OT: religion

[FlyerInHi]

[quote=scaredyclassic][quote=Blogstar][quote=afx114][quote=FlyerInHi]I hope we have an atheist president one day before I die.[/quote]

I guarantee you’ve had one already, probably multiple/most.[/quote]
Doesn’t really support the notion that atheists have a lot of integrity.[/quote]

I disagree. One can honestly say I believe in G-d, just like I believe in any abstract concept that others generally believe in. I believe in the free market means there is this generally accepted societal concept that that exists, but it’s not a real thing, it’s just an agreed upon way of viewing transactions in thecworld.

like G-d. Something we say exists, in that way that means yes but humans made it up and it meaningless without humans to tell the story.

I believe in G-d in that sense and that the jews are his chosen people. I do.[/quote]

That’s a very good way of putting it. Scaredy is the smartest guy in the room. I really believe that.

Also in the face of oppression, you oftentimes have no choice but to stay in the closet like gays do, or crypto Jews stayed in the closet for centuries.

[zk]

[quote=CA renter]
No, it means that things like the scientific explanation of the origin of the universe and the Biblical explanation are not incompatible. If you could set aside your biases for a moment, read the Biblical version, and then compare it to the scientific version. For many Christians, the Bible is not the actual “word of God” but the telling of the stories of God. Not everything is to be taken literally (such as the earth/universe being created in six Earth days), but if you look at the series of events, they are not out of line with one another. Many people believe that the “days” noted in religious texts simply refer to a period of time.
[/quote]
If you interpret something that outrageously loosely and ignore the parts that don’t match up, then pretty much any story is compatible with the origin of the universe.
[quote=CA renter]
What you seem to miss, zk, is that your belief in the absence of a god/higher power is no different than another person’s belief in the existence of a god/higher power. [/quote]

To believe in an omnipotent, magical being for which there is no evidence is not the same as thinking that the most likely reality is a universe that consists of matter that we can observe and that follows the laws of physics, many of which we can observe and test. We can’t be 100% certain that our observations are correct nor that this matter we appear to be observing actually does exist. But we do have mountains of evidence for it, vs. basically no evidence for an omnipotent being. Why would anyone believe in this omnipotent being? Because they want to. Or because their parents told them to and they’re not very skeptical. Can you think of another reason?

[quote=CA renter]
We DO NOT KNOW what exists outside of our very tiny window of knowledge. To claim that we know, one way or another, is ludicrous.
[/quote]
Who’s claiming to know?

[quote=CA renter]

Our differences seem to lie in the way we think. You seem to think more in terms of black and white, which is why your statements sound more absolute — whether about religion or vaccines, etc. I tend to think much more about all the grey, which is why I so often use terms like “IMHO/IMO,” “it seems,” “I believe,” etc. I will almost never speak in absolutes unless I know something for a fact. This is where you and I differ. [/quote]
I’ve stated in this thread and others that I think nobody knows anything with absolute certainty. But you either ignored or misread that.
[quote=CA renter]

For the record, I am not religious at all. My kids have never stepped foot in a church except for their grandmother’s funeral (not saying that’s either right or wrong). Personally, I’m agnostic and anti-religious because I hate how religion is used to control the masses (which, IMO, is why religion is so dogmatic…it keeps people fighting against one another and creates an easy way for those in power to get people to do what they want). Like scaredy, I acknowledge the benefits of religion in giving people something to help them with their fear of dying or by setting up incentives/disincentives to do the right thing and not do the wrong thing.
[/quote]
Noted for the record. Not sure of its importance.
[quote=CA renter]

But to claim that you KNOW that people who have a different belief system believe in a fantasy — assuming that a lack of evidence is what constitutes a fantasy — then you’re just as guilty as they are.
[/quote]
There you go making stuff up again. It is my opinion that people who believe in an omnipotent being for which there’s no evidence believe in a fantasy. I’ve never presented that as anything but my opinion. I’ve certainly never said I KNOW that they believe in a fantasy.

In any case, there is a lot of evidence for what I think is most likely true. That is not true for believers in gods.

[quote=CA renter]

There are so many things about the universe that we don’t understand — our knowledge is infinitesimally small
[/quote]
I disagree that our knowledge is infinitesimal. While there is a lot we don’t know, there is a lot we do know.

[quote=CA renter]

— we cannot claim one way or another without sounding foolish.
[/quote]
I agree that claiming anything with certainty is foolish. But, for the 11th time, I’m not claiming anything with certainty.
That being said, given the knowledge we do have, to believe in an omnipotent being for which there’s no evidence, and to base your life on it, would not, in almost all cases, happen without a strong desire to do so.
[quote=CA renter]
Are there other intelligent life forms in the universe? Statistically speaking, probably so. Could they be so much more intelligent than we are that if early humans have had contact with them, they might refer to them as a sort of god? As you probably know, there are many examples around the world where primitive people seemed to indicate visitors from space.
[/quote]
A superior intelligence is likely and also completely different from an omnipotent being. Sure, early humans could’ve referred to extraterrestrials as gods. Unless those extraterrestrials actually were gods, they were wrong about that. So I’m not sure what your point is.

[quote=CA renter]

The options are endless. None of us knows anything for a fact, so we all believe in a fantasy of some sort unless we just acknowledge all the possibilities and admit that we do not know.
[/quote]
Right. But how is the guy whose god is Goldie or the guy who has actual, diagnosable paranoid delusions or the guy who took acid living a fantasy any more than a christian or a muslim or the guy who worships zeus or any of the other thousands of gods whom humans have worshiped? There’s no evidence for any of those gods, nor for what the schizophrenic or the drug user sees, and I don’t know how one would say any of those gods or visions is less ludicrous than the others.

[zk]

[quote=flu][quote=afx114][quote=flu]What is wrong with just ignoring people? Yes, you might not like hearing all this religious stuff, but they have every right to practice what they believe as long as it doesn’t encroach on your right and doesn’t compromise someone(s) safety.[/quote]

Well that’s the answer right there then, isn’t it? Currently seven state constitutions literally ban atheists from office. That makes it hard for me to ignore.[/quote]

What about the other 43 states? If it was 43 states that ban atheists, then I would agree with you that it’s a widespread problem. If at all, it seems to suggest we’re already making progress that there are only 7 crazy states left. There are probably more states that oppose same sex marriage then there are states that ban atheism. Not that I’m suggesting it’s right to oppose same sex marriage or to ban atheists. But I hardly call this widespread oppression.[/quote]

Would you be as nonchalant, flu, if 7 states banned Asians from office?

[zk]

All this talk about atheists and where the fit in is why we need a new word for the agnostic whose beliefs are similar to mine. I would wager there are more like me than there are atheists.

Say you’re a…let’s say freethinker. I’ll use that word to describe myself and people with beliefs similar to mine, although it’s not perfect and I think with some effort I’ll come up with a better one. You think that the idea of god is ludicrous. You think that the likelihood of god is small enough to be easily and completely dismissed from consideration. But you know that you don’t know enough about the universe to be certain.

If you say you’re an agnostic, people get the wrong idea about you. They think that you think that there’s a decent chance there’s a god, but you’re not sure. And it would be cumbersome and awkward for you, starting from there, to convey just how you feel about the likelihood of god.

If you say you’re an atheist, but you only say it because most people’s idea of where you stand will be way off unless you use that word, then people (thinkers, anyway) will say, (not without merit), “your certainty is as ridiculous as the religious believer.” And they’ll also lump you in with the militant atheists with whom you’d rather not be lumped.

If you say, “I’m a (insert better word than “freethinker” here),” then people would know what you mean. And, more importantly, if the word gains popularity, all the [freethinkers] will identify with it, and identify themselves thusly and, if there are as many of us as I think there are, they will, in my little fantasy here, all come out of the closet and become a force for reason.

I’ve considered this for a while, but I’ve never really put any effort into coining this word. I’m going to start giving it some effort now. Anyone out there have any ideas?

[CA renter]

[quote=scaredyclassic][quote=CA renter][quote=FlyerInHi]Extremes, really?

I feel like there’s something very wrong when every politician has to end a speech with God bless the USA. I’d rather they wish me a good evening.

Plus believers think the one must find God for salvation. So even if they never talk about religion, they silently believe that God is the only answer and that excludes atheism. So why can’t atheists similarly exclude God?[/quote]

I agree with you about making religion a public spectacle.

Atheists can exclude God or a higher power, BTW.[/quote]

pretty rare i wager to find a dumber ;ess sophisticated religiious person who doesnt find an atheist to not be an affront to all that is decent in this world.

if atheists stay hidden, then religios people can go on thinking aTHEISTS ARE BAD PEOPLE. KINDA LIKE BEING A CLOSETED GAY. IF YOU GET TO KNOW A HOMOSEXUAL YOU WILL PROBABLY BE LESS OPPOSED TO GAY MARRIAGE. IF GAYS ARE ALL CLOSETED, SOCIETY WILL ASSUME THEY ARE A BUNCH OF PERVERTS. ATHEISTS ARE THE gays of this century…[/quote]

And many dumb, unsophisticated atheists (yes, they most certainly do exist) find religious people to be an affront to all that is decent in the world.

We’re not talking about dumber, less sophisticated religious people, though; at least, I’m not. If we match peer to peer, I’m willing to bet that atheists and religious people range from equally obnoxious and excluding of others to equally pleasant and tolerant.

I’ve known many Christians and atheists, and both groups have their good, bad, and neutral. I’ve seen no difference in the level of obnoxiousness where the extreme ones are concerned.

[Coronita]

[quote=zk]
Would you be as nonchalant, flu, if 7 states banned Asians from office?[/quote]

I think you mistaken my opinion here, not that my opinion really matters.

Nowhere did i say this was acceptable, and I would never support these 7 states viewpoint. But I don’t consider this to be a “crisis” to the extent that it’s worse than others in other categories have it, because frankly there are bigger fish to fry. We aren’t even close to giving equal rights to gay men and women yet.

And tongue and cheek. You can always pretend to be non-atheist. It’s not exactly easy to pretend not to be asian, as much as I would like to say changing my kid’s last name would increase my kid’s chances of being fairly admitted to a college of their choice.

[zk]

[quote=flu] You can always pretend to be non-atheist. It’s not exactly easy to pretend not to be asian, [/quote]

Good point.

[CA renter]

[quote=zk]All this talk about atheists and where the fit in is why we need a new word for the agnostic whose beliefs are similar to mine. I would wager there are more like me than there are atheists.

Say you’re a…let’s say freethinker. I’ll use that word to describe myself and people with beliefs similar to mine, although it’s not perfect and I think with some effort I’ll come up with a better one. You think that the idea of god is ludicrous. You think that the likelihood of god is small enough to be easily and completely dismissed from consideration. But you know that you don’t know enough about the universe to be certain.

If you say you’re an agnostic, people get the wrong idea about you. They think that you think that there’s a decent chance there’s a god, but you’re not sure. And it would be cumbersome and awkward for you, starting from there, to convey just how you feel about the likelihood of god.

If you say you’re an atheist, but you only say it because most people’s idea of where you stand will be way off unless you use that word, then people (thinkers, anyway) will say, (not without merit), “your certainty is as ridiculous as the religious believer.” And they’ll also lump you in with the militant atheists with whom you’d rather not be lumped.

If you say, “I’m a (insert better word than “freethinker” here),” then people would know what you mean. And, more importantly, if the word gains popularity, all the [freethinkers] will identify with it, and identify themselves thusly and, if there are as many of us as I think there are, they will, in my little fantasy here, all come out of the closet and become a force for reason.

I’ve considered this for a while, but I’ve never really put any effort into coining this word. I’m going to start giving it some effort now. Anyone out there have any ideas?[/quote]

Agnostic atheism, also called atheistic agnosticism, is a philosophical position that encompasses both atheism and agnosticism. Agnostic atheists are atheistic because they do not hold a belief in the existence of any deity and agnostic because they claim that the existence of a deity is either unknowable in principle or currently unknown in fact. The agnostic atheist may be contrasted with the agnostic theist, who believes that one or more deities exist but claims that the existence or nonexistence of such is unknown or cannot be known.[1][2][3]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnostic_atheism

—————–

Much respect to you, zk, for trying to work with me on this conversation. Thanks for trying to tone down the personal attacks, too.

It’s likely that our differences not only stem from how we see the world (black-white vs. grey), but also because we seem to hold very different beliefs about our knowledge of the universe. You seem to think that we know quite a bit (and we do), whereas I think that what we do know is an extremely tiny piece of what exists. Again, we can’t even really account for all the things that are not visible, audible, etc. to us because of our human limitations. Even with technology, we can only sense what we believe is there, based on our existing knowledge.

I may be far off, but I believe that the possibilities are endless. IMO, it’s unlikely that we will have the answers to these questions for many, many generations…if at all, in this world.

And I don’t think that an extraterrestrial being is necessarily separate from what people conceive of as a god/higher power. After all, the Biblical God existed before the Earth/universe, so he/she/it would indeed be an extraterrestrial being or power if he/she/it exists.

[Coronita]

Here’s my take on religious people.

You have a small percentage of religious people that are wacko nut jobs that screw it up for the rest of the religious people. Unfortunately, that small percentage tends to be the most visible and most vocal and have the most extreme viewpoints (my way or the highway). And for the vast body of folks that don’t believe in a religion, obviously it rubs people in the wrong way. And then people tend to generalize every religious person is a wacko nut job.

It’s really no different than watching the riots in Baltimore, seeing some of the looters/rioters are black, and then erroneously generalizing that every black person is a looter/rioter, when clearly that isn’t the case.

[CA renter]

[quote=flu]Here’s my take on religious people.

You have a small percentage of religious people that are wacko nut jobs that screw it up for the rest of the religious people. Unfortunately, that small percentage tends to be the most visible and most vocal and have the most extreme viewpoints (my way or the highway). And for the vast body of folks that don’t believe in a religion, obviously it rubs people in the wrong way. And then people tend to generalize every religious person is a wacko nut job.

It’s really no different than watching the riots in Baltimore, seeing some of the looters/rioters are black, and then erroneously generalizing that every black person is a looter/rioter, when clearly that isn’t the case.[/quote]

+1 flu

[scaredyclassic]

[quote=CA renter][quote=scaredyclassic][quote=CA renter][quote=FlyerInHi]Extremes, really?

I feel like there’s something very wrong when every politician has to end a speech with God bless the USA. I’d rather they wish me a good evening.

Plus believers think the one must find God for salvation. So even if they never talk about religion, they silently believe that God is the only answer and that excludes atheism. So why can’t atheists similarly exclude God?[/quote]

I agree with you about making religion a public spectacle.

Atheists can exclude God or a higher power, BTW.[/quote]

pretty rare i wager to find a dumber ;ess sophisticated religiious person who doesnt find an atheist to not be an affront to all that is decent in this world.

if atheists stay hidden, then religios people can go on thinking aTHEISTS ARE BAD PEOPLE. KINDA LIKE BEING A CLOSETED GAY. IF YOU GET TO KNOW A HOMOSEXUAL YOU WILL PROBABLY BE LESS OPPOSED TO GAY MARRIAGE. IF GAYS ARE ALL CLOSETED, SOCIETY WILL ASSUME THEY ARE A BUNCH OF PERVERTS. ATHEISTS ARE THE gays of this century…[/quote]

And many dumb, unsophisticated atheists (yes, they most certainly do exist) find religious people to be an affront to all that is decent in the world.

We’re not talking about dumber, less sophisticated religious people, though; at least, I’m not. If we match peer to peer, I’m willing to bet that atheists and religious people range from equally obnoxious and excluding of others to equally pleasant and tolerant.

I’ve known many Christians and atheists, and both groups have their good, bad, and neutral. I’ve seen no difference in the level of obnoxiousness where the extreme ones are concerned.[/quote]

perhaps. but the obnoxious superior atheist is a relatively new phenomenon. the obnoxious and dangerous religious viewpoint is pretty old.

im wondering how tht came about. when i was a kid, i dont recall religious people being so in your face, so proseyletizing, so demanding of public presence. kind of lik e veterans, they were proud and in the background.

as religiions got pushier and more needy, maybe atheists repsonded with “back the hell off?’ Im talking about the last 40 years in the usa only….

[scaredyclassic]

Americans judge atheists as more immoral than religious people. even atheists themselves do.

http://www.psmag.com/books-and-culture/americans-intuitively-judge-atheists-immoral-79095

this isnt a an odd position among a small minority of religious people. the general perception is atheists are less trustworthy. probably similar to how all gay people were perceived as perverts in the 50s.

i think thats worthy of pushback. not sure if or how this nation ever gets to acceptabnce of atheists as equals. i doubt that will ever happen. we’ll have a gay black woman before that, as long as she loves the lord.

[NotCranky]

[quote=flu]Here’s my take on religious people.

You have a small percentage of religious people that are wacko nut jobs that screw it up for the rest of the religious people. Unfortunately, that small percentage tends to be the most visible and most vocal and have the most extreme viewpoints (my way or the highway). And for the vast body of folks that don’t believe in a religion, obviously it rubs people in the wrong way. And then people tend to generalize every religious person is a wacko nut job.

It’s really no different than watching the riots in Baltimore, seeing some of the looters/rioters are black, and then erroneously generalizing that every black person is a looter/rioter, when clearly that isn’t the case.[/quote]
For many people it goes way beyond the wackos, They are personally offended by the church of their youth, they resent religions history, resent and fear religions power of control over humans in the present.( and the presidents) . They see entire churches are scandalous , people using ,money making machines, even the established acceptable brands. The pushy born agains are the least of it, more to be pitied for their obvious desperation than anything.

[NotCranky]

Scaredy, You are flip flopping again. Once atheists should be quiet and not rock the boat then they should demand that society remove the negative stigma.

[NotCranky]

Religions is scary, I can’t blame people for wanting to see it neutralized.

[Author]

Posts