On the Radar: The rise of atheism

[Enterprise-D]

Being raised in a religious society (or family) does not compel you to take up the same faith nowadays, but the morals and the ways of action are enforced on you. U.S. is a puritan society through and through, and the atheists carry on relatively the same values as theists. [Edit: that's my theory.]

I sort of agree (I guess ).

I've posted before that religion is a developmental necessity. It is a key factor in our current regard for morals and moral behaviour. However, it's high time to realise that our morals are self-beneficial and self-sustaining; there's no need to instill a fear of retribution simply because "evil" behaviour is resource consuming and largely unprofitable.

 

[mikenostic]

I sort of agree (I guess ).

I've posted before that religion is a developmental necessity. It is a key factor in our current regard for morals and moral behaviour. However, it's high time to realise that our morals are self-beneficial and self-sustaining; there's no need to instill a fear of retribution simply because "evil" behaviour is resource consuming and largely unprofitable.

I know. It's almost like saying religion is a crutch for people who can't deal with the truth of reality.

 

[Enmos]

I sort of agree (I guess ).

I've posted before that religion is a developmental necessity. It is a key factor in our current regard for morals and moral behaviour. However, it's high time to realise that our morals are self-beneficial and self-sustaining; there's no need to instill a fear of retribution simply because "evil" behaviour is resource consuming and largely unprofitable.

I disagree. Do you realize that you are saying that people that don't have any religion can't have good morals ? :bugeye:

 

[Enterprise-D]

I know. It's almost like saying religion is a crutch for people who can't deal with the truth of reality.

That too...

While I meant on a large scale (development of early humanity to now)...on a finer scale, the typical human will not react well to challenges to his own beliefs. It's like a shattering of 'reality'.

Look at the article alone, people are grumbling that atheism is getting a voice. If theists did not feel deeply threatened, they'd be oblivious to atheism. Matter of fact a large number of (esp. Christian) theists liken atheism to devil-worship...as a group of people to "combat".

 

[Enmos]

That too...

While I meant on a large scale (development of early humanity to now)...on a finer scale, the typical human will not react well to challenges to his own beliefs. It's like a shattering of 'reality'.

Look at the article alone, people are grumbling that atheism is getting a voice. If theists did not feel deeply threatened, they'd be oblivious to atheism. Matter of fact a large number of (esp. Christian) theists liken atheism to devil-worship...as a group of people to "combat".

Oh crap, I misread your previous post.. apologies
I agree with this one too.

 

[Enterprise-D]

I disagree. Do you realize that you are saying that people that don't have any religion can't have good morals ? :bugeye:

No no...I said "a" key factor, not the only one. As a larger organized population, earlier humans would not have been easily controlled (barbaric as they were) had they not feared a greater power. As time went along, these folks (controlled by christianity) would have developed and retained some sort of regard for moral behaviour.


Persons outside of religious development would have developed morals other ways (such as good socio-economics.."hey..if Og die, no can help hunt!" ).

 

[(Q)]

"Abramism°--seems more and more determined to thrust humanity into a new dark age"

Thank you, Tiassa, for sharing that excellent article. It gives one the feeling that there's still a sparkle of hope for mankind and that one day we might rid the earth of the cult of Abramism.

 

[S.A.M.]

That article indicates a severe ignorance of reality.

 

[(Q)]

That article indicates a severe ignorance of reality.

Of course, you can explain your hypocritical emotional outburst?

 

[S.A.M.]

Of course, you can explain your hypocritical emotional outburst?

Ascribing religious motivation to what has been shown, by not one but several studies to be a secular struggle only indicates that truth is not a priority; Mother Teresa was deeply religious, visit any one of her institutions, like the one in Bombay, having a crisis of faith is not a unique phenomenon except for those who think that theists lack the capacity to question and the rest about Hinduism and Buddhism merely indicates that the writer does not read the Asia section of the newspaper.

 

[(Q)]

So, can you explain your hypocritical emotional outburst?

Where exactly is the "severe ignorance of reality" in that article?

 

[S.A.M.]

See previous.

The premise of the article is based on the assumption that the whole world is American.

 

[(Q)]

I don't see that assumption, other than from you. You appear to have missed the premise.

"The rise of atheism is not, in fact hateful. It is an attempt to escape a world painted with hatred. "

 

[S.A.M.]

I don't see that assumption, other than from you. You appear to have missed the premise.

"The rise of atheism is not, in fact hateful. It is an attempt to escape a world painted with hatred. "

There is not one single fact in that article that is supported by anything more than opinion.:shrug:

 

[(Q)]

Denial is certainly one alternative.

"While violence between Hindus and Sikhs is not enough for me to indict either faith, we cannot escape the fact that what will bring India greater prosperity are those things that originate and function outside the religious paradigm. As to the Buddhists, there are myriad considerations, and while I do not consider them harmful as I do the Abramists, I am hard-pressed to see their influence in terms comparable to the effects of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam."

And MOST certainly, we can find centuries of historic support for the above "opinion."

 

[(Q)]

"To kill the Americans and their allies - civilians and military - is an individual duty for every Muslim."

What would be the individual duty of every atheist?

 

[S.A.M.]

Like I said, nothing more than opinion

 

[Harmonic_Subset]

Mother Theresa was well respected for her humanitarian work. Trying to paint her as an atheist after her death is equivalent to Catholics trying to assign her sainthood after her death. It's an attempt to re-write history and it's insulting. If anything they should have done that while she was alive, if she would have accepted it. Give credit where credit is due. Saying she was really an atheist gives people like S.A.M. a very good reason to reject the entire article, and he did.

The fact is, religion is stupid. And since 9-11, religion is the stupidest thing in the whole world. That's the short-short-version of the article. I hope S.A.M. understands that, cause there is no way to make it any more brief.

Myself, I am either an atheist or an agnostic. I prefer atheism when canned religions try to assert themselves. I'm annoyed when religious groups actually try to INCREASE the influence of religion in society. After an incident like 9-11, you'd have to be a goddam idiot to do that.

 

[S.A.M.]

Mother Theresa was well respected for her humanitarian work. Trying to paint her as an atheist after her death is equivalent to Catholics trying to assign her sainthood after her death. It's an attempt to re-write history and it's insulting. If anything they should have done that while she was alive, if she would have accepted it. Give credit where credit is due. Saying she was really an atheist gives people like S.A.M. a very good reason to reject the entire article, and he did.

The fact is, religion is stupid. And since 9-11, religion is the stupidest thing in the whole world. That's the short-short-version of the article. I hope S.A.M. understands that, cause there is no way to make it any more brief.

Myself, I am either an atheist or an agnostic. I prefer atheism when canned religions try to assert themselves. I'm annoyed when religious groups actually try to INCREASE the influence of religion in society. After an incident like 9-11, you'd have to be a goddam idiot to do that.

You must be American. 9/11 was carried out by clubbing playboys. Nothing to do with religion. Also nothing to do with Iraq, Saddam, WMDs, Iran, Afghanistan or Taliban. Any association with al Qaeda is due to obvious fake videos where "Osama" takes credit for it.

You guys moan about rationality yet swallow the bull.

 

[Harmonic_Subset]

We certainly don't need religion muddying things up any more then, do we.