If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   North Carolina: "We must lift the ban on religion in public places" Constituent: "So then would you support Islamic prayers being said before meetings?". Legislator: "Of course not, that would be terrorism"   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 494
    More: Asinine, Muslim prayers, Michele Presnell, North Carolina, Islamic, News & Observer, Carl Paladino, Congressional Progressive Caucus, establishment of religion  
•       •       •

15040 clicks; posted to Main » on 11 Apr 2013 at 6:13 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



494 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-04-11 05:28:03 PM  

ciberido: You're wrong.   Agnosticism is the absence of faith in gods.


No. Agnosticism is the view that it is unknown or unknowable. AFAIK most atheists are agnostics, IOW they don't KNOW there is no god, they just don't believe in them.  If you haven't looked at  RobSeace's chart, you should. Take the time to understand it.

Atheism is the certainty that gods do not exist.

No. Atheism is the absence of belief in gods.  Some atheists might be certain that there are no gods, but most just don't see any reason to believe in them.

I wonder where you get your information.

And, as I said earlier, it's a life stance, which does not make it a religion.

Not doing something (believing in gods, collecting stamps ...) is not a life stance.
 
2013-04-11 05:32:27 PM  

Karac: One of my fondest dreams is to learn to say the Lord's Prayer in the original Aramaic, or even just Hebrew - you know, just like Jesus would do.

And then go to a local school board meeting, ask if I can say a prayer before we start, and see how long it takes before I have to switch to english to yell "DON'T TASE ME BRO!"


Avvon d-bish-maiya, nith-qaddash shim-mukh.
Tih-teh mal-chootukh. Nih-weh çiw-yanukh:
ei-chana d'bish-maiya: ap b'ar-ah.
Haw lan lakh-ma d'soonqa-nan yoo-mana.
O'shwooq lan kho-bein:
ei-chana d'ap kh'nan shwiq-qan l'khaya-ween.
Oo'la te-ellan l'niss-yoona:
il-la paç-çan min beesha.
Mid-til de-di-lukh hai mal-choota
oo khai-la oo tush-bookh-ta
l'alam al-mein. Aa-meen.


you can hear it sung here
 
2013-04-11 05:33:28 PM  
img202.imageshack.us

Atheism is the antonym of religion.
 
2013-04-11 05:34:34 PM  

ciberido: Atheism is not a lack of belief.  Agnosticism is.  Why do you insist on confusing those two terms?


Atheism = A - Theos. God with a negating prefix.
Agnosticism = A - gnostikos. Knowledge with a negating prefix.
 
2013-04-11 05:37:52 PM  

neongoats: What I do give a shiat about, is freedom. Freedom to think you are a dickhole, freedom to worship something, freedom to not worship something. You see, I'm not trying to legislate Christianity out of existence. I'm not trying to drive worshippers into the sea with fire and pitchforks.(amusing as that might be) And I'm not constantly trying to get hurpers to legislate my lack of religion into law.

Hint: if you want freedom for Jesus, you damn well better support freedom for Behelifet, freedom for Thor, freedom for Allah, and freedom for atheists to think all of the above are delusions. Anything less is unacceptable.


Same here, I want religious freedom for all.  When have I ever said otherwise, please cite it.  Please quote from any Fark thread, EVER, where I have opposed freedom of religion.

Why the hell do people keep making a strawman of me in this thread to say I'm opposing freedom of religion by saying that Atheism is a religion?  I never said that.  If anything, it means you're quite free to be an Atheist.

I don't care if you worship Jesus, Allah, Yahweh, Buddha, Vishnu, Shang Ti, Mithras, Odin & Thor, Athena, Isis, The Horned God, the God and Goddess, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, or whatever.

Halleluiah, Allahu Akbar, Shalom, Namaste, Blessed Be, Ramen, whatever.

I'll laugh at you if you worship L. Ron Hubbard, but I won't stop you from doing anything with it unless you're breaking some other laws though.

Really, I keep wondering where this disconnect is coming from that I'm arguing one thing (that Atheism as practiced in the modern day meets the definition of a religious belief system and practices) but others act like I'm arguing something completely unrelated (that I oppose freedom of religion and want Christianity as a state religion, or something).

Please, PLEASE provide an actual quote from an actual post I've EVER made on Fark opposing freedom of religion.  Feel free to Google through old posts from all the years I've been on here, I certainly can't think of any time I've ever said anything like that.
 
2013-04-11 05:45:33 PM  

Silverstaff: Calling me a liar? For a belief system built on logic and reason, you sure are getting emotional.


Not emotional at all. Just stating a fact.

You continue to characterize all atheists by the actions of a tiny few. This is dishonest. You are a liar.
 
2013-04-11 05:52:23 PM  

Silverstaff: Atheism is a religion


This is the opposite of the truth.

Other things that are true by your logic:

-Christianity involves handling snakes during worship service
-Islam is terrorist organization
-Buddhism requires you to light yourself on fire
-Catholicism condones child sex abuse (okay, maybe I should have left this one off the list)
 
2013-04-11 06:06:44 PM  

Silverstaff: (that Atheism as practiced in the modern day meets the definition of a religious belief system and practices)


By your intensely open and vague definition, just about any gathering of 3 people could be a religion.

Your kids softball team: meets all of your criteria.. RELIGION!
Stamp and coin collecting club: meets all of your criteria... RELIGION!
Tupperware party throwing old house biddy: meets all of your criteria... RELIGION!

Lacking a belief in something isn't a religion. No matter how many times you repeat yourself with big walls of texts, it doesn't make it so.

Your fervent, fiery eyed fundamentalism about how being atheist is a religion might be a religion though. I mean, you are believing false things intentionally. Passionately defending that belief, and insistent that you are being persecuted for your beliefs.
 
2013-04-11 06:29:12 PM  

neongoats: By your intensely open and vague definition, just about any gathering of 3 people could be a religion.


No, I'm going by the definition in the Comparative Theology textbook I used in college.  Theology is a bit of a hobby of mine.

Religion is something that:
1. Describes the relationship between mankind and the sacred and divine.
2. Expresses that description through social interaction, practices, symbols, and other intellectual and cultural forms.
3. Provides a path of personal improvement or transformation.

Note that this does NOT include Apple as a religion, or a sports team as a religion, or the other strawmen thrown out in this thread, because none of them meet the first part of that description, since none discuss the relationship of humanity to the divine.  Atheists do discuss that relationship though, they deny it exists by denying the existence of the sacred and divine.

As to the second part, as I noted many times, in those "walls of text" you like to deride, there is plenty of social mimicry by atheists of other religious forms such as worship services, sacraments and symbols, not to mention the many books discussing the subject.

As for a path of personal transformation, given how the typical dogma seems to be something like "we're more logical, become an atheist and become a better person" or the Dawkins-sponsored pro-Atheism bus-ads that say "There probably is no God, so stop worrying and enjoy life", seem to say that your life will be improved by adopting Atheism, which makes it pass the third prong of that test.

I'm even willing to admit that not every atheist is religiously atheistic, but I am quite adamant that there is such a thing as religious atheism.  Just saying you don't believe in God and that's it, being an atheist, yeah, that's not a religion.  When you add in atheistic church services, ordinations, "unbaptism", symbols, that's turning your belief system into a religion.  When you're making a point of angrily, vehemently defending your lack of religion on an online message board, you're definitely at least in a grey area as to whether or not it's a religion.
 
2013-04-11 06:41:36 PM  

Silverstaff: neongoats: By your intensely open and vague definition, just about any gathering of 3 people could be a religion.

No, I'm going by the definition in the Comparative Theology textbook I used in college.  Theology is a bit of a hobby of mine.

Religion is something that:
1. Describes the relationship between mankind and the sacred and divine.
2. Expresses that description through social interaction, practices, symbols, and other intellectual and cultural forms.
3. Provides a path of personal improvement or transformation.

Note that this does NOT include Apple as a religion, or a sports team as a religion, or the other strawmen thrown out in this thread, because none of them meet the first part of that description, since none discuss the relationship of humanity to the divine.  Atheists do discuss that relationship though, they deny it exists by denying the existence of the sacred and divine.

As to the second part, as I noted many times, in those "walls of text" you like to deride, there is plenty of social mimicry by atheists of other religious forms such as worship services, sacraments and symbols, not to mention the many books discussing the subject.

As for a path of personal transformation, given how the typical dogma seems to be something like "we're more logical, become an atheist and become a better person" or the Dawkins-sponsored pro-Atheism bus-ads that say "There probably is no God, so stop worrying and enjoy life", seem to say that your life will be improved by adopting Atheism, which makes it pass the third prong of that test.

I'm even willing to admit that not every atheist is religiously atheistic, but I am quite adamant that there is such a thing as religious atheism.  Just saying you don't believe in God and that's it, being an atheist, yeah, that's not a religion.  When you add in atheistic church services, ordinations, "unbaptism", symbols, that's turning your belief system into a religion.  When you're making a point of angrily, vehemently defe ...


But only a tiny fraction of athiests do this.  So when you say atheism is a religion, I can use the same logic to condemn any follower of the Abrahamic god as terrorists, because a few of his followers are.  I realize that doing so would be intellectually dishonest.  The same can not be said about you, apparently.
 
2013-04-11 07:41:19 PM  
"I'm an Atheist because I believe God doesn't exist, not because I have a score to settle with him." - Adam Carolla
 
2013-04-11 07:56:30 PM  
Actually, I'm liking the path Silverstaff is mapping out...

The next time someone conflates athiesim with genocidal dictators, ask them about this:

i48.tinypic.com

It's almost like all atrocities *ARE* associated with religion after all.
 
2013-04-11 08:20:04 PM  

maxheck: Actually, I'm liking the path Silverstaff is mapping out...

The next time someone conflates athiesim with genocidal dictators, ask them about this:

[i48.tinypic.com image 640x1188]

It's almost like all atrocities *ARE* associated with religion after all.


Except that Stalinism and Maoism are not religions, however, both Stalin and Mao were avowed atheists and spread atheism in their nations.  Stalin founded the League of Militant Atheists, publicly stated there was no God and made atheism the official belief system of the USSR.  Atheism was a core tenet of Marxist-Leninist philosophy.  One of the major goals of the Cultural Revolution was the complete eradication of religion from the PRC.

If you're going to call Stalinism and Maoism religions, then Atheism is definitely a religion.  Stalinism and Maoism would essentially be denominations of Atheism.  Obviously not every atheist is or was Stalinist/Maoist, however every obedient Stalinist/Maoist by definition was Atheist.

You want to talk atrocities committed in the 20th century the USSR and PRC?  Okay, just remember, they were done in the name of an officially Atheist state, including the imprisonment in gulags of Russian Orthodox clergy purely on the grounds of their religious faith and the destruction of Orthodox churches .

So yes, please, if you want to talk about the role, drop that inaccurate little chart there that pretends that nothing bad has ever been done in the name of Atheism, and line it up that the atrocities of Stalin and Mao can be listed as atrocities done in the name of Atheism.
 
2013-04-11 08:32:53 PM  
Silverstaff:

maxheck: Actually, I'm liking the path Silverstaff is mapping out...

The next time someone conflates athiesim with genocidal dictators, ask them about this:

[i48.tinypic.com image 640x1188]

It's almost like all atrocities *ARE* associated with religion after all.

Except that Stalinism and Maoism are not religions, however, both Stalin and Mao were avowed atheists and spread atheism in their nations. Stalin founded the League of Militant Atheists, publicly stated there was no God and made atheism the official belief system of the USSR. Atheism was a core tenet of Marxist-Leninist philosophy. One of the major goals of the Cultural Revolution was the complete eradication of religion from the PRC.

If you're going to call Stalinism and Maoism religions, then Atheism is definitely a religion. Stalinism and Maoism would essentially be denominations of Atheism. Obviously not every atheist is or was Stalinist/Maoist, however every obedient Stalinist/Maoist by definition was Atheist.

You want to talk atrocities committed in the 20th century the USSR and PRC? Okay, just remember, they were done in the name of an officially Atheist state, including the imprisonment in gulags of Russian Orthodox clergy purely on the grounds of their religious faith and the destruction of Orthodox churches .

So yes, please, if you want to talk about the role, drop that inaccurate little chart there that pretends that nothing bad has ever been done in the name of Atheism, and line it up that the atrocities of Stalin and Mao can be listed as atrocities done in the name of Atheism.


Let me quote someone with one word changed and see if you agree with him:

"Sorry, Atheists Statists, collectively, have derped out and created a full-bore religious belief system around denying religion, complete with congregations and worship services, dogmatic texts, symbols and rites/rituals.

If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, looks like a duck, it's a duck. You've got symbols, texts defining your beliefs, places where you congregate to share your beliefs, groups of people of like belief who gather together out of this belief, rites and rituals performed by these people in these places, and symbols to define and publicly proclaim your beliefs with, and have even had violent militants.

If it sounds like a religion, talks like a religion, and acts like a religion, it's a religion."


Sound familiar?

Methinks you would like to have it both ways. Just because the name of the god is "The State" rather than "Yahweh" or whatever god you worship doesn't mean it isn't a religion.

Religious behavior is based on some deep-rooted stuff in the human mind and society. It works. The first thing you do when your religion wants to evangelize is to shut out all other religions. "Thou shalt have no other god before me." This wasn't lost on Stalin any more than it was on the writers of the Torah.
 
2013-04-11 08:40:05 PM  
The North Carolina measure responds to the ACLU suit by declaring that each state is "sovereign" and no federal court can prevent a state from "from making laws respecting an establishment of religion." Though Warren, one of the bill's authors, told HuffPost Live that the measure was not seeking to create a state religion, the drafted legislation would clearly allow for such an action.

The court only has to tell you that the damned US Constitution says "NO!"  If you don't like that, well then this really is a case of "GTFO!"
 
2013-04-11 08:41:59 PM  

Silverstaff: made atheism the official belief system of the USSR


Ummm...
 
2013-04-11 09:33:19 PM  

vrax: Silverstaff: made atheism the official belief system of the USSR

Ummm...


Yeah, after further review, we're gonna have to assign him an

i.qkme.me
 
2013-04-11 09:43:14 PM  

vrax: Silverstaff: made atheism the official belief system of the USSR

Ummm...


You want citations for that?

http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/128810?uid=3739256&uid=2&uid=4 &s id=21101890978473
"The Soviet policy of state atheism (gosateism), albeit inconsistently applied, is a major goal of the official ideology"
Protest For Religious Rights in the USSR: Charateristics and Consequences by David Kowalewski, Russia Review, Volume 39, Number 4, October 1980

http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1905/dec/03.htm
"Religion is one of the forms of spiritual oppression which everywhere weighs down heavily upon the masses of the people, over burdened by their perpetual work for others, by want and isolation... Those who toil and live in want all their lives are taught by religion to be submissive and patient while here on earth, and to take comfort in the hope of a heavenly reward... Religion is opium for the people. Religion is a sort of spiritual booze, in which the slaves of capital drown their human image, their demand for a life more or less worthy of man."
Socialism and Religion by Vladimir Lenin, Novaya Zhizn No. 28, December 3, 1905

http://books.google.com/books?id=EGZWrMIXlPAC&lpg=PP1&ots=0ySqufbAvG &d q=ussr%20religion%20policy&lr&pg=PR6#v=onepage&q&f=false
"A fundamental tenet of Marxism-Leninism is that religion will ultimately disappear.  If it began to seem unlikely to do so, the authorities would naturally adopt measures to promote its disappearance, since its continued prsence was a rebuke to the claims of the ideology."
Religious Policy in the Soviet Union by Sabrina Ramet, Cambridge University Press 1993

You do realize the whole reason the national motto of the US was changed from "E Pluribus Unum" to "In God We Trust" and that "Under God" was added to the Pledge of Allegiance in the 1950's was specifically to counterpoint the official atheist stance of the USSR during the cold war?  The modern right-wing "Christian State" derp traces back to trying to make the US look like a Christian religious entity to serve as a counterpoint to the atheistic USSR.
 
2013-04-11 10:22:53 PM  
Silverstaff

You do realize the whole reason the national motto of the US was changed from "E Pluribus Unum" to "In God We Trust" and that "Under God" was added to the Pledge of Allegiance in the 1950's was specifically to counterpoint the official atheist stance of the USSR during the cold war? The modern right-wing "Christian State" derp traces back to trying to make the US look like a Christian religious entity to serve as a counterpoint to the atheistic USSR.

And many of the stories in the Christian Bible were slams on competing religions or political systems.

Again, that's the first thing you do when you're setting up a religion. Take a look at one of the newer ones like Scientology. What are they famous for?

Christianity wants Islam to dissapear. Islam wants Christianity to dissapear... and *everybody* hates the Jews... :)
 
2013-04-11 10:27:09 PM  

natas6.0: yes yes yes, I understand all the impotent rage against the mean old religious people who like to pray before a meeting.
yes they're ignorant
yes they say stupid crap
but I really dislike that we have to accomodate  all the things
if you don't like something, you have the freedom to walk the fark out
THAT seems more like the america I used to like


Why? Don't the Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, Atheists, satan worshippers, Wiccans, Taoists and such in the state pay taxes? As such, don't they deserve equal representation in their state and local government, and more importantly, what that government does in their name?
The america you used to like, if it ever existed, is gone. Everyone lives here, and everyone gets a say. You would do well to remember that, and so would the republicans.
 
2013-04-11 10:28:39 PM  

spongeboob: On the plus side I would love to see the battle between different sects of Christianity to be the official state religion.


If you really want to see heads asplode, make the official Christian religion Catholicism...
 
2013-04-11 10:45:03 PM  
i14.photobucket.com
 
2013-04-11 10:50:54 PM  

Silverstaff: vrax: Silverstaff: made atheism the official belief system of the USSR

Ummm...

You want citations for that?

http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/128810?uid=3739256&uid=2&uid=4 &s id=21101890978473
"The Soviet policy of state atheism (gosateism), albeit inconsistently applied, is a major goal of the official ideology"
Protest For Religious Rights in the USSR: Charateristics and Consequences by David Kowalewski, Russia Review, Volume 39, Number 4, October 1980

http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1905/dec/03.htm
"Religion is one of the forms of spiritual oppression which everywhere weighs down heavily upon the masses of the people, over burdened by their perpetual work for others, by want and isolation... Those who toil and live in want all their lives are taught by religion to be submissive and patient while here on earth, and to take comfort in the hope of a heavenly reward... Religion is opium for the people. Religion is a sort of spiritual booze, in which the slaves of capital drown their human image, their demand for a life more or less worthy of man."
Socialism and Religion by Vladimir Lenin, Novaya Zhizn No. 28, December 3, 1905

http://books.google.com/books?id=EGZWrMIXlPAC&lpg=PP1&ots=0ySqufbAvG &d q=ussr%20religion%20policy&lr&pg=PR6#v=onepage&q&f=false
"A fundamental tenet of Marxism-Leninism is that religion will ultimately disappear.  If it began to seem unlikely to do so, the authorities would naturally adopt measures to promote its disappearance, since its continued prsence was a rebuke to the claims of the ideology."
Religious Policy in the Soviet Union by Sabrina Ramet, Cambridge University Press 1993

You do realize the whole reason the national motto of the US was changed from "E Pluribus Unum" to "In God We Trust" and that "Under God" was added to the Pledge of Allegiance in the 1950's was specifically to counterpoint the official atheist stance of the USSR during the cold war?  The modern right-wing "Christian State" derp traces back t ...


Sorry, I'm not disputing the establishment of atheism as policy.  I'm poking at the "belief system" part.
 
2013-04-11 10:53:50 PM  

Silverstaff: "The Soviet policy of state atheism (gosateism), albeit inconsistently applied, is a major goal of the official ideology"
Protest For Religious Rights in the USSR: Charateristics and Consequences by David Kowalewski, Russia Review, Volume 39, Number 4, October 1980


Roight, guv.  A system that sets up Dear Leader as a god is atheist.
 
2013-04-11 11:23:52 PM  

TheGregiss: vudukungfu: Religion is like guns and penises.
It's OK to have one.
It's OK to be proud of it.
Don't whip it out and wave it around at a polling place, a legislature, a school, a bank, the mall, etc. etc.

Fark atheists™ take note as this applies to you.


I have been an atheist all my life. No one knows I'm an atheist until some bible thumping asshole decides that they want to do something insanely stupid, like try to change laws so that they are in line with their particular delusion.
In essence, believe in whatever you want to, just don't try and change the rules so that I have to follow your beliefs. Leave people alone to live their lives, and you live yours, capice?
 
2013-04-11 11:39:56 PM  

rewind2846: TheGregiss: vudukungfu: Religion is like guns and penises.
It's OK to have one.
It's OK to be proud of it.
Don't whip it out and wave it around at a polling place, a legislature, a school, a bank, the mall, etc. etc.

Fark atheists™ take note as this applies to you.

I have been an atheist all my life. No one knows I'm an atheist until some bible thumping asshole decides that they want to do something insanely stupid, like try to change laws so that they are in line with their particular delusion.
In essence, believe in whatever you want to, just don't try and change the rules so that I have to follow your beliefs. Leave people alone to live their lives, and you live yours, capice?


Exactly!  The vast majority of atheists here on Fark and elsewhere typically get fired up when some assclown decides to interject their religious crap into a place it doesn't belong and/or in a way that is unacceptable.  It's pretty damned rare that I see some atheist just "proselytizing".
 
2013-04-12 12:19:17 AM  

vrax: rewind2846: TheGregiss: vudukungfu: Religion is like guns and penises.
It's OK to have one.
It's OK to be proud of it.
Don't whip it out and wave it around at a polling place, a legislature, a school, a bank, the mall, etc. etc.

Fark atheists™ take note as this applies to you.

I have been an atheist all my life. No one knows I'm an atheist until some bible thumping asshole decides that they want to do something insanely stupid, like try to change laws so that they are in line with their particular delusion.
In essence, believe in whatever you want to, just don't try and change the rules so that I have to follow your beliefs. Leave people alone to live their lives, and you live yours, capice?

Exactly!  The vast majority of atheists here on Fark and elsewhere typically get fired up when some assclown decides to interject their religious crap into a place it doesn't belong and/or in a way that is unacceptable.  It's pretty damned rare that I see some atheist just "proselytizing".


Did you miss the Rick Warren son "suicide thread?"
 
2013-04-12 12:23:17 AM  

Lsherm: vrax: rewind2846: TheGregiss: vudukungfu: Religion is like guns and penises.
It's OK to have one.
It's OK to be proud of it.
Don't whip it out and wave it around at a polling place, a legislature, a school, a bank, the mall, etc. etc.

Fark atheists™ take note as this applies to you.

I have been an atheist all my life. No one knows I'm an atheist until some bible thumping asshole decides that they want to do something insanely stupid, like try to change laws so that they are in line with their particular delusion.
In essence, believe in whatever you want to, just don't try and change the rules so that I have to follow your beliefs. Leave people alone to live their lives, and you live yours, capice?

Exactly!  The vast majority of atheists here on Fark and elsewhere typically get fired up when some assclown decides to interject their religious crap into a place it doesn't belong and/or in a way that is unacceptable.  It's pretty damned rare that I see some atheist just "proselytizing".

Did you miss the Rick Warren son "suicide thread?"


I wouldn't say I missed it, exactly.  *ba-dum crash*  Yes, I did not read that one.  I'll take a looksie, though now I'm a bit afraid.
 
2013-04-12 12:43:56 AM  

Silverstaff: No, I'm going by the definition in the Comparative Theology textbook I used in college.  Theology is a bit of a hobby of mine.

Religion is something that:
1. Describes the relationship between mankind and the sacred and divine.
2. Expresses that description through social interaction, practices, symbols, and other intellectual and cultural forms.
3. Provides a path of personal improvement or transformation.

Note that this does NOT include Apple as a religion, or a sports team as a religion, or the other strawmen thrown out in this thread, because none of them meet the first part of that description, since none discuss the relationship of humanity to the divine.  Atheists do discuss that relationship though, they deny it exists by denying the existence of the sacred and divine.


Could you define "sacred" and "divine" for us?

I think your confusion comes because the words "sacred" and "divine" mean something different to atheists than they do to theists. To a theist, "sacred" means something that has special meaning to God, and "divine" means something part of or connected to God.

To an atheist, "sacred" means something that has special meaning to a religious person because of their religion, and "divine" means something a religious person thinks comes from God.

So, despite using the same words, we are not actually talking about the same things. Therefore, the first part of your definition does not apply.

What superhuman being(s) do atheists worship anyway?
 
2013-04-12 12:52:20 AM  
Theocracy is great when it's your religion.
 
2013-04-12 01:34:04 AM  

Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: RedPhoenix122: Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: Since we don't want to pray to terror gods, could an atheist lead a group chant thanking the building inspector for providing a well functioning place of meeting?

At least there's tangible evidence of that.

"All hail Terry, keeper of fire codes and master of ADA compliance!"


That would be quite amusing.
 
2013-04-12 01:45:44 AM  

This About That: I especially like the part where, in a very few sentences she says "We just need to start taking a stand on our religious freedom or it will be whisked away from us." seconds after she said that allowing Muslim prayer is supporting terrorism. Have legislators always been this ignorant, or is it just because of the Internet that we hear about it?


They've always been this ignorant, and it's just now that it's becoming widely known.
 
2013-04-12 04:35:05 AM  

Silverstaff: If you're going to call Stalinism and Maoism religions, then Atheism is definitely a religion.


Nope. Infallible leaders are a mark of religion, not atheism. It is human to fail, and no criticism of Stalin or Mao was tolerated.

Stalinism and Maoism would essentially be denominations of Atheism.  Obviously not every atheist is or was Stalinist/Maoist, however every obedient Stalinist/Maoist by definition was Atheist.

People who worship infallible leaders aren't atheists. Take North Korea as an example (although they've taken this waaay further than China or the USSR ever did).

You want to talk atrocities committed in the 20th century the USSR and PRC?  Okay, just remember, they were done in the name of an officially Atheist state,

I'll just lump you with the other fools who can't tell the difference between atheism and communism.
 
2013-04-12 08:56:12 AM  

Silverstaff: No, I'm going by the definition in the Comparative Theology textbook I used in college.  Theology is a bit of a hobby of mine.


What did that textbook of yours say about atheism. Did it define it as a religion? Was there a chapter on it comparing atheist belief systems to other religions?
 
2013-04-12 10:18:10 AM  

miscreant: Agnosticism is the belief that whether gods exists or not is not just unknown, but unknowable.


Inside a philosophy class, yes.

Out in the real world, "agnostic" means "I don't know or don't have a strong opinion on the topic."

It's a lot like how "theory" means something very different when two biologists are discussing the theory of evolution versus your boss at work telling you he has a theory about taxes.
 
2013-04-12 10:23:14 AM  

RobSeace: ciberido: You're wrong. Agnosticism is the absence of faith in gods. Atheism is the certainty that gods do not exist. And, as I said earlier, it's a life stance, which does not make it a religion.

Not sure where you came up with that... Agnostic vs gnostic is an entirely separate issue from atheist vs. theist... The former is a question of knowledge/certainty, while the latter is an issue of belief... What you're describing as "atheism" is really "gnostic atheism"... Most of us are agnostic atheists...

[i132.photobucket.com image 683x660]


Yeah I've seen that chart many times.  But only in Fark threads for some reason.

Again, the distinction you're making is great if two philosophy professors are having a nice chat in the teacher's lounge.  It's not how the average American uses the words "atheist" and "agnostic" when talking about why Judy's brother-in-law doesn't go to church.

"God's existence is unknowable" is in interesting position to take inside a classroom or Fark thread.  It has no real bearing on discussing what politicians are trying to do in North Carolina.
 
2013-04-12 10:24:39 AM  

ciberido: Out in the real world, "agnostic" means "I don't know or don't have a strong opinion on the topic."


Which does not preclude the atheist "without god" definition.

Which is the only definition that includes all atheists and is therefore, IMO, the most useful and correct definition.
 
2013-04-12 11:11:06 AM  

ciberido: It's not how the average American uses the words "atheist" and "agnostic" when talking about why Judy's brother-in-law doesn't go to church.


Well, I can't claim to speak on behalf of "the average American", but I've always used the words that way... I've heard others use the looser "atheist lite" definition of agnostic before many times, but I still resist it, and continue to refer to myself as both agnostic and atheist... But, I've never heard anyone else before try to seriously claim that atheist inherently means you are certain that no gods exist, as you did... That's just crazy talk... No one I know or have read before has ever used the term that way... (Nor have I ever encountered anyone who would even fit that definition!) No definition I find anywhere asserts anything close to that... Some claim it means one holds an active disbelief in gods, while others use the correct simple lack of belief definition, but none say it means one knows there are no gods... Who are these people you know who use the word that way? Is there any documentation of this usage anywhere?
 
2013-04-12 03:23:56 PM  

RobSeace: ciberido: It's not how the average American uses the words "atheist" and "agnostic" when talking about why Judy's brother-in-law doesn't go to church.

Well, I can't claim to speak on behalf of "the average American", but I've always used the words that way... I've heard others use the looser "atheist lite" definition of agnostic before many times, but I still resist it, and continue to refer to myself as both agnostic and atheist... But, I've never heard anyone else before try to seriously claim that atheist inherently means you are certain that no gods exist, as you did... That's just crazy talk... No one I know or have read before has ever used the term that way... (Nor have I ever encountered anyone who would even fit that definition!) No definition I find anywhere asserts anything close to that... Some claim it means one holds an active disbelief in gods, while others use the correct simple lack of belief definition, but none say it means one knows there are no gods... Who are these people you know who use the word that way? Is there any documentation of this usage anywhere?


You will definitely find a solid group of gnostic atheists out there.  It goes somewhat like this: "Based on all the evidence against and the complete lack of any evidence for, I am confident that God doesn't exist, just as I'm confident that the tooth fairy doesn't exist."  It may be hard to swallow because the idea of God is so pervasive and seemingly unassailable to so many, but the same would have been said with regard to the Greek gods which we now dismiss as pure myth, as fiction, without a second thought.
 
2013-04-12 03:32:29 PM  

vrax: "Based on all the evidence against and the complete lack of any evidence for, I am confident that God doesn't exist, just as I'm confident that the tooth fairy doesn't exist."


Which is not the equivalent of saying "I know for a fact that gods do not exist",  "Gods cannot exist", or anything like that.

Your example is a statement of personal position based on an analysis of available evidence. The examples I gave are claims of knowledge. They are different and very, very few people make the latter statements.
 
2013-04-12 04:06:34 PM  

Farking Canuck: vrax: "Based on all the evidence against and the complete lack of any evidence for, I am confident that God doesn't exist, just as I'm confident that the tooth fairy doesn't exist."

Which is not the equivalent of saying "I know for a fact that gods do not exist",  "Gods cannot exist", or anything like that.

Your example is a statement of personal position based on an analysis of available evidence. The examples I gave are claims of knowledge. They are different and very, very few people make the latter statements.


Then change "am confident" to "know" if it makes you feel better.  Since you can't directly observe something that doesn't exist, evidence for and/or against is all there will ever be.  I mean, I suppose you could leave room for the tooth fairy, even though there is no evidence for such a thing and plenty against, but since we have yet to actually directly observe one, well I guess we'd have to leave it at 99.9999% confident that it doesn't.
 
2013-04-12 05:53:25 PM  

vrax: You will definitely find a solid group of gnostic atheists out there.


I'm not saying gnostic atheists don't exist... I'm saying I've never before heard anyone use the unadorned term "atheist" to mean specifically and only the gnostic atheists, and claim it was wrong to include the agnostic atheists under the umbrella of the term as well... That's what I find a totally baffling concept...

Also, just being fairly confident in your belief doesn't mean you know for sure... If you would ever consider the possibility of changing your belief if presented with evidence of gods, then I'd say you're not really gnostic... Because, they claim to already have certain knowledge of the non-existence of gods...
 
2013-04-12 06:12:59 PM  

Uncle Tractor: Atheism is the absence of faith in gods.


Lack of belief, more precisely. And which term also is used to for the class of belief systems that lack such belief in god(s)... as I said.

TheGregiss: Being a former church goer I can safely say youre having a collective circle jerk about your beliefs.
which is essentially a religious gathering.


Lacks the ritualistic elements; compare Dale Cannon's "Six Ways of Being Religious".
 
2013-04-12 07:20:13 PM  

RobSeace: vrax: You will definitely find a solid group of gnostic atheists out there.

I'm not saying gnostic atheists don't exist... I'm saying I've never before heard anyone use the unadorned term "atheist" to mean specifically and only the gnostic atheists, and claim it was wrong to include the agnostic atheists under the umbrella of the term as well... That's what I find a totally baffling concept...


I'm sorry, I totally misunderstood what you were getting at.  I completely agree with you.

Also, just being fairly confident in your belief doesn't mean you know for sure... If you would ever consider the possibility of changing your belief if presented with evidence of gods, then I'd say you're not really gnostic... Because, they claim to already have certain knowledge of the non-existence of gods...

I guess after reading and watching so many atheist discussions over the years I've come to accept that gnostic refers to the extent of our knowledge.  This is, again, why mythical creatures often come up when discussing gnostic atheism.  Most people are 100% sure that faeries don't exist.  Why?
 
Displayed 44 of 494 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report