It does, actually, atheists are destructive by nature. All atheists in a position of power seek first and foremost to destroy religious symbols.
Moderate Faith vs Pure Atheism: Society
- Thread starter Norsefire
- Start date
It does, actually, atheists are destructive by nature. All atheists in a position of power seek first and foremost to destroy religious symbols.
That isn't what atheism means. Atheists also think about issues of philosophy, life, spirituality, ect. They just don't use God as an explanation for all that.
Here we go again...
Do you disagree that atheists in power attack religious symbols?
Sigh, what athiests have done this?. and if some have It doesnt mean that if religion ceases to be that that part of the worlds history would be wiped away.
I see a rise in atheism correlates with a breakdown in individual, family and social structure. To me that is indicative of destruction.
Mostly because of the persistence of religion and not due to lack of trying on the part of atheists. All societies with official atheistic rule have had their cathedrals and statues, their religious works, methods of worship etc destroyed or forbidden.
She means we don't want nativity scenes on public grounds, ten commandments in courthouses, and the like.
No, just because you have a handful of exmaples of somethng doesnt mean that any atheist in power is going to gravitiate towards the destruction of religious symbols, if anything they would see it as part of the worlds history.
You're kidding. Even in so called secular societies, any hint of religious symbolism is effectively opposed and banned by atheists. If by any chance atheists were to take over, we would become a poorer, colourless, joyless world indeed.
I disagree, history is history and if religion just died out over time what point would there be in trying to remove evidence that it existed if nobody cared anymore. None.
Your disagreement does not correlate with facts as they are present. I believe atheists would destroy anything with the slightest association to religion for fear of its resurgence.
You really cant prove that if religion did just die out that athiests would still remove the symbols with current facts either, Its all speculation.
You really cant prove that if religion did just die out that athiests would still remove the symbols with current facts either, Its all speculation.
I don't need to. I just look at atheists in power in so called secular societies today.
And look at what is replacing it; if faith is becoming less important, what is replacing it? Money? Drugs? Media?
This simply isn't adequate.
You really cant prove that if religion did just die out that athiests would still remove the symbols with current facts either, Its all speculation.
I think so, that they would want to, ya know, "burn the cathedrals, burn the sistine chapel, burn jerusalem, burn the US constitution ( it mentions God), burn the US dollar bill, etc
It's everywhere, and removing it is a MASSIVE change.
No, I agree. Didn't they blow up those giant Buddhist sculptures in Afghanistan?
Oh, that was the Taliban, my bad...
Secular society has nothing to do with atheism. In fact it was created by religious people in order to ensure religious freedom.
And you're quite right; I agree, if some other form of spirituality would take the place of religion (or at least, Abrahamic religion), then it's ok, as a common ground for the people HOWEVER when you compare England to Italy, there is a massive difference. IN England it is increasingly becoming more and more just about money and I think it's a DISGRACE to the English people. Whatever happened to loyalty to the King?
Also, look at the flag of Spain, the English Flag, the coats of arms and flags of so many European countries: there's a cross there.
Why would they do that? If their reason is that religion is violent, then it makes no sense to also be violent.