I was merely commenting on the atheism part. You can pick any society you like.
Atheism and political apathy
- Thread starter S.A.M.
- Start date
I was merely commenting on the atheism part. You can pick any society you like.
Well insofar as you're criticizing some of the negative results of atheist political involvement, I'm telling you to look in the mirror. In my opinion, the most important feature of general atheist thought is the ability to adapt to changing circumstances and knowledge. Thus it has typically been atheistic thought patterns that have opened societies up to new ideas and progress, and paved the way for past injustices to be addressed and prevented from reocurring. The idea of a secular society allowing equal access to all races and religions is a very atheistic concept. Why would a hardcore religious ethnic majority want to invite a minority into its country to participate in their society and encourage different views?
Name one atheist country with a secular society.
I'd say Canada comes pretty damn close. Barack Obama was known to be an atheist in his younger years, and I doubt he's truly changed underneath the surface, which would make America in many ways a second such country. But it depends what you mean by atheist country.
Poll results show atheism is a significantly large and rapidly growing minority in Canada, Europe, parts of Asia and even in Israel, but none of these countries has a clear atheist majority as far as I'm aware.
Poll results show atheism is a significantly large and rapidly growing minority in Canada, Europe, parts of Asia and even in Israel, but none of these countries has a clear atheist majority as far as I'm aware.
Antatica
Its a scientific outpost only run by scientists
Sam im sorry but its a silly question, yes countries have churchs because a majority of people tend to have SOME form of religion. This means nothing, if everyone gave up there religion would sociaty colaps?
No!!!!!!!!!!
but this is compleatly irelivent to your operning post. You claimed that all athiasts are politically apathetic, i have proved decisivly that you are wrong. My proof, juila gullard is currently sharing my desktop with sciforums so your propersition is WRONG. End of discussion
Its a scientific outpost only run by scientists
Sam im sorry but its a silly question, yes countries have churchs because a majority of people tend to have SOME form of religion. This means nothing, if everyone gave up there religion would sociaty colaps?
No!!!!!!!!!!
but this is compleatly irelivent to your operning post. You claimed that all athiasts are politically apathetic, i have proved decisivly that you are wrong. My proof, juila gullard is currently sharing my desktop with sciforums so your propersition is WRONG. End of discussion
I don't see any atheist government. All run by theists, or at least presumptive theists.
Perhaps this may help?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_atheism
Antatica
Its a scientific outpost only run by scientists
Sam im sorry but its a silly question, yes countries have churchs because a majority of people tend to have SOME form of religion. This means nothing, if everyone gave up there religion would sociaty colaps?
No!!!!!!!!!!
but this is compleatly irelivent to your operning post. You claimed that all athiasts are politically apathetic, i have proved decisivly that you are wrong. My proof, juila gullard is currently sharing my desktop with sciforums so your propersition is WRONG. End of discussion
No, you did not. I have not seen any evidence of political activity of atheists, least with regards to theists in their society or even on behalf of theists. All you showed was that you are politically aware, but I have yet to see where atheists have contributed to the political scene in any significant manner.
I would argue that the mechanisms of Communism in many ways parallel the mechanisms of religion. Another good reason to disregard Communist philosophy. But this is a typical argument, and quite a frustrating one- that the only societies which have ever attained any sort of atheistic government were the ones in which power was seized and the people were brutally oppressed by communists. Yet even in these societies, the majority of the population running day to day operations retained their religious views. The USSR never fully stamped out the church in private lives, and Russia hasn't benefited much now that it's back out in the open. In China there's always been an exorbitant amount of religious superstition, and it still abounds amongst the majority even after decades of communist rule.
The reason atheists haven't yet been elected to head offices is because no society on Earth has yet moved solidly towards the atheist camp. There has only been a gradual progression over the ages in most societies from extreme religion down to mild religion down to secularism. The time for secular societies governed by democratically elected, outspoken atheists hasn't come yet, but it's only just around the corner. The outdated voter mentality is all that's holding it back, but the demographic is shifting. In the meantime, plenty of atheists have been active, especially in the academic communities which shape the political debate. Perhaps you haven't heard of the intelligent design debacle?
Feel free to point out any society where atheists have positions of power in any capacity that affects political decisions and have defended the rights of theists rather than disparaged them, as a commitment to secular society. I'll check in tomorrow.
im not sure your right on that, Im pritty sure NZ had (or has) an athiast PM and australia could have had heeps of them because we dont actually ask our pollies what religion they are. There are very few pollies who religion i could actually tell you.
Atheists are almost never in the majority, just like geniuses.
Sweden 46 - 85% Atheist/ Agnostic/ Nonbeliever in God
Denmark 43 - 80%
Norway 31 - 72%
Japan 64 - 65%
Finland 28 - 60%
Sweden 46 - 85% Atheist/ Agnostic/ Nonbeliever in God
Denmark 43 - 80%
Norway 31 - 72%
Japan 64 - 65%
Finland 28 - 60%
Feel free to point out any society where atheists have positions of power in any capacity that affects political decisions and have defended the rights of theists rather than disparaged them, as a commitment to secular society. I'll check in tomorrow.
I could point to Richard Dawkins, a highly influential scientist, but it depends what you believe religious rights are. I don't think many atheists will support the idea of kids being sequestered and indoctrinated from a young age in religious schools, with the forceful suppression of alternative views. If you're just talking about peoples' rights to believe whatever they want to believe, to express their views and to raise their families in nondiscriminatory traditions, then those are rights I haven't heard many atheists question at all.
I'd question the accuracy of this survey. Look how wild the swing is on Finland and Norway- why such a large error margin? From what I know of Sweden, I'll bet it's close to 50% atheist, but to call it majority atheist I think is a bit early. If a series of definitive polls were to be conducted on the matter and such a result were obtained, then I'd definitely be convinced.
Are you telling me that criminals in prison freely confess to being atheist?
Or people with severe mental disease or genetic defects.
You're holding up Richard Dawkins as one who stands for the rights of the religious? The Richard Dawkins? Who wrote the God Delusion? I suppose you think Christians who consider atheists as an immoral plague on society are standing up for their rights?
Or people with severe mental disease or genetic defects.
You're holding up Richard Dawkins as one who stands for the rights of the religious? The Richard Dawkins? Who wrote the God Delusion? I suppose you think Christians who consider atheists as an immoral plague on society are standing up for their rights?
Richard Dawkins has never said anything about violating the rights of the religious to practice the faith of their choosing.
Except for signing two petitions: one to prevent parents from teaching their children religion [which he revoked when he realised how foolish it made him look] and one to shut down all faith schools. Not to mention making disparaging remarks about religious people in public, including refusing to shake the hand of a minister. I bet if anyone refused to shake his hand because he is an atheist, it would be a different story.
The religious don't have the inherent right to shake the hand of anyone they please. They should also not have the right to violate the religious freedoms of their children.
I will let any children I sire believe what they want to believe.