To the atheists...

An atheist government enforces private religion

  • Total voters
    23
S.A.M.

S.A.M.

uniquely dreadful
Valued Senior Member
Imagine your country gets, somehow a government that is pro-science, at the same time being pro-atheism.

In order to educate the people better about being areligious, they decide to:

- stop all public display of religion
-change all religious holidays to secular counterparts
-convert all places of worship into historical structures if old, or into alternative institutions if new
-remove all references to God from public documentation
-enforce the idea that religion should be private, through fines and legal measures

What would your position be?

Theists, please comment without voting
 
Last edited:
I don't think our government should take a position on religious affairs. We already support science, something that should continue or increase.
 
That sounds more like dictatorship S.A.M.
I would not support such a government. A government should be about keeping freedom of speech and freedom of religion as principles.

But I don't think an atheist government would take such a position.
 
Last edited:
The libertarian movement has a high percentage of atheists, yet upholding freedom of religion is one of our principles. Much as I would prefer not to live among people who are always on the verge of religiously motivated genocidal outbursts, I recognize that religion is an instinct (a collection of archetypes, which are unconscious beliefs) and any attempt to eradicate it by force will cause more harm than good. It's justice Brandeis's slogan again: The best disinfectant is sunshine. Like racists and all the other cockroaches, we need religionists to feel free to assemble in public and to contribute their boneheaded comments to public discourse. The alternative is not to know where they're meeting and what they're planning in the absence of rational criticism.

Nonetheless I believe that separation of church and state should be more effective. No references to gods in official documents or ceremonies. Better laws about discrimination against people Christians don't like such as gays, women, ethnic minorities, foreigners, and everyone who isn't exactly like them. However I don't consider that a high priority among the changes that need to be made to this country.

Science flourished for decades amid an American population with an overwhelming Christian majority. The current anti-science movement is just a reflection of a certain wing of the Christian community becoming ascendant. The ease with which they convince more moderate Christians of anti-science dogma is more a reflection of the dismal accomplishments of a government-run education system than anything else.

So fixing the educational system is more important than going after religion directly, and is also both kinder and more practical. Other countries have large Christian majorities without anyone building a Museum of Evolution Denial.
 
I'd support it for certain religions, but I wouldn't want to do with with the introverted religions :p
 
banning religion all together would be a serious infringement of peoples rights, i would however support laws to prevent the religious trying to covert or force their beliefs on people.
 
I could vote for some of that, but as a renewed theist I don't object to the public display of religion - which, suprising to Sam, includes abayas, symbols of oppression though they are.
 
The opposite of those enforced rules should be initiated instead, that of not forcing.

By simply stopping the cycle of indoctrination of children and allowing them to learn biological and cosmological concepts from science instead of from myths and superstitions would find more and more people giving up these cults, and we'd observe events such as religious institutions turning to places of learning about biology and cosmology, displays of public religion turning into displays of public lectures and seminars, religious holidays turning into holidays of recognition for discoveries of science.

One simply doesn't rid that which has been infesting mankind for centuries. Changes of this magnitude will take generations.
 
I think some people need religion as much as they need air and food. I can't imagine why anyone would take that away from them.
Its arrogant.
 
vslayer said:
banning religion all together would be a serious infringement of peoples rights, i would however support laws to prevent the religious trying to covert or force their beliefs on people.
Click to expand...

Ah so if atheists do it, its alright?
 
S.A.M. said:
Ah so if atheists do it, its alright?
Click to expand...

Huh? Have Christians been supporting laws to prevent atheists trying to convert or force their beliefs on people ?

Edit: I mean religious people of course, not just Christians :)
 
Orleander said:
I think some people need religion as much as they need air and food. I can't imagine why anyone would take that away from them.
Its arrogant.
Click to expand...

So, if the person "needed" their religion simply because they were indoctrinated as a child, is it still right to let them cling to it? In other words, remove the indoctrination, not the religion itself.
 
Enmos said:
Huh? Have Christians been supporting laws to prevent atheists trying to convert or force their beliefs on people ?

Edit: I mean religious people of course, not just Christians :)
Click to expand...

I mean if you support a law that prevents someone from proselytising, does that mean that you support freedom of religion?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top