Does atheism scare you?

mikkel_the_dane · Mar 29, 2021

Twilight Hue said:
Morality is simply the ability for a group or community to live together amicably and peacefully with a minimum of conflict and dissent among peers sharing common values. It has nothing to do with a religion or a lack of religion in exclusive terms.

Well, that is your definition. There are other ones.

SA Huguenot · Mar 29, 2021

ratiocinator said:
This is simply untrue. Atheism is the lack of believe in god(s). It says nothing at all about morality one way or another.

The atrocities you cite were due to other ideologies. I could list religiously motivated atrocities if you want - that actually did appear to be motivated by the relevant religion.

Evolution of our social species. empathy, rationality. Do you have the first hint of any evidence that atheists are less moral than theists?

Now why would you claim that Atheists have some ingrained morality code.
So far I have not witnessed any such a fact.
I just have to look at the utterances of Richard Dawkins et all, to be personnaly, horrendously offended in their accusations of my stupidity in believing in God.
or to see how Atheists are always working together to get a Christian out of an University, or organisation and how they make place for their own.
Just as the Atheist likes to accuse some "Christian behaviour" as non moral, I see the same with the vile cheating, and corruption by the Godless atheists in South Africa.
I speak of firsthand observation, that Atheists are fighting for abortions, Gay Rights, socialist equity where the Christian has no right to even critisize these practices.

ratiocinator · Mar 29, 2021

SA Huguenot said:
Yes, who decides on Morality?
What is the rules.
If any person from whatever denomination, from Atheism, to Islam, to Christian to Buddism, claims morality, ...
can we get their "Sources" utilised by them to establish how they perceive morality, and scrutinise it?
I think any claim on reality is subjected to scrutiny before acceptance.

Of course, but who does the scrutinising? It's difficult and messy but pretending that religion offers an answer and access to unchanging objective morality is a fantasy that is contradicted by history as well as the world we live in today.

Twilight Hue · Mar 29, 2021

mikkel_the_dane said:
Well, that is your definition. There are other ones.

It can't be denied that morality is value based which differs from group to group.

Revoltingest · Mar 29, 2021

SA Huguenot said:
Yes, who decides on Morality?

Individuals decide for themselves.
Groups reach consensus.

What is the rules.

There are none.
But I observe that groups tend to consensus.

If any person from whatever denomination, from Atheism, to Islam, to Christian to Buddism, claims morality, ...
can we get their "Sources" utilised by them to establish how they perceive morality, and scrutinise it?
I think any claim on reality is subjected to scrutiny before acceptance.

Scrutinize, discuss, negotiate, compromise, & ideally reach
some agreed upon morality that works better than alternatives.

ratiocinator · Mar 29, 2021

SA Huguenot said:
Now why would you claim that Atheists have some ingrained morality code.

I didn't. Knowing that somebody is an atheist does not tell you anything at all about their morality.

mikkel_the_dane · Mar 29, 2021

Twilight Hue said:
It can't be denied that morality is value based which differs from group to group.

That is correct.

SA Huguenot · Mar 29, 2021

ratiocinator said:
No true Scotsman.

If the bible were taken as evidence, the god of the bible would be guilty of genocide and crimes against humanity. Look, just as another example, at the lack of condemnation of slavery and how good Christians supported it in more recent times.

and this is totally incorrect.
You obviously never went to see the reasons for these accusations you mention.
The sentence:
The god of the bible would be guilty of genocide and crimes against humanity. Look, just as another example, at the lack of condemnation of slavery and how good Christians supported it in more recent times...

Was debunked numerous times.

ratiocinator · Mar 29, 2021

SA Huguenot said:
I just have to look at the utterances of Richard Dawkins et all, to be personnaly, horrendously offended in their accusations of my stupidity in believing in God.
or to see how Atheists are always working together to get a Christian out of an University, or organisation and how they make place for their own.

You are confusing atheism with anti-theism. I suspect most atheists simply don't care about religion.

SA Huguenot said:
I speak of firsthand observation, that Atheists are fighting for abortions, Gay Rights, socialist equity...

Good - but this really has nothing to do with atheism per se. Yet again:atheism is no more than not having a belief in any god(s) - it says nothing about any of these issues, which are also supported by many theists.

SA Huguenot said:
...where the Christian has no right to even critisize these practices.

Again, this has nothing to do with atheism but, speaking for myself, I would want to defend your right to criticise anything you want to (so long as you didn't incite violence).

ratiocinator · Mar 29, 2021

SA Huguenot said:
The god of the bible would be guilty of genocide and crimes against humanity. Look, just as another example, at the lack of condemnation of slavery and how good Christians supported it in more recent times...

Was debunked numerous times.

Never seen it debunked anywhere. Most 'answers' I've seen were laughable - and terrifying.

Laika · Mar 29, 2021

SA Huguenot said:
Oh how nice for atheists to have such collective amnesia.
When atheism is unleashed on the populace, such as the Communist party's 1917 Russian revolution, or the Chinese Sedong communist government, or the Veitnam communist, or Pol Pot, of Fidel Castro, the East block etc. Millions of people will die!
and the first that will be killed will be the Christian.
In atheism there is no place for theists, but hatred and extermination of any morality.
Perhaps the atheist should remember how the soviets, and Bolshevics killed of more than 60 million people.
or how the Kmer rouge took 3 million lives, or the communist atheist Mosambique a million.

The 20th century is a lesson to the world on what atheism could achieve, sweet nothing.
And do not even try to claim that the communists were not atheists.
they took their lessons from Marks, and Engels.
an utopia where no religion exists, for in the atheists' mind, religion was the "opeum of the mind of the Masses"!

And any person thinking that the human somehow posesses a moral standard, and no religion is needed to be the guideline for morality, that is a myth.
to the Atheist there is no reason on self moral compass, for why should there be?

if we are mere animals, why think it is wrong to rape, murder, steal etc?
It is the nature of man to greed, lust, and to feed.
The Moral law is the one which is in the concience of Man, and if he so desires to feed these vices, why should he have any guidelines not to do so?
Is it wrong, asks the atheist, if a person sees a woman and abducts her, rapes her and kills her?
perhaps, but being an animal, it is his nature to do so, and he can never be held accountable for his nature.
If another atheist thinks it is wrong, why would he think so?
Because of some moral law, that is unwritten?
Who decides about this law?
the atheist?
Well, they could not get it right in 150 years, and they still dont.
They want to tell us that man is good and without religion, man will still be good.
and viola! We are back with the atheist practices of the 20th century.

And guess what, the Biblical moral laws are the one which is perhaps the oldest, and still used as a guideline.

Oh yes, I fear atheism. For their mocking of a believer, in the media, learning institutions, and all the organisations where they ensure their atheist brothers and sisters are getting the employment on the grounds of not being religious.
I fear atheism for the ruthless governments they create, in Mosambique, South Africa, Venezuella, Cuba, the old USSR, Korea, Veitnam, Cambodia, China and so on.
Any atheist thinking they are an example of high morality should first tell me to what authority they ascribe their Moral Law.
Mine comes from a Creator who I will have to answer for my deeds.
And therefore, I am bound to the ultimate accountability.

There is a fair amount of truth in what you have said and there will no doubt be dozens of pages of denials of any connection between atheism and communism by atheists who have never had any personal belief or relationship with the latter. Communists were undoubtedly responsible for some terrible atrocities and persecution of religious people (and still are). However, the history of this persecution, is far more nuanced and complicated and it is worth taking a moment to illustrate that, even if this conversation will fast speed away to directions more fitting of the demented futility of online polarisation.

Even if you take the cynical view, the Soviet's weren't stupid enough to try to **** everyone off all at once, and were willing to offer concessions to some ethnic minority groups and to their religious beliefs as part of policies emphasising national autonomy, with the Russian Orthodox Church baring the brunt of the hostility.

This policy led to the establishment of the world's first modern Jewish state in 1934 in the Soviet Union itself, based on the belief that Jews needed a territory to call a homeland. (As it is in Siberia, naturally, not many people were wildly enthusiastic).

Given that Muslims in central Asia faced considerable discrimination and persecution under the Tsarist Empire, the Soviets did take a more tolerant view initially in how Islam was treated, leading to significant discussion amongst Soviet academics on the historical origins and role of Islam. Below is a quotation of Joseph Stalin defending Sharia Law and a picture of him wearing Islamic dress from 1935 (source). (The origins of the second image I'm less sure about)

“We are told that among the Daghestan peoples the Sharia is of great importance. We have also been informed that the enemies of Soviet power are spreading rumours that it has banned the Sharia. I have been authorized by the Government of the Russian Socialist Federative Soviet Republic to state here that these rumours are false. The Government of Russia gives every people the full right to govern itself on the basis of its laws and customs. The Soviet Government considers that the Sharia, as common law, is as fully authorized as that of any other of the peoples inhabiting Russia. If the Daghestan people desire to preserve their laws and customs, they should be preserved”

J. V. STALIN (1920) Source: Congress of the Peoples of Daghestan (November 13, 1920), Works, Vol. 4.

ChristineM · Mar 29, 2021

SA Huguenot said:
Oh how nice for atheists to have such collective amnesia.
When atheism is unleashed on the populace, such as the Communist party's 1917 Russian revolution, or the Chinese Sedong communist government, or the Veitnam communist, or Pol Pot, of Fidel Castro, the East block etc. Millions of people will die!
and the first that will be killed will be the Christian.
In atheism there is no place for theists, but hatred and extermination of any morality.
Perhaps the atheist should remember how the soviets, and Bolshevics killed of more than 60 million people.
or how the Kmer rouge took 3 million lives, or the communist atheist Mosambique a million.

The 20th century is a lesson to the world on what atheism could achieve, sweet nothing.
And do not even try to claim that the communists were not atheists.
they took their lessons from Marks, and Engels.
an utopia where no religion exists, for in the atheists' mind, religion was the "opeum of the mind of the Masses"!

And any person thinking that the human somehow posesses a moral standard, and no religion is needed to be the guideline for morality, that is a myth.
to the Atheist there is no reason on self moral compass, for why should there be?

if we are mere animals, why think it is wrong to rape, murder, steal etc?
It is the nature of man to greed, lust, and to feed.
The Moral law is the one which is in the concience of Man, and if he so desires to feed these vices, why should he have any guidelines not to do so?
Is it wrong, asks the atheist, if a person sees a woman and abducts her, rapes her and kills her?
perhaps, but being an animal, it is his nature to do so, and he can never be held accountable for his nature.
If another atheist thinks it is wrong, why would he think so?
Because of some moral law, that is unwritten?
Who decides about this law?
the atheist?
Well, they could not get it right in 150 years, and they still dont.
They want to tell us that man is good and without religion, man will still be good.
and viola! We are back with the atheist practices of the 20th century.

And guess what, the Biblical moral laws are the one which is perhaps the oldest, and still used as a guideline.

Oh yes, I fear atheism. For their mocking of a believer, in the media, learning institutions, and all the organisations where they ensure their atheist brothers and sisters are getting the employment on the grounds of not being religious.
I fear atheism for the ruthless governments they create, in Mosambique, South Africa, Venezuella, Cuba, the old USSR, Korea, Veitnam, Cambodia, China and so on.
Any atheist thinking they are an example of high morality should first tell me to what authority they ascribe their Moral Law.
Mine comes from a Creator who I will have to answer for my deeds.
And therefore, I am bound to the ultimate accountability.

Don't forget the close on a billion untimely deaths brought about by religious wars throughout history. Oh right you forgot them, ok

BTW, Stalin was raised christian in kept his religious beliefs all his life. You seem to confuse nationalism wirh atheism here.

Mao Zedong and Pol Pot were both raised Buddhist, of the two only Mao denounced his faith but again, nationalism took president over religion.

Also you seem to have forgotten another good christian, Hitler

As for the rest of your hateful rant in the name if religion, such is what caused the millions the hundreds of millions of deaths in gods name.

9-10ths_Penguin · Mar 29, 2021

SA Huguenot said:
To which Martin Luther replied and called those who committed these atrocities as devils posing in the cloak of vicars of Christ.
He on many occasions called the people who murdered Christians for believing in Jesus as their saviour, "Godless men".
In that time I do not think the word Atheist was used as it is now.
be as it may, Martin Luther called the inqusitionist atheists.

Martin Luther as in the author of "On the Jews and Their Lies"? That Martin Luther?

SA Huguenot · Mar 29, 2021

ratiocinator said:
I didn't. Knowing that somebody is an atheist does not tell you anything at all about their morality.

OK, so lets examine what an atheist is.

1. They do not believe there is something as God.
2. They do not believe there is something as a Creator who created everything inclusive of themself.
3. They dont believe a word from the authority of the Bible.
They therefore are sure that they are nothing but an unguided mindless result of nature which are shaped and formed in Nature.
Therefore the Atheist as a product of nature believe in the example of Nature where, the strongest shall survive.
What moral code does such a creature have on his concience?
I am the strongest, and I must survive?
I can have it all? If I cant have it, I can take it?
The above is allowed, because the naturel law of Nature states:
You must survive, eat, and reproduce.
It does not say,
you have to care for the meek, work for your food, and love a partner to grow a family.

Then, If you dont agree to the "Family value" set out by the Christian moral code,
You end up with a total different one where children can now be subdued to hormone suppressions to prevent their gender to mature, the mothers to be supported by government because the fathers just had sex to make babies with no consequesces to anyone.
Or in a religion where polygamy is thought to be a family value,
therefore to conclude,
I have my suspicions over any atheist deciding what "Moral values" should comprise off.
I will rather have a Christian Bible believing person to rule my country, than any atheist.
The track record on Christian leaders ruling in a secular state, is much better than an Atheist ruling any country.
and lets not even mention the deaths by atheism,
All the atheist countries of this world is the most empoverished, historical and current.
Atheism in government is a failure.

Revoltingest · Mar 29, 2021

Laika said:
There is a fair amount of truth in what you have said and there will no doubt be dozens of pages of denials of any connection between atheism and communism by atheists who have never had any personal belief or relationship with the latter.

Atheism & communism have no connection, other than
that both can be adopted by humans. This atheist hates
the hive mentality & control of communism. Other atheists
& many believers like it.

ChristineM · Mar 29, 2021

SA Huguenot said:
OK, so lets examine what an atheist is.

1. They do not believe there is something as God.
2. They do not believe there is something as a Creator who created everything inclusive of themself.
3. They dont believe a word from the authority of the Bible.
They therefore are sure that they are nothing but an unguided mindless result of nature which are shaped and formed in Nature.
Therefore the Atheist as a product of nature believe in the example of Nature where, the strongest shall survive.
What moral code does such a creature have on his concience?
I am the strongest, and I must survive?
I can have it all? If I cant have it, I can take it?
The above is allowed, because the naturel law of Nature states:
You must survive, eat, and reproduce.
It does not say,
you have to care for the meek, work for your food, and love a partner to grow a family.

Then, If you dont agree to the "Family value" set out by the Christian moral code,
You end up with a total different one where children can now be subdued to hormone suppressions to prevent their gender to mature, the mothers to be supported by government because the fathers just had sex to make babies with no consequesces to anyone.
Or in a religion where polygamy is thought to be a family value,
therefore to conclude,
I have my suspicions over any atheist deciding what "Moral values" should comprise off.
I will rather have a Christian Bible believing person to rule my country, than any atheist.
The track record on Christian leaders ruling in a secular state, is much better than an Atheist ruling any country.
and lets not even mention the deaths by atheism,
All the atheist countries of this world is the most empoverished, historical and current.
Atheism in government is a failure.

Atheism : a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods.

Nothing more, nothing less. Whatever else you add to that to justify hated is nothing to to with atheism

Nimos · Mar 29, 2021

osgart said:
I'm an atheist who accepts that there is objective morality. It's solely up to us to be moral. There's no authority of morality who determines who is morally acceptable and who isn't. There is no natural moral law existing in nature. Rather objective morality is something that just happens to be. Because of objective morality worthwhile societies can be built.

Can you clarify what you mean by "There is no natural moral law existing in nature. Rather objective morality is something that just happens to be."?

Revoltingest · Mar 29, 2021

SA Huguenot said:
They therefore are sure that they are nothing but an unguided mindless result of nature which are shaped and formed in Nature.
Therefore the Atheist as a product of nature believe in the example of Nature where, the strongest shall survive.
What moral code does such a creature have on his concience?

We get morality from our genetic makeup, upbringing, & culture.
Tis the same for religious folk, who interpret their scripture thru
that lens. (It's why there's so much variation in belief even among
those of the same faith, eg, opposite sides of abortion rights.)

Atheism in government is a failure.

And theocracies are successful?
Only for those who believe the state religion.
I prefer secular government.

osgart · Mar 29, 2021

Nimos said:
Can you clarify what you mean by "There is no natural moral law existing in nature. Rather objective morality is something that just happens to be."?

I mean that we are not created with morality in mind. Morality isn't a preplanned design. Objective morality is not intended to be it just is as far as I know.

Nimos · Mar 29, 2021

SA Huguenot said:
And any person thinking that the human somehow posesses a moral standard, and no religion is needed to be the guideline for morality, that is a myth.
to the Atheist there is no reason on self moral compass, for why should there be?

if we are mere animals, why think it is wrong to rape, murder, steal etc?

I assume you agree that not all atheists rape, murder and steal and that some of us, truly believe that it is wrong, do you think that atheists just suppress this urge and some are just better at it than others or why do you think that not all atheists go on a rampage?

Does atheism scare you?

My own religion

Well-Known Member

Lightly seared on the reality grill.

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.

Pragmatic Libertarian

Lightly seared on the reality grill.

My own religion

Well-Known Member

Lightly seared on the reality grill.

Lightly seared on the reality grill.

Well-Known Member

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.

1/10 Subway Stalinist

Well-Known Member

Pragmatic Libertarian

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.

Well-Known Member

Pragmatic Libertarian

Nothing my eye, Something for sure

Well-Known Member