Why isn't faith embarrasing?

[S.A.M.]

Huh? I seriously have no fucking idea how the normal behavior of humans regardless of their belief status has anything to do with this. In all of my jobs (even the DOD ones) I've only known two or three atheists. The rest were xians, muslims, and jews. Actually, there was one guy who said he wa a buddhist. He didn't act like one though.

Anyway. WTF?

And? having an atheist in the equation made a difference because?

 

[superluminal]

And? having an atheist in the equation made a difference because?

Huh? I think you better rephrase your whole point here for the assumption-insinuation-cryptically challenged. That would be me.

 

[S.A.M.]

The tenets of the cult must remain consistent in order for the cult to be successful and for the cycle of indoctrination to continue . Any moves towards new ideas that might spawn civilization would result in inconsistencies, hence tribalism must be maintained at all times and at all costs.



Incoming salvos. Red Herring rain.

Are you saying that, given the opportunity, you would not "educate" everyone you could into your ideological viewpoint?

(You could be such a reasonable person, IF ONLY you weren't a theist)

 

[S.A.M.]

Huh? I think you better rephrase your whole point here for the assumption-insinuation-cryptically challenged. That would be me.

I mean did the athiest somehow show qualities that set him apart as a more rational, more reasoned being? Did he advocate that weapons are bad and kill people? Did he...etc.

What made the atheist (such as you) so rational and reasonable as compared to the others?

I am curious to understand what positive changes you see associated with atheism in your workplace or society (besides the feel good moment from calling all theists as delusional, that is)

 

[(Q)]

Are you saying that, given the opportunity, you would not "educate" everyone you could into your ideological viewpoint?

I would attempt to put semblance where required in order to provide free education for everyone. Even books like the Quran and the Bible would have their places right along side the other books of mythologies.

 

[iceaura]

”

I disagree. I think the reason that we do not have a Maoist or Stalinist society all over the world, redesigning perfect humans in a perfect society using cold logic is because of religion

You seem to have confused Stalinism with cold logic aimed at human perfection, Maoism with Western secularism, and (once again) theism with religion.

I disagree. Most religious people I know (and I'm not talking about the ones who abuse religion for power) are charitable folks who prefer to run educational and aid organisations.

The rest of us are talking about the ones who abuse religion for power. Even at a very local, community level. We think they are a very large percentage of the religious people.

Actually that is what western secularism does; it mocks differences and insists on conformity. Everything must be standardised to a monoculture.

? Methinks Western theistic religion plays a role, there - one similar to the role played by other theistic religions, we observe. Otherwise, the engines of capitalist cultural leveling are not based in any particular ideology - the bankers can, and do, quote scripture to their purpose.

Does that extend to discrimination against those who do not follow our ideologies?

Among theistic religionists, it certainly does. The science director of the Texas Education Agency just got fired for hinting that she might be opposed to the major local theistic religion's ideological textbook modifications, for example. She'd been in the job, and on the civil service ladder, for many years.

She's in her late fifties, looking forward to taking care of her father on a much reduced income and insurance coverage.

This kind of public lesson is typical of religion in action, wherever and whenever it has acquired political power. The theistic ones, in particular, seem to ally with fascist politics easily.

Are there religious communists?

There are branches of "communism" that would qualify as religions under evenhanded definitions (Lenin's fervent ideology and Jesuit trained approach, say. Or Maoism). And of course a good many Christian sects have been communist, over the years - some still are, essentially. The early Christian Church was a communist organization.
But you couldn't possibly have not known that.

I am curious to understand what positive changes you see associated with atheism in your workplace or society

As both my workplace and general society are dominated by theists, I can only point to anecdotes. But the little refuges of social hanging out in which the theists are outnumbered, or of different kinds so as to cancel out in some ways, do provide many of the more joyful memories of my life. And none of the really ugly ones.

 

[S.A.M.]

I would attempt to put semblance where required in order to provide free education for everyone.

Well well well. Even you can speak sense occasionally, it seems.

I'll contribute to any enterprise like that.

Here is my fav charity.

http://www.ikat.org/

I wish you success.

 

[S.A.M.]

You seem to have confused Stalinism with cold logic aimed at human perfection, Maoism with Western secularism, and (once again) theism with religion.
The rest of us are talking about the ones who abuse religion for power. Even at a very local, community level. We think they are a very large percentage of the religious people.

And this is really unusual because when atheists are in power, they do not abuse it.
And religious people are a negligible proportion of the population, so a high proportion of them abusing power is really noticeable.

? Methinks Western theistic religion plays a role, there - one similar to the role played by other theistic religions, we observe. Otherwise, the engines of capitalist cultural leveling are not based in any particular ideology - the bankers can, and do, quote scripture to their purpose.
Among theistic religionists, it certainly does. The science director of the Texas Education Agency just got fired for hinting that she might be opposed to the major local theistic religion's ideological textbook modifications, for example. She'd been in the job, and on the civil service ladder, for many years.

She's in her late fifties, looking forward to taking care of her father on a much reduced income and insurance coverage.

Is this supported by all the theists? Are they glad to see her go?

This kind of public lesson is typical of religion in action, wherever and whenever it has acquired political power. The theistic ones, in particular, seem to ally with fascist politics easily.
There are branches of "communism" that would qualify as religions under evenhanded definitions (Lenin's fervent ideology and Jesuit trained approach, say. Or Maoism). And of course a good many Christian sects have been communist, over the years - some still are, essentially. The early Christian Church was a communist organization.
But you couldn't possibly have not known that.

So you're saying the reasson why all communists' regimes destroyed religious places of worship and killed religious figures while forbidding worship is because they were religious?

As both my workplace and general society are dominated by theists, I can only point to anecdotes. But the little refuges of social hanging out in which the theists are outnumbered, or of different kinds so as to cancel out in some ways, do provide many of the more joyful memories of my life. And none of the really ugly ones.

I wonder what the religious people under atheist regimes considered their joyful moments.

 

[Myles]

And you would have known this even if you were a feral child.

If part of a group of feral children a value system would develop over time. Would a feral child become a Christiamn or a Muslim ?

 

[Myles]

Correct, without the restraining force of religion, human beings would never have overcome their innate tendencies to tribalism and violence.

Removing the restraint of religion has shown how easily men return to violence, tribalism and genocide.

Just read the comments that educated rational atheists on this forum make while generalising about all theists. No differences between nuts at either extreme.

(Q) would probably run re-education camps like Stalin or Mao given the chance. And consider it nothing but a logical choice, as they probably did.

Give me an example where religion has acted as a restraint on other than the weak ! The crusades, Israel/Palestine, and others too numerous to list ? If that is restraint, let my people go !

 

[visceral_instinct]

Given the common definition of faith, i.e. belief without the requirement for proof or evidence, why wouldn't anyone with even a rudimentary sense of intellectual integrity be ashamed to call themselves a "person of faith"?

Is it an ingrained fear of not belonging to the group?

Is it an actual hedging of bets against a possible hell?

Is it simply intellectual lazyness?

Look at the definition. Apply it to any other part of your practical life. Say your stock investments, or whether or not you'll buy that used car, or any number of other instances where you would or would not willingly shutdown your intellect and just hope for the best.

Discuss.

I agree.

That's the point I always try to make. If I went around talking to an invisible person, people would at best take it as a joke, at worst ask me if I was on something. Yet otherwise rational adults regularly go into churches and do exactly that.

 

[iceaura]

So you're saying the reasson why all communists' regimes destroyed religious places of worship and killed religious figures while forbidding worship is because they were religious?

That would be the usual reason to do stuff like that, wouldn't it?

Isn't that why the Taliban blew up the Buddhas, for example?

It's not the Gods who are jealous - it's the priests.

We think they are a very large percentage of the religious people. ”

And this is really unusual because when atheists are in power, they do not abuse it.

The constant switching between religion and theism is creating confusion, here, for one thing.

For another: power corrupts. Religion often provides a way of gaining power. The objections I have toward institutionalized theistic religion do not lie (primarily) in its direct effects on individual character, but in the means of oppression and avenues toward unjustified power it opens up, and consequent corruption of both individual character and society in general.

Atheists abuse power - including theistic religious power, when they get it. How many atheistic Popes do you think there have been ? None ?

I wonder what the religious people under atheist regimes considered their joyful moments.

My comment was not about my regime, but my community. You asked for beneficial aspects of atheism at work, in society. I pointed out that whatever they might be, we in the US could hardly know about them.

And the various absurdities of work and life their beliefs create do not embarrass the faithful, or create doubt. If I had a religion that required people to wear clothes while swimming, and fobade the sale of used cars and beer but not bricks on Sunday, I'd stop and think a minute.

 

[S.A.M.]

If part of a group of feral children a value system would develop over time. Would a feral child become a Christiamn or a Muslim ?

Have you heard of any society that has developed without religion?

Give me an example where religion has acted as a restraint on other than the weak ! The crusades, Israel/Palestine, and others too numerous to list ? If that is restraint, let my people go !

You mean the vast majority of religious people living peacefully escapes you?

That would be the usual reason to do stuff like that, wouldn't it?

Isn't that why the Taliban blew up the Buddhas, for example?

It's not the Gods who are jealous - it's the priests.

So, in the absence of religion, people create other "religion-like" systems.

Seems about right.

For another: power corrupts. Religion often provides a way of gaining power. The objections I have toward theistic religion do not lie (primarily) in its direct effects on individual character, but in the means of oppression and avenues toward unjustified power it opens up, and consequent corruption of both individual character and society in general.

Ah so you're saying a group of atheists would also eventually become corrupted by a power structure. I agree.

My comment was not about my regime, but my community. You asked for beneficial aspects of atheism at work, in society. I pointed out that whatever they might be, we in the US could hardly know about them.

Well I have lived in Mumbai and Saudi Arabia and the United States; of the three, I have found the people in the US to be most likely to exhibit racism towards a woman like me. What does that indicate to you?

 

[iceaura]

So, in the absence of religion, people create other "religion-like" systems.

It wasn't in the absence of religion. It was in replacement of well-established religions, and usurption of their groomed constituency.

Have you heard of any society that has developed without religion?

If by "developed" you mean became agricultural, no. Religion seems necessary to agriculture, at least early on.

And that makes a lot of sense.

Well I have lived in Mumbai and Saudi Arabia and the United States; of the three, I have found the people in the US to be most likely to exhibit racism towards a woman like me. What does that indicate to you?

That theistic religion does not prevent racism ? That suburban white people who live among suburban white people need to get out more ? That the Jim Crow era is not long past, in the US ? Damn if I know.

I can guarantee you this: the more fervently religious people in the US are not the least racist.

 

[Myles]

Have you heard of any society that has developed without religion?

You mean the vast majority of religious people living peacefully escapes you?



So, in the absence of religion, people create other "religion-like" systems.

Seems about right.



Ah so you're saying a group of atheists would also eventually become corrupted by a power structure. I agree.


Well I have lived in Mumbai and Saudi Arabia and the United States; of the three, I have found the people in the US to be most likely to exhibit racism towards a woman like me. What does that indicate to you?

I refer to your first point above.

If you are prepared to equate religion with superstition I know of no such society. But they are based on fear of the unknown, a need to
propitiate putative gods and performs rituals.

We all started out that way but some of us have moved on, the most obvious turning point being the Age of Reason

 

[SnakeLord]

I disagree. I think the reason that we do not have a Maoist or Stalinist society all over the world, redesigning perfect humans in a perfect society using cold logic is because of religion.

Ah yes, the perfect utopia that was the inquisition, the crusades, the reconquista, the troubles in Northern Ireland, the French wars of religion, jihad, 30 years war, etc etc and so on.

So what happens when a society becomes less religious? I'm sure Skinwalker will happily provide relevant data, but in short: less crime, less abortion, less teen pregnancy.. less of seemingly everything that you religious people outwardly condemn but inwardly seem to thrive on. As mentioned to lg recently, why is it we find India, some 92% religiosity, has a 53% child sex abuse statistic? Find out the statistic for a society with 10% religiosity.

Furthermore I must raise issue with your statement given that it does not refer to atheists, it refers to communists. As explained there is a vast difference. You might as well just say that chess players cause the most harm because Stalin played chess. Stalin might very well have been an atheist, (aswell as a chess player), but neither of those is culpable for the actions committed. How many atheists on this forum alone? How many of those are communists? You seem to be under the impression that one means the other. Needless to say, it does not.

Short of helping old grandmas cope with the thought of impending death, what has religion actually aided? Less violence it has not.

Most religious people I know (and I'm not talking about the ones who abuse religion for power) are charitable folks who prefer to run educational and aid organisations.

Purely out of interest... "educational" in what regard? Education that what they believe is true, so help you god? How many of these "friends" of yours actually go around teaching the facts and theories of evolution? Instead they offer you bread in exchange for your acceptance that their 'tribe' is the right tribe. Hell, we could all use another skilled person in our tribe.. What better way to get volunteers, (loyal ones), than to coax them with what they need?

Actually that is what western secularism does; it mocks differences and insists on conformity.

I am afraid I disagree. While religion had the say a bunch of homosexuals had to hide and pretend to be something they were not. Western secularism said "hey, be what you want to be". I am unaware of its accuracy but I saw a poster on the tube by some gay help group that stated: 1 in 10 people are gay. If that's true, and there are 6 billion people, how many people under the banner of religion can't even admit to being who they are without fear of death or being outcast? Doesn't the muslim world still stone these people to death? Do they do that under the banner of secularism? The bible shows exactly what religious thinking leads to. Even tarot readers were to be stoned to death. Ok, I agree they're idiots, but stoning them to death? And in 2008 people, religious people, are still stoning people to death all because of what this person does with his own penis. Where does secularism do this?

A few years back women couldn't vote, under the banner of religion, woman couldn't preach, under the banner of religion, etc etc and so on. From a biblical standpoint you, as a woman, have absolutely nothing to complain about unless you want beatings. No Sam, it is not the religious that gave you the right and the ability to talk openly amongst men. A short while back and you'd already be dead. Think about that. Everytime you open your mouth to assert your opinion, think what would really happen under the banner of religion.

Does that extend to discrimination against those who do not follow our ideologies?

I've been drinking, (it's New Year), so you'll have to forgive me. Maybe I'm just plain drunk but your question seems odd... I'll just answer it as I see it.. sort of.

Discrimination can and will occur against anyone of any 'group'. A 14 year old chess fanatic will certainly face discrimination from the schools football team, it is a given. Stick happens.

The thing is.. I'm being honest although slightly drunk..

Sandy, (example), would face a lot less stick on a site dedicated to jebus worship. She could talk about her close romantic encounters with jebus to her hearts content and everyone would say "aaah" and "oooh", and "it's so lovely" and the world would be happy. The thing is, and I hate to break it to you.. Sandy comes to a science forum and says she loves jebus. Does that not strike you as odd? If Sandy wanted people to agree and ooh and aah and kumba ya she could do so easily. Instead she comes to the one place that isn't going to ooh and aah and kumba ya and complains because they don't? What are you moaning about?

How much joy and love and respect am I going to get if I log on to jebusownsyou.com and say jebus was a faggot? Come on, it's not quantum mechanics. I'm sorry, but Adstar, Sandy and Woody are not going to hear their hippy jewish god praised on a science forum. Neither is lg and his 300 single gods. That's what happens when you decide to spout your crap on a forum that has specific principles that do not tolerate your crap.

Don't get me wrong... Thor.. love the guy. Long hair, masculine body, carries a hammer. Dude's awesome. We can discuss the mythology, the belief... The minute some twonk comes along and says "he's real, he's real!" what do you expect? yhwh, global floods, mass murder blah blah.. "but he's real!"... oh fuck off. This forum is related to science, not science fiction. Life is not an episode of Stargate.

Is that what your parent did?

Sorry, been drinking.. Is what what my parents did?

Are there religious communists?

Are there any atheists in foxholes?

 

[S.A.M.]

We all started out that way but some of us have moved on, the most obvious turning point being the Age of Reason

Also known as the Age of Two World Wars, the Age of Structural Adjustment Policies and the Age of the Atomic Bombing of Two Civilian Cities, the Age of Communist Genocide, the Age of the Holocaust, the Age of Forced Sterilisation of Unworthy Peoples and the Age of Eugenics and the Age of Global Arms Trade and War on Terror.

Is that what you mean?

 

[S.A.M.]

Ah yes, the perfect utopia that was the inquisition, the crusades, the reconquista, the troubles in Northern Ireland, the French wars of religion, jihad, 30 years war, etc etc and so on.

So what happens when a society becomes less religious? I'm sure Skinwalker will happily provide relevant data, but in short: less crime, less abortion, less teen pregnancy.. less of seemingly everything that you religious people outwardly condemn but inwardly seem to thrive on. As mentioned to lg recently, why is it we find India, some 92% religiosity, has a 53% child sex abuse statistic? Find out the statistic for a society with 10% religiosity.

Furthermore I must raise issue with your statement given that it does not refer to atheists, it refers to communists. As explained there is a vast difference. You might as well just say that chess players cause the most harm because Stalin played chess. Stalin might very well have been an atheist, (aswell as a chess player), but neither of those is culpable for the actions committed. How many atheists on this forum alone? How many of those are communists? You seem to be under the impression that one means the other. Needless to say, it does not.

Short of helping old grandmas cope with the thought of impending death, what has religion actually aided? Less violence it has not.



Purely out of interest... "educational" in what regard? Education that what they believe is true, so help you god? How many of these "friends" of yours actually go around teaching the facts and theories of evolution? Instead they offer you bread in exchange for your acceptance that their 'tribe' is the right tribe. Hell, we could all use another skilled person in our tribe.. What better way to get volunteers, (loyal ones), than to coax them with what they need?



I am afraid I disagree. While religion had the say a bunch of homosexuals had to hide and pretend to be something they were not. Western secularism said "hey, be what you want to be". I am unaware of its accuracy but I saw a poster on the tube by some gay help group that stated: 1 in 10 people are gay. If that's true, and there are 6 billion people, how many people under the banner of religion can't even admit to being who they are without fear of death or being outcast? Doesn't the muslim world still stone these people to death? Do they do that under the banner of secularism? The bible shows exactly what religious thinking leads to. Even tarot readers were to be stoned to death. Ok, I agree they're idiots, but stoning them to death? And in 2008 people, religious people, are still stoning people to death all because of what this person does with his own penis. Where does secularism do this?

A few years back women couldn't vote, under the banner of religion, woman couldn't preach, under the banner of religion, etc etc and so on. From a biblical standpoint you, as a woman, have absolutely nothing to complain about unless you want beatings. No Sam, it is not the religious that gave you the right and the ability to talk openly amongst men. A short while back and you'd already be dead. Think about that. Everytime you open your mouth to assert your opinion, think what would really happen under the banner of religion.



I've been drinking, (it's New Year), so you'll have to forgive me. Maybe I'm just plain drunk but your question seems odd... I'll just answer it as I see it.. sort of.

Discrimination can and will occur against anyone of any 'group'. A 14 year old chess fanatic will certainly face discrimination from the schools football team, it is a given. Stick happens.

The thing is.. I'm being honest although slightly drunk..

Sandy, (example), would face a lot less stick on a site dedicated to jebus worship. She could talk about her close romantic encounters with jebus to her hearts content and everyone would say "aaah" and "oooh", and "it's so lovely" and the world would be happy. The thing is, and I hate to break it to you.. Sandy comes to a science forum and says she loves jebus. Does that not strike you as odd? If Sandy wanted people to agree and ooh and aah and kumba ya she could do so easily. Instead she comes to the one place that isn't going to ooh and aah and kumba ya and complains because they don't? What are you moaning about?

How much joy and love and respect am I going to get if I log on to jebusownsyou.com and say jebus was a faggot? Come on, it's not quantum mechanics. I'm sorry, but Adstar, Sandy and Woody are not going to hear their hippy jewish god praised on a science forum. Neither is lg and his 300 single gods. That's what happens when you decide to spout your crap on a forum that has specific principles that do not tolerate your crap.

Don't get me wrong... Thor.. love the guy. Long hair, masculine body, carries a hammer. Dude's awesome. We can discuss the mythology, the belief... The minute some twonk comes along and says "he's real, he's real!" what do you expect? yhwh, global floods, mass murder blah blah.. "but he's real!"... oh fuck off. This forum is related to science, not science fiction. Life is not an episode of Stargate.



Sorry, been drinking.. Is what what my parents did?



Are there any atheists in foxholes?

I'm sorry, is everyone an American Christian here?

Are we all to be defined by western morality? As always?

 

[Cyperium]

Given the common definition of faith, i.e. belief without the requirement for proof or evidence, why wouldn't anyone with even a rudimentary sense of intellectual integrity be ashamed to call themselves a "person of faith"?

Is it an ingrained fear of not belonging to the group?

Is it an actual hedging of bets against a possible hell?

Is it simply intellectual lazyness?

Look at the definition. Apply it to any other part of your practical life. Say your stock investments, or whether or not you'll buy that used car, or any number of other instances where you would or would not willingly shutdown your intellect and just hope for the best.

Discuss.

I don't shut down my intellect, I've seen many things in which I've thought I was right about something, but later found that I was wrong, I don't think the majority of people know about the thermosphere, the place in the sky where the temperature rises instead of dropping, they think the temperature get's colder and colder indefinetly. I don't think that the majority of people knows about how we (at least occasionally) go through the suns atmosphere with solar winds and I don't think that the majority of people know about the uncertainty principle, in which nothing can be exactly determined in a quantum scale, people on a certain level takes science for granted, they don't go around demanding proof, why would they? Some people aren't even that interested, they just want to get on with their lives. Which is the reason we are here after all, to live life. Not demanding proof of how the world is constructed and if it was random or with intent (or random with intent) or whatever.

Why is that?

Not because I shut off my intellect, or because they do, but because there are things that matters more in life, things like meaning and faith.

 

[SnakeLord]

I'm sorry, is everyone an American Christian here?

Are we all to be defined by western morality? As always?

I'm sorry, that was your response to my entire post? I almost feel like turning religious and saying: "shuttup woman. Return to your hole and cover yourself up.. I'm sick of the sight of your neck.."

:bugeye:

Look, I understand what day it is, but please.. if you're going to remain in, (undoubtedly while the guy of the household freely bonks 4 other women), at least do me the courtesy of responding fully. You're talking to an atheist now, I wont hold it against you.