while I am at work.

[Shakeyhands]

this thread is soooooooo 1987.

[DarkAngel_]

this thread is soooooooo 1987.

lol i know, but would it change if i asked instead should i be allowed to be atheist? a more conservative look on putting church in a news room shows that though people are more accepting then they used to be, they are also more prone to violence, and hurtful remarks. (atheists of outrage put aside) existentialism is widely accepted as a moral code for the common atheist but there seems to be a 'big bad wolf' in the media's outlook of an atheist, that is called nihilistic, sadistic, or materialistic... none of which is true... while attending a church function a dogmatic doctrine was established in the sermon, that, 'god is loving and pities the lost.' but contradicted later by adding that, 'atheism is a sin and will be punished on the day of judgment.' that day i heard several people speak about strong atheism being satanic or crudely influenced by a leftist agenda meant to break people's faith... people are delusional. atheism is being slandered by 'he-said shes-said,' they are being prosecuted by peers in the manner of small town alienation, paranoia, and execution of harassment planned before the fact, and it is only common in remote areas which middle class communities have to thrive on these rumors and acts of borderline oppression.

point: do these people have that right as free people, or do atheists have the freedom to thrive.

[Shakeyhands]

Oleg?

[Cuzzin E]

let the xtians attack, it's their right

[Oleg Bach]

Oleg?

You called? Aheism is the religion of fear - It's like some fear being in a tight space and others fear being super small with the eternal universe stretching out all around them - atheists are those that do not have the common sense to know they are a little speck of nothing. Once you except the fact that you are a nothing then maybe you can grow to a something - so untill you can live for ever...you may as well believe that eternity has intelligence and you are dependent on it - I would not take the chances that atheists take - to defy and ignore - help..we are frail humans and we need all the help we can get.

[cybercoma]

Forget atheism and agnosticism.... ignosticism is the wave of the future!

[Oleg Bach]

after this video was made and released many band members were threated and virbally attacked.

"when the song was originally released as a single many record shops refused to stock the track, fearing a religious backlash." (via wikipedia)

And one man who DJed this song on his radio station was almost struck on a news program on CNN... my issue is i am atheist and I'm being prosecuted by civil insult, threats, hate, the contradiction of a god, his son, and the holy ghost and communion there of. Christ had a great message not many follow especially the Christians, just as Buddha. the Muslim belief is frightful but... respectable if not taken literally and if taken as an honorable religion. Jews have an ancient doctrine that has obedience but as we see is changing... all of them are, and those that do not modernize (abolish dogma) will diminish. the cause of freedom outweighs dogma.

the problem is; is it ethical to prosecute these atheists for voicing 'weak' atheism, should outraged Christian's who attack, be prosecuted. (my opinion, no and no.)

I have a good understanding of super old school orthodox Christianity - and what I noticed was intelligent atheists are MORE Christ like and Godly than the damned Christians. Most become atheists not because the hate the thought of their being a cosmic intelligence - but they hate the thought of what religion has become...look at the mainstream churches - they do the opposite to what old school Christian doctrine states - in other words they are OPPOSITE to Christianity - which makes most Christians practicers of anti-christism.

[GostHacked]

You called? Aheism is the religion of fear - It's like some fear being in a tight space and others fear being super small with the eternal universe stretching out all around them -

How is it a religion of fear? I don't hear athiests calling the heard to church every Sunday to worship a god they fear. Because there is nothing to fear. Atheism is combating that fear of being contricted and cramped that is every day organized religion. Ahtiesm does not promote any hell or heaven? It does not scare you into thinking you are going to hell if you go against God's wishes. There is no God .. and therefore nothing to fear.

atheists are those that do not have the common sense to know they are a little speck of nothing.

Yes we are all little insignificant specks .. Every one of us in the human race are specks. Beleiving in a mystical magical omnipotent creator of the universe causes me to beleive that none of the religious people have common sense.

Once you except the fact that you are a nothing then maybe you can grow to a something - so untill you can live for ever...you may as well believe that eternity has intelligence and you are dependent on it

Life is what you make it. You can be anything if you put yourself to it. If you are depending and counting on others to make things happen for you... I have a religion to sell you.. for cheap!!!

I would not take the chances that atheists take - to defy and ignore - help..we are frail humans and we need all the help we can get.

Life is all about chances and risks. And the first step is to help yourself. From what I hear, God only helps those who help themselves first. But don't take advice from me.. I am just an Athiest.

[Pliny]

How is it a religion of fear? I don't hear athiests calling the heard to church every Sunday to worship a god they fear.

Ghost hacked,

Atheism is a cult like following. They are basically against organized religion. The fact that metaphysical phenomena could occur is outside their frame of reference.

"In the beginning was the word...." when some one finally understands the word we will have heaven on Earth.

[tango]

To me this just sounds like someone questioning/rejecting religion, as we are all entitled to do.

If xians are getting upset to the point of attack ... that's pathetic and a problem for the law to deal with.

Nothing here but free speech.

[WIP]

Ghost hacked,

Atheism is a cult like following. They are basically against organized religion.

Well first of all, it seems like a lot of religious people here proclaim that they are against organized religion, so that's not necessarily an atheist thing.

And explain to me how being against organized religion makes it a cult?

The fact that metaphysical phenomena could occur is outside their frame of reference.

I think the word you're looking for is supernatural, because metaphysics is understood as the philosophical attempt to discern first principles, such as the nature of mind, existence, causality, objects and substance, time....it doesn't necessarily mean supernatural phenomena.

Now then, the supernatural may be part of your frame of reference, but it's not part of mine, unless you can provide some way to prove to me in an objective manner that it exists; until then, it remains your personal subjective belief....keeping in mind of course that it may be shared with others of like mind when you gather together at church for example. But, if you're talking to someone who does not share this belief, or has a totally different interpretation of the supernatural, then your supernatural beliefs have no common ground, so any agreement on a given subject, will have to be found in the natural world and natural phenomena that we can agree do exist.

"In the beginning was the word...." when some one finally understands the word we will have heaven on Earth.

Maybe you should ask all of the people who claim that they already understand it!

[Pliny]

Well first of all, it seems like a lot of religious people here proclaim that they are against organized religion, so that's not necessarily an atheist thing.

And explain to me how being against organized religion makes it a cult?

You are correct. I am not particularly fond of organized religion either but I am not an Athiest.

Since that is true being against organized religion does not make it a cult.

But I didn't say Atheism was a cult either, I said it was cult-like. And they do proselytize their belief at every level of society, claiming the authority of science. Men who know, just like the Pope.

I think the word you're looking for is supernatural, because metaphysics is understood as the philosophical attempt to discern first principles, such as the nature of mind, existence, causality, objects and substance, time....it doesn't necessarily mean supernatural phenomena.

Correct again. Metaphysics is as you say. I however used the adjective "Metaphysical". My American Heritage dictionary for metaphysical states: "4a) Immaterial. Incorporeal. Supernatural."

My Winston dictionary states: "3.) above or beyond the material world."

Metaphysics is a subject and is defined as a science.

I agree with you, for purposes of clarity that the term "supernatural" would be a better choice of words for what I was attempting to convey.

Now then, the supernatural may be part of your frame of reference, but it's not part of mine, unless you can provide some way to prove to me in an objective manner that it exists; until then, it remains your personal subjective belief....keeping in mind of course that it may be shared with others of like mind when you gather together at church for example. But, if you're talking to someone who does not share this belief, or has a totally different interpretation of the supernatural, then your supernatural beliefs have no common ground, so any agreement on a given subject, will have to be found in the natural world and natural phenomena that we can agree do exist.

The term exists and is, if you have a concept of it, a part of your frame of reference. You can conceive of things that are considered supernatural by others I am sure, but you would have to make them up. And then it just becomes imagination which is well within the realm of the natural. You believe it is just imagination and requires no further examination. Maybe there is something more to it. Perhaps if you took a good look at your imagination, privy only to yourself, you might realize someone is looking at it. And it doesn't seem to be in plain view for anyone else. I would have to, using your terms and reference deny you had any imagination, unless you can prove to me in an objective manner that it exists, until then it remains your personal subjective belief. There is no proof known to tell me you have one. I know I do and I know some say they don't or describe theirs as entirely different than mine. Are you one of those that don't? Are you going to say that science has "proven" it's existence like it has "proven" the origin of the universe? Did they see one somewhere and measure it physically? What are it's dimensions? Was it located in some protoplasmic electro-chemical cells. Did they find some ocular structure a person uses that views imagination? I seem to understand there is something in physics about light striking a surface and... well you know all that.

Not only is there viewing of the imagination but there has to be interpretation of what is being viewed for understanding. Perhaps some people are viewing their imaginations incorrectly or perhaps need someone to interpret it for them and tell them what they are viewing adding the correct significances and symbols? I think that may have happened.

Well, we don't know everything yet. Perhaps a little home theatre will be found somewhere deep in the recesses of our gray matter. Not that a home theatre would be of any use if someone weren't sitting there to watch and decide what to watch and experience the whole thing. Or should we just pay attention to what's exterior and shut down this seeming objectively unprovable, supernatural home theatre?

Now don't be going and trying to look at who is viewing your imagination. It's you. You will never see yourself unless you think you are an object. You could then look in a mirror.

Edited April 16, 2009 by Pliny

[GostHacked]

Ghost hacked,

Atheism is a cult like following. They are basically against organized religion. The fact that metaphysical phenomena could occur is outside their frame of reference.

"In the beginning was the word...." when some one finally understands the word we will have heaven on Earth.

I don't see any athiest churches going up anywhere. So, this cult you talk about ... I have never witnessed it, being an athiest/agnostic myself.

WIP. Pliney .. great posts .

For many here on MLW, organized religion is a problem to and for most. Organized religion is a mold, or template. If you don't fit in that mold right away, you never will.

My late Oma was a very religious person, but I had never really known that when she was alive. My parents had told me after she had died that she always kept it to herself. To her it was a very personal thing. I guess she did not share it because no one else shared her view on all of it. Or she knew this always would bring about endless debates, so she never said anything.

Athiesm maybe cult-like .. but I will say organized religions are definately are cults.

[cybercoma]

They are basically against organized religion.

Not true. "They" don't exist as it pertains to atheism, since it is merely a label applied to those that reject religious belief. Some people, that may be considered atheists, are against organized religion, others aren't. There is no consistent set of beliefs that you can paint on atheists. The only thing that they have in common is that they live their life as though god doesn't exist.

An overwhelming majority of adults don't believe in Santa Claus. What you're suggesting with atheists would be like saying, "those who don't believe in Santa Claus are capitalists." Sure, some of them are, but that doesn't necessarily have anything to do with Santa; in other words, it's not necessary to not believing in Santa Claus and is therefore not a defining characteristic of those who do not believe in Santa. All that can be said is that they don't believe Santa. It's illogical to take a position on what they stand for based solely upon what they do not believe in.

Edited April 17, 2009 by cybercoma

[WIP]

The term exists and is, if you have a concept of it, a part of your frame of reference. You can conceive of things that are considered supernatural by others I am sure, but you would have to make them up. And then it just becomes imagination which is well within the realm of the natural. You believe it is just imagination and requires no further examination.

Stop right there! Imagination is by its very nature a subjective process. Whatever I choose to imagine, I cannot expect other people to believe it, or even to understand it. Any supernatural phenomena is by its very nature, subjective, since it cannot be reproduced or tested by any sort of scientific examination. If it can be studied and examined, then it moves from the supernatural to the natural world of verifiable phenomena. So, it is not true that the naturalist refuses to examine supernatural claims like miracles, ghosts, psychic powers etc.. The advocates for the supernatural usually refuse any honest examination of their claims, since when they are put under carefully controlled conditions - like the intercessory prayer study conducted for the Templeton Foundation - they are unable to prove anything that can't be explained naturally.

Maybe there is something more to it. Perhaps if you took a good look at your imagination, privy only to yourself, you might realize someone is looking at it. And it doesn't seem to be in plain view for anyone else. I would have to, using your terms and reference deny you had any imagination, unless you can prove to me in an objective manner that it exists, until then it remains your personal subjective belief. There is no proof known to tell me you have one. I know I do and I know some say they don't or describe theirs as entirely different than mine. Are you one of those that don't? Are you going to say that science has "proven" it's existence like it has "proven" the origin of the universe? Did they see one somewhere and measure it physically? What are it's dimensions?

If you mean by imagination - the capacity to form mental images of objects or even abstract concepts, then the objective proof that someone else has an ability to imagine is determined by their level of creativity. And just like intelligence and memory, it is a measure of one of the brain's functional abilities. It is not a supernatural force with its own separate existence.

Was it located in some protoplasmic electro-chemical cells. Did they find some ocular structure a person uses that views imagination? I seem to understand there is something in physics about light striking a surface and... well you know all that.

The average human brain has about 100 billion neurons, each one having up to 10,000 dendrites that connect with other neurons nearby -- so you're talking about a very complex system to try to break down and analyze. And we still don't understand all of the functions of the individual neuron to begin with. The level of complexity makes it unlikely that the brain can be reduced to finding individual neurons with specific functions. Consciousness itself, is more likely an emergent phenomena that manifests when a complex array, like the billions of neurons in the brain's cerebral cortex area are working together. But, each aspect of consciousness cannot be reduced to specific neurons or neural columns.

Not only is there viewing of the imagination but there has to be interpretation of what is being viewed for understanding. Perhaps some people are viewing their imaginations incorrectly or perhaps need someone to interpret it for them and tell them what they are viewing adding the correct significances and symbols? I think that may have happened.

Well, we don't know everything yet. Perhaps a little home theatre will be found somewhere deep in the recesses of our gray matter. Not that a home theatre would be of any use if someone weren't sitting there to watch and decide what to watch and experience the whole thing. Or should we just pay attention to what's exterior and shut down this seeming objectively unprovable, supernatural home theatre?

Imagination aside, to be technical, we do not have a perfect description of any phenomena, whether it's coming to us from sensory information about the outside world or in the other direction, the concept of our own ego or sense of self, which we create almost continuously to provide a necessary illusion of having one unified continuous mind. These are all perceptions that can be subject to illusion or self-deception. So there is nothing that qualifies as absolute truth. Every belief, perception and experience we have could possibly be a delusion.

Nevertheless, there are a range of probabilities that our experiences and perceptions are valid or delusional. The first clue to whether our experience should be trusted is how well it stacks up in the world of shared experiences. In other words, are other people seeing the same thing we see, or drawing the same conclusions from similar evidence that we have. And this gets back to the question of the natural and the supernatural. Anything we are going to call objective evidence is going to have to be verified by others, and have reproducible effects. And that is why everyone, whether they are a naturalist or a believer in supernatural phenomena, has to use the assumption of methodological naturalism when dealing with issues that affect others. We can arrive at some consensus regarding evidence if we are applying the scientific method. But if someone is going to claim that an action is created by an unseen force that is not bound by the natural laws that we understand, there is no common ground for furthering the debate, let alone arriving at some sort of conclusion.

[Pliny]

So there is nothing that qualifies as absolute truth. Every belief, perception and experience we have could possibly be a delusion.

Why do you say every belief, perception and experience is possibly a delusion? Take it to it's conclusion and assume it is all a delusion. Where does that leave you now?

Nevertheless, there are a range of probabilities that our experiences and perceptions are valid or delusional. The first clue to whether our experience should be trusted is how well it stacks up in the world of shared experiences. In other words, are other people seeing the same thing we see, or drawing the same conclusions from similar evidence that we have. And this gets back to the question of the natural and the supernatural. Anything we are going to call objective evidence is going to have to be verified by others, and have reproducible effects. And that is why everyone, whether they are a naturalist or a believer in supernatural phenomena, has to use the assumption of methodological naturalism when dealing with issues that affect others. We can arrive at some consensus regarding evidence if we are applying the scientific method. But if someone is going to claim that an action is created by an unseen force that is not bound by the natural laws that we understand, there is no common ground for furthering the debate, let alone arriving at some sort of conclusion.

What do you mean? You have arrived at a conclusion. The debate for you ended awhile ago. You are now just convincing yourself with further proofs.

Let me just ask you one question. Why do you need another person or thing or scientific experiment to prove you, yourself are a delusion and the only thing that matters is matter?

Using the material universe to prove their is nothing outside(metaphorically speaking) of the material universe is similar to knocking on wood to prove only that there is not nothing there with something that may not be there in the first place.

Might or might not be not untrue.

[Pliny]

I don't see any athiest churches going up anywhere. So, this cult you talk about ... I have never witnessed it, being an athiest/agnostic myself.

What's an athiestic church supposed to look like? How about a lab?

WIP. Pliney .. great posts .

Glad you are enjoying them.

For many here on MLW, organized religion is a problem to and for most. Organized religion is a mold, or template. If you don't fit in that mold right away, you never will.

Organized religion is a problem for me as well. I don't believe in rite and ritual.

And the power that concentrates within the organization tends to prove out Lord Acton - power corrupts.

My late Oma was a very religious person, but I had never really known that when she was alive. My parents had told me after she had died that she always kept it to herself. To her it was a very personal thing. I guess she did not share it because no one else shared her view on all of it. Or she knew this always would bring about endless debates, so she never said anything.

Athiesm maybe cult-like .. but I will say organized religions are definately are cults.

It's interesting to discuss life from a philosophical point of view. A religious point of view is not a personal point of view but more of a common belief point of view that makes unyielding debate because of the idea that that many people can't be wrong. The word Religion derives from Latin meaning "to bind back". I assume that means beliefs that bind people together.

Sorry cybercoma. I don't have time right now to reply to your post. Maybe later.

Have a glorious day!

Edited April 17, 2009 by Pliny

[cybercoma]

My post doesn't really need a reply. I was just pointing out that there is no consistency between atheists and their beliefs, since atheism by definition is about not having a belief in a particular thing (being God).

Edited April 17, 2009 by cybercoma

[ToadBrother]

You called? Aheism is the religion of fear - It's like some fear being in a tight space and others fear being super small with the eternal universe stretching out all around them - atheists are those that do not have the common sense to know they are a little speck of nothing. Once you except the fact that you are a nothing then maybe you can grow to a something - so untill you can live for ever...you may as well believe that eternity has intelligence and you are dependent on it - I would not take the chances that atheists take - to defy and ignore - help..we are frail humans and we need all the help we can get.

First of all; atheism isn't a religion. If atheism is a religion, then so is two-column accounting and the Socratic method. You're just redefining words, with little interest in what they mean, or the views of those who define themselves by the word. In a word; it's dishonest.

As to whether we are a speck of nothing or not, that's irrelevant. My atheism isn't some attempt to make myself feel better, it comes simply from my lack of belief in gods.

But what you're demonstrating is your own fear and ignorance of those who don't share your worldview. Rather than accept the sincerity of atheists, you basically lie about what they are.

[Oleg Bach]

Atheist are either arrogant and overly proud psudeo intellectuals OR just people to stupid to imagine the big picture...AND they are so limited in their perception they can not get a grasp on what endlessness or eternity is - they pigeon hole human existance and try to explain things away--- by saying - there is no design and it's just a huge accident - AND they know better than the rest who foolishly believe maybe there is intelligent life in the universe - Maybe there is a force and mind called God?

[cybercoma]

Atheist are either arrogant and overly proud psudeo intellectuals OR just people to stupid to imagine the big picture...AND they are so limited in their perception they can not get a grasp on what endlessness or eternity is - they pigeon hole human existance and try to explain things away--- by saying - there is no design and it's just a huge accident - AND they know better than the rest who foolishly believe maybe there is intelligent life in the universe - Maybe there is a force and mind called God?

If anything even remote close to this were said about Jews, the post would be labeled antisemitic. It's about atheists though, so it's supposed to be ok? That, in a nutshell, is the problem atheists have and why so many of them are now outspoken.

[GostHacked]

Atheist are either arrogant and overly proud psudeo intellectuals OR just people to stupid to imagine the big picture...AND they are so limited in their perception they can not get a grasp on what endlessness or eternity is -

You are a piece of work Oleg. Not everything needs to be explained to death. Eternity and endlessness is kind of a strange concept to actually vision or think about, religious and atheists alike. I can see the bigger picture, and I still can't find Waldo.

they pigeon hole human existance and try to explain things away--- by saying - there is no design and it's just a huge accident - AND they know better than the rest who foolishly believe maybe there is intelligent life in the universe - Maybe there is a force and mind called God?

Science has not proved or disproved god for the simple fact, the scientific method for proving or disproving something cannot be applied to this god creature. No criterea can be set up for unobjectable observation for god. The only thing we have to evaluate god, is a series of ancient books that have been 'purple monkey dishwashered' in each version.

However, that does not mean that someday evidence may be found to prove god's existance. It just might be found, who knows.. right?? I'd like to see you religious wingnuts even admit of the possibility there is no god. Once that happens, then good debates will happen.

And actually there could be millions of different intelligent life forms out there, science postulates it, but as of this moment, cannot prove it because of our scientific infancy and lack of real exploration of the universe. We seem to need that in order to prove intelligent life out there, or to prove anything in science. But we don't seem to need it when it comes to a beleif and faith in god.