Why is an athiest and athiest?

[PennyKay]

An atheist’s point of view – Why is an atheist and atheist? - (edit: I was rushed when ths was written so this is probably a better title; why do theists deny freedom to athiets?)

Life, I hope to think is something that we all consider the meaning of at least once in our brief lives. To every individual it means something else. To some, life is to be lived for others, for their children, mothers, fathers, friends, husbands, and wives. Some see life to be a mission, a chance to contribute something to the future generations. Others see life as a game, and the goal is to reach as high a position as they can. Regardless though on how you see your life, every thought, every notion that has come from the human mind, has happened on this one spec of dust floating in a sea of being. For that reason alone, every life is worth the same.

My dreaded fear though, that some people have the inability to see the big picture, to see life for what it really is. Now, please don’t get me wrong, I can understand the appeal of religion, the belief in an all powerful God, the belief that when we pass away, our soul will be transported to some pearly gates in another world. There is one huge problem with religion in my book that smacks me head on in the face, and it is this; one of the truly bad effects of religion is that it teaches us that it is a virtue to be satisfied with not understanding.

Now, some people I believe are very content with the idea of not understanding, with simply resting on the fact that somewhere at sometime, their God will make it all alright. Certain people are simply at ease with the phrase ‘cest la vie’. The belief that ignorance is bliss though is a faulty system. It means that that are potentially millions of people on this planet, ranging from bin-men to Prime Ministers and Presidents to Kings and Queens, who are all under the impression that they are entitled to their opinion. No. No you are not. People are entitled to their informed opinion. That’s a very different thing.
This world is mine as much as it is anyone else’s. I am free to believe whatever it is I choose to believe, whether that is the Christian God, Jewish God, Buddhist Gods, or the Cookie Monster. I am free. It is the thinking though of many religious folk that we are not free if we do not succumb to their beliefs. That we should have our basic human rights stolen away from us because our opinions do not align to yours, seems to be a common thought process for many religious people.

Let’s look at homosexuality. Christians, this question is for you; why are you against homosexuality? The bible tells you? Which part? Leviticus 18:22? It says it is an abomination. In the paragraph above, it also says eating rabbit is an abomination, wearing linen and wool at the same time an abomination. If I sell my daughter, as stated in Exodus 21:7, is that still ok?

What people have to realise is that what was relevant morally, and ethically at least 2000 years ago, isn’t necessarily what should be considered moral and ethical now. Advances in physics, chemistry, biology, psychology among others, means that we have a far broader sense of life, the universe and our place within it. When our factual intelligence has improved as a race through discoveries, we should do our earnest to make sure our emotional intelligence improves in correlation with it. This though is where I believe we falter as a race. Two words sum this up perfectly; nuclear power.

Why do people believe in any religion at all? Well, as I see, humans are pack animals; we have evolved to be part of a crowd for safety, the more people who we can relate to, the less chance of being ostracised by society. As soon as somebody different, with alternative perceptions on morality, religion, science, and ultimately life appears, the dunces are confederacy against them. It is a sad fact of life.

Our curiosity too may indeed play a part. You could say that curiosity is one of the attributes that humans have that sets us apart from the rest of the animal kingdom. Our curiosity to look up at the stars and wonder about the deepest, most profound questions one can answer; why do stars shine? Why does the sun move in the sky? Why are something’s hot and other thing’s cold? Is there life elsewhere in the universe? Why does anything go to the bother of existing at all?

We have often wondered these thoughts, and before the days of science as we know it and the technology and instruments to aid us, all we had were our eyes and our brain. Our ancestors observed as much as they could, and depending on their culture, location on the planet, and their traditions, each group of people came up with their own creation story. With the local climate, animals and history playing a huge role on what their creation story told. As time went on, humans grew increasingly intelligent, the size of our colonies grew, and Empires fired into existence. Empires were great for attaining one thing; power, the more of it the better. One way to gain power is to have a uniform leader. A leader who was strong yet compassionate, loving yet fearful, all knowing yet gave freewill, and a leader whose logic and working could never be fully understood by the masses. What’s more, this leader should be immortal, and never be seen so that this leader would never be questioned or challenged. The already existing idea of a supernatural deity, the idea of God fits very well into this don’t you think?

Of course, this is all just conjecture, my own personal opinion. Nothing that will ever be proved. That is the point however, you simply cannot prove it. You cannot prove or disprove the existence of God, not anyone. I as a scientist have to say that what we have figured out isn’t that God doesn’t exist, but that we can explain the universe pretty well without having to use the word God. God isn’t necessary.

For the reason that nobody has the monopoly on whether God does or does not exist, nobody can dictate what somebody else can do with their life on a religious basis. That is most definitely morally wrong, by any Gods standards.

So heres my question. Religious people who don't believe we are all entitled to our freedom. Why?

 

[HonestJoe]

That's an interesting read but I feel your thoughts need some serious refinement.

To start with, you seem to be taking the discussion in the same flawed direction many religious believers do, presenting the idea of atheism verses religion, even very specific religious beliefs. The fact is that atheism has absolutely nothing to do with religion. Atheism describes a singular characteristic of an individual, that they do not believe in the existence of a god or gods. It's opposite is theism, itself with no automatic link to religion. Obviously many (though far from all) religions involve belief in one or more gods of some kind but in my experience it is counter-productive to address these individual beliefs in some kind of conflict with atheism. If they are to be discussed, it should be independently, on their own merits.

You also make a mistake that is one of my pet hates - stating that religious belief is a choice. It is clear from all our experiences that we can't simply choose whether to believe in a god or not and, if we do, what we believe about their nature. Religious practice can be chosen but again, that is distinct from theism itself. We all experience the world around us, learn and are taught and the unique combination of all that information is processed though our unique brains and comes out with a unique answer. There is no conscious control over that process beyond the limited way we can control the information we get and even that won't necessarily have the outcomes we might expect. Presenting theism and religious belief as a conscious choice creates an entirely different (and fundamentally flawed) discussion.

Something of a side point, but despite your title, as far as I can tell you never actually get in to why you (or atheists in general) are atheists (FWIW, I believe there is at least one answer per atheist who ever lived).

To answer your question (despite not being at all religious), I suspect most religious people don't believe we're all entitled to our freedom for the same reason everyone else do. Freedoms are generally restricted to protect individuals (the person being restricted or others) or society as a whole. Obviously religious people have different viewpoints on what is personally or socially damaging but the basic principals are the same.

 

[McBell]

To start with, you seem to be taking the discussion in the same flawed direction many religious believers do, presenting the idea of atheism verses religion, even very specific religious beliefs. The fact is that atheism has absolutely nothing to do with religion. Atheism describes a singular characteristic of an individual, that they do not believe in the existence of a god or gods. It's opposite is theism, itself with no automatic link to religion. Obviously many (though far from all) religions involve belief in one or more gods of some kind but in my experience it is counter-productive to address these individual beliefs in some kind of conflict with atheism. If they are to be discussed, it should be independently, on their own merits.

I disagree.
It is not a "flawed direction" when it is the direction used by the (for lack of a better word) "opposition".

It would be nice if everyone was to look at your opinion and go, "hey, you know he is right, perhaps we should change our whole worldview to match up with his opinion", but since I seriously doubt that will happen, it is, in my opinion, better to deal with things the way they actually are.

Now do not get me wrong, it would be really nice if everyone agreed with your opinion and went with it, but holding out for something that is most likely never going to happen does not help with the here and now.

You also make a mistake that is one of my pet hates - stating that religious belief is a choice. It is clear from all our experiences that we can't simply choose whether to believe in a god or not and, if we do, what we believe about their nature. Religious practice can be chosen but again, that is distinct from theism itself. We all experience the world around us, learn and are taught and the unique combination of all that information is processed though our unique brains and comes out with a unique answer. There is no conscious control over that process beyond the limited way we can control the information we get and even that won't necessarily have the outcomes we might expect. Presenting theism and religious belief as a conscious choice creates an entirely different (and fundamentally flawed) discussion.

Until such time as you can show your pet hate is something other than wishful thinking, I will stick with your pet hate being nothing other than wishful thinking.

In my experience it is more likened to a drug addict who does not want to change claiming that they have no choice but the do drugs.

Something of a side point, but despite your title, as far as I can tell you never actually get in to why you (or atheists in general) are atheists (FWIW, I believe there is at least one answer per atheist who ever lived).

I agree.
Both with the OP not going into the why AND that there is at least one answer per atheist.

To answer your question (despite not being at all religious), I suspect most religious people don't believe we're all entitled to our freedom for the same reason everyone else do. Freedoms are generally restricted to protect individuals (the person being restricted or others) or society as a whole. Obviously religious people have different viewpoints on what is personally or socially damaging but the basic principals are the same.

I suspect it has to do with "Elitist Club" mentality.
And that it is not in the least limited, restricted, or even exclusive to religious, atheist, agnostic, theist...

 

[PennyKay]

Thank you for your reply HonestJoe.

I just want to put a note to my original post (was a bit rushed so I don’t think I was clear enough), I use Christianity mainly as it is the religion I know most about, growing up in the UK, it's what my religious education was most focused on, which is why I use it in examples.

I believe myself that atheism has a lot to do with religion. Of course, atheism is where an individual has a lack of belief in a God, but the fact is that there are so many example of when atheists are frowned upon (certainly by fundamentalists) for not believing in God. This is where atheism and theism are related. For example, a common argument against atheists is 'where do we get our morals from, if we don’t read religious texts?' Why do many theists think they have the monopoly against atheists on morality?

I haven't at any point stated that religious belief is a choice. The belief in a God(s) may not be a choice, it may be an instinctive feeling, but we all have a choice regarding which religion we choose to follow, to what extent, and what we do with it. Do you think Islamic terrorists don’t have a choice?

I think that the serious refinement needs to be made by the religious leaders who govern the masses who look to them for advice, to re-read their religious texts, and to see which values are actually still relevant in our society by listening to their followers, not dictating.

Again I disagree with that all atheists have different reasons why they don’t believe in a God. Fundamentaly I think it comes down to two simple things; they have never seen/experienced anything to give them a belief in a God, like myself. Or alternatively, they do see/experience something that forces them to loose their belief in a God.

Touching on the point that interests me. Freedom. I guess this goes back to my original point though, nobody knows if a God or Gods exist, so why do you try and restrict our freedom depending on your own personal belief?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

What percentage of 'religious people' (an interesting spongy category) do you think wish to deny you freedom?

 

[PennyKay]

What percentage of 'religious people' (an interesting spongy category) do you think wish to deny you freedom?

By religious people I mean; People who believe in a religion... Nothing spongy about that.

I'd say however many people Fox News reaches out to. Which I know sounds very sarcastic, and it is, but you cannot deny that there are religious people that deny the freedom from non-religious people on religious grounds! All you have to do is Google it or Youtube it. For a starters you could look at the Concerned Women for America website (I know it focus' on Christianity, but as I said it's the religion I know most about). It exists, that is a fact. The question I am asking is why?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

By religious people I mean; People who believe in a religion... Nothing spongy about that.

I suspect that a great many would disagree. Perhaps you have given the matter insufficient thought.

I'd say however many people Fox News reaches out to. Which I know sounds very sarcastic, and it is, but you cannot deny that there are religious people that deny the freedom from non-religious people on religious grounds!

You paint (sloppily) with a very broad brush and, in doing so, model the methodology you claim to oppose.

 

[PennyKay]

I suspect that a great many would disagree. Perhaps you have given the matter insufficient thought.


You paint (sloppily) with a very broad brush and, in doing so, model the methodology you claim to oppose.

You disagree that religious people are people who follow a religion???

I may point out here that there is a difference between following a religion and believing in a God. You can believe in a God without being religious. The religion side of it is the set of rules, traditions, teachings etc passed down over potentially thousands of years that are said to have originated from the God(s) associated with the religion. This is where choice comes into it. We may not have a choice to believe in a God, but we all do have a choice which religion to follow, how much we learn from it, and what we do with it. Whether we choose to use it for bad or for good. We all make these choices. Again, I will reiterate, my point is why do some religious people make the choice to use their religion to deny the freedom of others? As I said, it is a fact people do this, this cannot be denied. I am asking why?

It is possible believe it or not to choose not to follow any religion, yet still believe that a God(s) created the universe. It's possible to have your own very unique, personal set of beliefs that don't originate specifically from any one religion. Maybe taking your favourite aspects from many religions, and forming your belief on them.

I used the Fox News comment sarcastically (I even pointed out it was sarcastic to avoid confusion) as Fox News has a terrible habit of illustrating the point I am making. Again, Google or YouTube the words Fox News and religion together if you want examples.

 

[HonestJoe]

It is not a "flawed direction" when it is the direction used by the (for lack of a better word) "opposition".

If it's flawed, it's flawed regardless of who is doing it. If your "opposition" is doing it, the correct response is to point out their flaw or ignore then, not play along.

Until such time as you can show your pet hate is something other than wishful thinking, I will stick with your pet hate being nothing other than wishful thinking.

That's fairly simple. All you need to do is choose to believe in a god, with true and honest faith. You don't have to do it for long, you just have to choose to believe. If you can't do that (as I know I can't), it somewhat demonstrates my point.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

You disagree that religious people are people who follow a religion???

I disagree with the proposal that religious people are necessarily people that follow a religion. So, for example, here.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I used the Fox News comment sarcastically ...

What you did not do (other than paint with a broad brush) is answer ...

What percentage of 'religious people' (an interesting spongy category) do you think wish to deny you freedom?

 

[HonestJoe]

I just want to put a note to my original post (was a bit rushed so I don’t think I was clear enough), I use Christianity mainly as it is the religion I know most about, growing up in the UK, it's what my religious education was most focused on, which is why I use it in examples.

I understand that completely. My point is that there should be a distinction made between challenging a specific religion (and even Christianity isn't really one religion in this context) and explaining your atheism. Someone could believe in a god but disagree with Christianity (or at least the aspects you highlighted) and someone could not believe in a god yet still agree with and support the social principals in Christian scripture.

This is where atheism and theism are related. For example, a common argument against atheists is 'where do we get our morals from, if we don’t read religious texts?' Why do many theists think they have the monopoly against atheists on morality?

We pretty much all think we're moral people and those who have diametrically opposed moral views to us are not. That's a human thing, not a religious one.

I haven't at any point stated that religious belief is a choice. The belief in a God(s) may not be a choice, it may be an instinctive feeling, but we all have a choice regarding which religion we choose to follow, to what extent, and what we do with it. Do you think Islamic terrorists don’t have a choice?

It might not have been your intention but it was a very clear interpetation of your words. I agree that there is a fundamental difference between what you believe and what you do about it.

 

[Desert Snake]

Religion can be an intellectual trap, so a can atheism.

 

[George-ananda]

So heres my question. Religious people who don't believe we are all entitled to our freedom. Why?

I'm wondering whom you consider 'religious people'. Does that include people with spiritual beliefs but are not part of any organized religion, like me.

Also there seems to be an assumption that 'religious people' are narrow minded; kind of insulting.

My guess is you have a problem with the stances of the conservative right-wing of 'religious people'. For example, they may condemn homosexuality but they can't stop anyone from practicing their freedom

 

[Falvlun]

Stick around these forums and you'll find there's a lot of live and let live religious people out there.

 

[Halcyon]

It's only really in the last couple of years that the oddness of the atheist label has actually instilled itself upon me.

I mean, in how many other aspects of our lives do we define ourselves by that which we lack? Not having a belief in a deity should affect our personality about as much as not being able to play a musical instrument, or not being able to swim.
Other people might think it's disadvantageous not to know how to swim or play the piano, or have no interest/ability in innumerable other areas yet we don't let those people's opinions shape our worldview.
However with atheism, a term that only exists in counter-position to worldviews the person in question rejects as false and largely irrelevant, has developed a culture of it's own to the point where we now seem to have atheist apologetics.
Is it just me who thinks this is odd?

 

[Me Myself]

I disagree.
It is not a "flawed direction" when it is the direction used by the (for lack of a better word) "opposition".

? Opposition who? I am a theist, me and others know that you can be both an atheist and a religious person (like a buddhist) or a theist that doesn't practice a specific religion.

Do you really want to combat ignorance with ignorance?

 

[Desert Snake]

Do you really want to combat ignorance with ignorance?

? Want? Who said anything about want? People ccan be ignorant without intending to be.


sincerely, d

 

[Me Myself]

? Want? Who said anything about want? People ccan be ignorant without intending to be.


sincerely, d

Absolutely, but I said that because the person I was replying to said that it was going to voluntarily adopt a concept simply because his opposition uses it, e en though it is clearly a faulty paradigm.

So it read like willful spreading of ignorant paradigms. Or disinformation, however you want to put it.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

An atheist’s point of view – Why is an atheist and atheist? - (edit: I was rushed when ths was written so this is probably a better title; why do theists deny freedom to athiets?)

Life, I hope to think is something that we all consider the meaning of at least once in our brief lives. To every individual it means something else. To some, life is to be lived for others, for their children, mothers, fathers, friends, husbands, and wives. Some see life to be a mission, a chance to contribute something to the future generations. Others see life as a game, and the goal is to reach as high a position as they can. Regardless though on how you see your life, every thought, every notion that has come from the human mind, has happened on this one spec of dust floating in a sea of being. For that reason alone, every life is worth the same.

My dreaded fear though, that some people have the inability to see the big picture, to see life for what it really is. Now, please don’t get me wrong, I can understand the appeal of religion, the belief in an all powerful God, the belief that when we pass away, our soul will be transported to some pearly gates in another world. There is one huge problem with religion in my book that smacks me head on in the face, and it is this; one of the truly bad effects of religion is that it teaches us that it is a virtue to be satisfied with not understanding.

Now, some people I believe are very content with the idea of not understanding, with simply resting on the fact that somewhere at sometime, their God will make it all alright. Certain people are simply at ease with the phrase ‘cest la vie’. The belief that ignorance is bliss though is a faulty system. It means that that are potentially millions of people on this planet, ranging from bin-men to Prime Ministers and Presidents to Kings and Queens, who are all under the impression that they are entitled to their opinion. No. No you are not. People are entitled to their informed opinion. That’s a very different thing.
This world is mine as much as it is anyone else’s. I am free to believe whatever it is I choose to believe, whether that is the Christian God, Jewish God, Buddhist Gods, or the Cookie Monster. I am free. It is the thinking though of many religious folk that we are not free if we do not succumb to their beliefs. That we should have our basic human rights stolen away from us because our opinions do not align to yours, seems to be a common thought process for many religious people.

Let’s look at homosexuality. Christians, this question is for you; why are you against homosexuality? The bible tells you? Which part? Leviticus 18:22? It says it is an abomination. In the paragraph above, it also says eating rabbit is an abomination, wearing linen and wool at the same time an abomination. If I sell my daughter, as stated in Exodus 21:7, is that still ok?

What people have to realise is that what was relevant morally, and ethically at least 2000 years ago, isn’t necessarily what should be considered moral and ethical now. Advances in physics, chemistry, biology, psychology among others, means that we have a far broader sense of life, the universe and our place within it. When our factual intelligence has improved as a race through discoveries, we should do our earnest to make sure our emotional intelligence improves in correlation with it. This though is where I believe we falter as a race. Two words sum this up perfectly; nuclear power.

Why do people believe in any religion at all? Well, as I see, humans are pack animals; we have evolved to be part of a crowd for safety, the more people who we can relate to, the less chance of being ostracised by society. As soon as somebody different, with alternative perceptions on morality, religion, science, and ultimately life appears, the dunces are confederacy against them. It is a sad fact of life.

Our curiosity too may indeed play a part. You could say that curiosity is one of the attributes that humans have that sets us apart from the rest of the animal kingdom. Our curiosity to look up at the stars and wonder about the deepest, most profound questions one can answer; why do stars shine? Why does the sun move in the sky? Why are something’s hot and other thing’s cold? Is there life elsewhere in the universe? Why does anything go to the bother of existing at all?

We have often wondered these thoughts, and before the days of science as we know it and the technology and instruments to aid us, all we had were our eyes and our brain. Our ancestors observed as much as they could, and depending on their culture, location on the planet, and their traditions, each group of people came up with their own creation story. With the local climate, animals and history playing a huge role on what their creation story told. As time went on, humans grew increasingly intelligent, the size of our colonies grew, and Empires fired into existence. Empires were great for attaining one thing; power, the more of it the better. One way to gain power is to have a uniform leader. A leader who was strong yet compassionate, loving yet fearful, all knowing yet gave freewill, and a leader whose logic and working could never be fully understood by the masses. What’s more, this leader should be immortal, and never be seen so that this leader would never be questioned or challenged. The already existing idea of a supernatural deity, the idea of God fits very well into this don’t you think?

Of course, this is all just conjecture, my own personal opinion. Nothing that will ever be proved. That is the point however, you simply cannot prove it. You cannot prove or disprove the existence of God, not anyone. I as a scientist have to say that what we have figured out isn’t that God doesn’t exist, but that we can explain the universe pretty well without having to use the word God. God isn’t necessary.

For the reason that nobody has the monopoly on whether God does or does not exist, nobody can dictate what somebody else can do with their life on a religious basis. That is most definitely morally wrong, by any Gods standards.

So heres my question. Religious people who don't believe we are all entitled to our freedom. Why?

Religious people are not the only people who want to provoke you from having freedom, all people do. All philosophies believe in restricting people: Christianity, Islam, Humanism, Antinatalism, Primitivism, Socialism, etc.

It's so goofy when you ask religious people why they don't allow you to do X, when they could ask you why you don't allow people to do something you find immoral. It's all about feelings. Religious people have different feelings.