Activist atheism

[Martin]

Or the dreaded Origin of Species by Darwin?
*dramatic music*

God forbid! Actually most of the people where I live visit the supermarket rather than church on a Sunday morning.

 

[ecco]

If there were no religion, there would be one less thing to divide humanity.

As John Lennon wrote:

Imagine there's no heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
...
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion, too

I’m still wondering if you’re thinking of denouncing religions
...
Do you have any other ideas about how it could be beneficial to some people or to society, to denounce religions and debate with some of their followers?

I say: "If there were no religion, there would be one less thing to divide humanity."

You twist it to say I'm denouncing religion. I have and do denounce aspects of religions.

However that is beside the point of my comment. If you want to address my comment: "If there were no religion, there would be one less thing to divide humanity" then do so.

 

[tayla]

Perhaps if you had really studied you would know that Dawkins is not,a by his own admittance, not atheist.

He's a 6.9 out of 7 atheist. Maybe he at times calls himself agnostic. He is certainly not a theist if that's what you are proposing.

 

[Revoltingest]

It might be better for your purposes to leave atheism out of it, and say “anti-religious” instead. For example, “My only worry is whether in the future an anti-religious totalitarianism might take over under the influence of the ideas I mention in the OP.”

We should also note that anti-religion sentiment is often greatest
among the religious themselves. They're pro their own, but oppose
the others. We see this in some Islamic theocracies. And we also
see it in small scale efforts by Christians to impose more of their
beliefs upon Ameristanians.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

...
Sure, science is not really very connected to morality.
...

Science is well connected to morality.
Biology is what causes moral subjectivity in humans.

So here is my way of explaining it. You know causality, right?

Part 1
Here is an example with a human, a dog and a ball. Context dependent of course. Throw the ball and the dog tries to catch it.
There are several causal effects, physical e.g. gravity and so on. They are objective.
Objective: of, relating to, or being an object, phenomenon, or condition in the realm of sensible experience independent of individual thought and perceptible by all observers : having reality independent of the mind
Definition of OBJECTIVE
Now explain this with causality, objective is a causality not in human brains and nor in the dog's.
Having reality independent of the mind is a causality not in a brain.

Part 2
Objective: expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations
Now nobody can give a reason for doing something which is not a result of personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations, because a reason e.g. you have for acting is a subjective causality. That applies to me as well.

Context: I heard it years ago as a reason for how some creationists hate biology. It explains moral subjectivity as natural and not from the Devil as Evil.
It took me a while to figure out, because I couldn't really find it. At least I couldn't find directly, I had to put it together through indirect texts and do the rest myself.
Subjectivity is a causal effect of in the end - the replication of the fittest gene. Yeah, science is connected to this:
"Man is the measure of all things: of the things that are, that they are, of the things that are not, that they are not." - Protagoras

And, yes - I am religious, yet a cognitive, cultural and moral relativist, anti-realist and subjectivist. That is how post-modern I am.

With the best regards

 

[tayla]

So can i ask why you object to the first quote?
Or the second? Are you against education?
Or the third, indoctrination is brainwashing, why would you support that?

I don't object to any of the quotes I presented. I am concerned when a group of people (atheists) take away the rights of parents over their children, and the rights of other members of society based on their philosophical viewpoints. Just declaring that truth should prevail is not a good reason; this can easily become atheistic totalitarianism in the future.

 

[tayla]

And the religious dont?

Why do you assume I love religion because I have concerns about the effects of atheism? I consider revealed religions and revealed spiritual paths to be untrustworthy sources of truth and knowledge. I worry when a group of people wishes to impose their views on society; this is how a future atheistic totalitarian state can come to be.

This is why I think the tone of the debate between atheists and others is so important. They can lose by winning. Just look at the current political situation in the US; the winners have lost, and they have lost for us all, dragging us all along with them. These activist atheists I refer to have the capability of doing the same kind of thing.

 

[Audie]

I don't object to any of the quotes I presented. I am concerned when a group of people (atheists) take away the rights of parents over their children, and the rights of other members of society based on their philosophical viewpoints. Just declaring that truth should prevail is not a good reason; this can easily become atheistic totalitarianism in the future.

Who is taking whose rights away? Be specific.

There have been and still are theistic totalitarian states.
THERE is a bit o' rights taking!

You are worried about a hypothetical future atheist one?

 

[ecco]

Definition of hatred from Merriam-Webster online dictionary:

1 : extreme dislike or disgust : hate
2 : ill will or resentment that is usually mutual : prejudiced hostility or animosity​

Definition (partial) of hate from Merriam-Webster online dictionary:

1b : extreme dislike or disgust : antipathy, loathing
1c : a systematic and especially politically exploited expression of hatred

// a crime motivated by bigotry and hate​

I think you are using the most extreme aspect of the word hatred; I'm just using it to indicate extreme dislike or aversion or disgust.

Why use "hatred" when what you want to indicate is "disgust" or "aversion"? Why not just use "disgust" or "aversion"? Could it be that you thought you could get more reaction if you used "hatred"?

 

[Revoltingest]

I don't object to any of the quotes I presented. I am concerned when a group of people (atheists) take away the rights of parents over their children, and the rights of other members of society based on their philosophical viewpoints. Just declaring that truth should prevail is not a good reason; this can easily become atheistic totalitarianism in the future.

I have a friend you remind me of.
He is regularly troubled by possibilities he thinks of....
- That Obama would refuse to leave office, & make himself dictator.
- That Muslims, gays & Marxists have formed a cabal to take over the country.
- The the left hates the country, & plans to destroy it.
- That aliens are waiting for a one world government to form, & then they'll invade & take over.
He gets fixated, & worries about such things.

I counsel him to not worry about everything which is possible.
There are, of course, an unlimited number of possible calamities.
I advise only worrying about that which is likely.


Oh, rats....did I just provide new worries?

 

[ecco]

Do you always equate truth with hatred?

What? Is this a serious question?

Yes.

 

[Audie]

Y



More nonsense.
Show some examples of atheists asking for proof of god.

Nonsense is right. Just made up.
I dont get how it is that "'theists", some
of whom think their actions will have
long term consequences with "god"
are sooooo careless about speaking
falsehoods.

 

[tayla]

Lets rewrite your paragraph with one word deleted

Yes, I agree. Non-atheists do the same thing. I'm not defending them.

This kind of argument reminds me of my 8 year old grandson; if he sets a bowl full of milk on the edge of the counter and someone bumps into it knocking it to the ground, he says, "I didn't do it, I didn't touch it last" and he won't on his own clean it up. Atheists should be willing to consider the effects their words and actions can have on others, including on society in general. If they are too arrogant, we might end up with an atheistic totalitarian state someday, and they will think that is a good thing.

 

[tayla]

Do you not think is rather hypocritical to make such an accusation when religion is by far the biggest abuser of their belief

How am I being hypocritical? I am not religious. I reject religion; it is a lie and a scam.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Why use "hatred" when what you want to indicate is "disgust" or "aversion"? Why not just use "disgust" or "aversion"? Could it be that you thought you could more reaction if you used "hatred"?

So you admit, that there are non-religious humans, which have a behavior not based on reason, logic and evidence alone?
You know, just as a belief is a behavior, they have a behavior, which is wrong. Not that they are wrong, but their behavior is wrong, because it is not based on reason, logic and evidence.

 

[tayla]

So with nonsense revealing itself as not breathing i say breathe because they dont. Simple!

My concern is that if atheists have the wrong perspective about the legitimacy of a government and the rights of minority views, they might assume at some future date that they should establish an atheistic totalitarian regime.

Also, I am not an atheist, but many (some, a few, one, list of names, blah blah) atheists assume any non-atheistic perspective is clearly wrong based on their assumption of materialism/physicalism. There can be no dialog, no consideration of the source and validity of this assumption. Not very becoming for people who claim to care about truth.

 

[ecco]

Not sure what you mean. But if you don't believe what I wrote then that's good - because
it's disturbing. We have another one, right now, concerning a rugby player who posted
biblical verses on-line about adultery, gays, dishonesty, divorce etc. He lost a multi-million
dollar contract as corporations withdrew their sponsorship.

Are you upset that executives and board members of private corporations have a right to discontinue allowing bigots to represent their products?

Another company was targeted last year because a board member belonged to a church
with a strong anti gay-marriage stance.

Attacked how?

So certainly, religious freedoms ARE under attack, and by extension, the rights of people
to speak their mind.

It's interesting that you consider bigotry to be a religious freedom.

 

[tayla]

You talk about honesty and then you make a comment like your second sentence. Wow!

You are referring to my sentence:

Often my interactions with atheists has been limited to them saying, "prove it"​

Why is this so shocking? it's a fact. I wish these same atheists were not so one dimensional in their thinking.

Here's a claim I make: some varieties of atheism are based on the assumption of materialism/physicalism. Why should we accept that assumption? How can things such as ideas be material?

 

[Jim]

I have a friend you remind me of.
He is regularly troubled by possibilities he thinks of....
- That Obama would refuse to leave office, & make himself dictator.
- That Muslims, gays & Marxists have formed a cabal to take over the country.
- The the left hates the country, & plans to destroy it.
- That aliens are waiting for a one world government to form, & then they'll invade & take over.
He gets fixated, & worries about such things.

I counsel him to not worry about everything which is possible.
There are, of course, an unlimited number of possible calamities.
I advise only worrying about that which is likely.


Oh, rats....did I just provide new worries?

In one of the Oz books there was a town of people called “Flutterbudgets.” My memory of it is that as Dorothy and her friends came into town, a woman cane running up to them, desperately worried and crying out for them to save her baby who was about to be run over by some vehicle. When they questioned her about it, she said that if she carried her baby outside, and if she accidentally dropped it, and if it rolled down the hill into the road, and if a vehicle happened to be coming by, it might run over her baby.

 

[ecco]

I think that sometimes people do feel threatened by people not believing the way they do. I’m wondering, do you think that’s the only reason for Christians feeling threatened by atheists? Another reason might be some displays of animosity and hostility against Christians, rallying around some banners of atheism.

Banners of atheism?

Like this one representing Catholics against Protestants?

I couldn't find any banners from back in the day of Catholic England against Protestant Englishmen.

I couldn't find any banners from back in the day of Protestant England against Catholic Englishmen.