Atheist versus Atheist - Page 2 - Religion, God, and Theology

Two Plus Two Forums Other Topics Religion, God, and Theology

Atheist versus Atheist

Post Reply Subscribe

...

Page 2 of 6

1 2 3 4 5 6

Page 2 of 6

1 2 3 4 5 6

08-02-2010 , 06:10 AM

#26

tame_deuces

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 17,817

Quote:

Originally Posted by MelchyBeau

Snip.

Quote:

Originally Posted by vixticator

Snip.

Quote:

Originally Posted by batair

Snip.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MelchyBeau

Snip.

Quote:

Originally Posted by vbnautilus

Snip.

Guys, you are overreacting wildly to Megenoita's (sp?) post.

All you have to do as an atheist to have a moral system of just as high standard and consistency as any theist according to said logic is to claim your morals were inscribed on an archetypical teapot which also said God does not exist.

I don't see why we need to make it more complicated than that. Occam's razor.

Quote

08-02-2010 , 06:39 AM

#27

Arouet

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 6,433

Quote:

Originally Posted by tame_deuces

True. I just don't know what I'd do if I ever found out that the teapot didn't exist. Probably go rape a few women, and kill children for sport.

Quote

08-02-2010 , 09:52 AM

#28

SixT4

veteran

Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 2,924

Quote:

Originally Posted by Splendour

You don't think the atheist-atheist/atheist-Buddhist controversy shows that the world will never be conflictless?

I thought the whole point of the New Atheists was to achieve world peace through atheism? Am I misinterpreting their aims?

If all religion were eradicated never to arise again could the world ever be safe from all ideas?

a) Not everyone who doesn't believe in God wants religion eradicated. I'm not particularly fussed.
b) Conflict does not solely arise over religion. People will always fight.

Quote

08-02-2010 , 09:54 AM

#29

SixT4

veteran

Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 2,924

Quote:

Originally Posted by Megenoita

I've never heard an argument that atheism should be more peaceful than another view, just that the other views (ones with gods) cause violence and wars, so they're bad. Atheism can't really argue for any less violence since any particular atheistic worldview can justify virtually any act. For instance, Jeffrey Dahmer (killed many people, raped men, ate people, etc.), once caught and imprisoned said evolution was the key contributor to his depravity, that if we're just animals, there's nothing wrong with anything, including killing, raping, eating our own kind, since all these things happen in the wild. Makes sense to me from an atheist perspective. He said if he had known God existed at the time he never could have committed those acts because he would have believed in human dignity, inherent human worth.

Of course atheists can believe in human dignity, inherent human worth, it's just not consistent with any worldview they can contrive; there will be a logical disconnect.

Communist countries tend to want to get rid of religion to better warp human minds and take away rights-it's population control.

When apologists for atheism such as Richard Dawkins go around talking, they're attacking religion, not defending the plausibility of atheism.

Please keep it coming. Posts like this amuse me greatly.

Quote

08-02-2010 , 01:37 PM

#30

G1982

old hand

Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 1,770

Quote:

Originally Posted by Megenoita

Communist countries tend to want to get rid of religion to better warp human minds and take away rights-it's population control.

So atheism is mind warping population control and religion is the paradigm of free thinking excellence...?

Next you will be claiming atheists hold an illogical faith based position and theists are masters of evidence based reasoning.

Edit: And by "next", I mean "in the preceding paragraph of your post to the one I quote above".

Quote

08-02-2010 , 03:54 PM

#31

Splendour

banned

Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 18,896

Quote:

Originally Posted by G1982

It is if you believe Ravi Zacharias.

He says that there are no free societies in the world like the ones with Christian-Judeo heritages.

Christian-Judeos are the only ones that will allow you to dissent. Try dissenting in a Muslim country or a totalitarian one.

We see where it got the Dalai Lama...permit residence in India.

Quote

08-02-2010 , 05:22 PM

#32

tame_deuces

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 17,817

Quote:

Originally Posted by Splendour

Please tell the good Ravi to go to Serbia and proclaim his love for Albanians.

I'm sorry, but the good Ravi obviously does not not his geography nor his history.

Quote

08-02-2010 , 08:06 PM

#33

Max Raker

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 15,738

Quote:

Originally Posted by Splendour

It is if you believe Ravi Zacharias.

He says that there are no free societies in the world like the ones with Christian-Judeo heritages.

Christian-Judeos are the only ones that will allow you to dissent. Try dissenting in a Muslim country or a totalitarian one.

We see where it got the Dalai Lama...permit residence in India.

The Christian-Judeo free society of India?

Quote

08-02-2010 , 08:21 PM

#34

MelchyBeau

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 6,043

Quote:

According to the 2001 census, Hinduism accounts for 80.5% of the population of India.[2] Islam (13.4%), Christianity (2.3%) and Sikhism (1.9%) are the other major religions followed by the people of India.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_India

Quote

08-02-2010 , 09:24 PM

#35

Splendour

banned

Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 18,896

Quote:

Originally Posted by Max Raker

The Christian-Judeo free society of India?

Did you misread?

The Dalai Lama is from Tibet and forced to go to India by China.

Quote

08-02-2010 , 09:31 PM

#36

Max Raker

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 15,738

Quote:

Originally Posted by Splendour

Did you misread?

The Dalai Lama is from Tibet and forced to go to India by China.

Right, so India is ok with his dissenting speech? Making it a non christian free society?

Quote

08-02-2010 , 09:42 PM

#37

Splendour

banned

Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 18,896

Quote:

Originally Posted by Max Raker

Right, so India is ok with his dissenting speech? Making it a non christian free society?

Afaik India is just his sanctuary.

He's not speaking out against India. So you're not making the point you think you are.

Quote

08-02-2010 , 09:48 PM

#38

Max Raker

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 15,738

Quote:

Originally Posted by Splendour

Afaik India is just his sanctuary.

He's not speaking out against India. So you're not making the point you think you are.

I think it is stupid to think that only Judeo Christian societies are free. I realized all along that my argument wasn't 100% rigorous, but you were flying dangerously close to the sun of self contradiction within like 3 lines, which was pretty funny imo

Quote

08-03-2010 , 01:44 PM

#39

MelchyBeau

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 6,043

Forced expulsion of jews from certain parts of europe

Forced conversion of jews.

Crusades.

State sanctioned murders of protestants by catholics

State sanctioned murders of catholics by protestants

Forced conversion of Australian natives

Forced conversion of South American natives

Forced conversion of North American natives

Pogroms

Massacres of Mormons

anti jehovah's witness laws

and the list goes on.

Quote

08-03-2010 , 02:31 PM

#40

Splendour

banned

Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 18,896

Quote:

Originally Posted by MelchyBeau

This thread isn't for you to use as a polemic/diatribe against Christianity. We have millions of those threads on here and you have the make a "new thread" function button at your command.

This thread is an examination of why atheists are repressing Buddhist atheists.

Quote

08-03-2010 , 02:39 PM

#41

loK2thabrain

Tiger > Jack

Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 23,203

splendour you derail more threads than the rest of rgt combined.

Quote

08-03-2010 , 06:19 PM

#42

Pokerlogist

veteran

Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 3,302

Not sure what the point of this thread is suppose to be. It seems incorrect to call Buddhism atheistic. Many Buddhists worship a diety even though it is not a part of core Buddhism. A diety is not strictly incompatible with Buddhism, it is just not necessary. Also, in an article entitled Many Faiths, One Truth, the 14th Dalai Lama seemed to criticize current atheism when he wrote: "Radical atheists issue blanket condemnations of those who hold to religious beliefs."

Quote

08-03-2010 , 08:27 PM

#43

Arouet

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 6,433

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pokerlogist

Not sure what the point of this thread is suppose to be.

Her point is to use a strawman argument to take a shot at atheism. One is not an atheist because one believes atheists are more peaceful. One is not an atheist to achieve any particular goal at all, whether positive or negative. One is an atheist simply because one does not believe in a deity.

Quote

08-03-2010 , 09:42 PM

#44

SixT4

veteran

Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 2,924

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pokerlogist

"Radical atheists issue blanket condemnations of those who hold to religious beliefs."

On a side note, I would agree with the Dali Lama that this is an illogical and negative thing to do. A number of atheists lump any and all "belief in a deity" into the term "religion" and generalize it as bad.

Certain forms of casual belief not only cause little to no harm, but have extremely positive psychological impacts on followers.

It can give them a sense of identity, self-acceptance of themselves and their fellow human beings, acceptance of events that happen, purpose in life to do their best, and the motivation to help everyone and try to make the world better.

Quote

08-03-2010 , 09:45 PM

#45

Splendour

banned

Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 18,896

Quote:

Originally Posted by Butcho22

splendour you derail more threads than the rest of rgt combined.

Yes but that's not intentional that's due to impetuosity.

Quote

08-04-2010 , 03:07 AM

#46

bunny

will feast on your soul

Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 11,219

Quote:

Originally Posted by Splendour

This thread is an examination of why atheists are repressing Buddhist atheists.

Ultimately I think it's because atheists don't see themselves as on one team. I think the fact you find it puzzling would be like an atheist saying "Gee, splendour thinks women shouldnt be obliged to wear burkas - totally counter to what these other theists think. How weird."

Redheads may oppress other redheads - it doesnt show some kind of schism, it means the redheadedness is not the relevant property the oppressed are being judged on. Similarly, atheists may oppress other atheists - their atheism is irrelevant, it's the political view (or something similar) the oppressor is objecting to.

Quote

08-04-2010 , 08:11 AM

#47

Splendour

banned

Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 18,896

Quote:

Originally Posted by bunny

I don't buy that. In the Soviet Union good communists that just happened to be theists were killed.

You can't isolate one ideology from another one in a human being's head and prove that communism alone is responsible for the killings. Clearly communist atheists and communist theists saw themselves different on the point of atheism/theism and it was a contributing factor.

Quote

08-04-2010 , 08:59 AM

#48

Arouet

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 6,433

Quote:

Originally Posted by Splendour

Atheism is the absence of a believe: it is NOT an ideology. Atheists, however, can have a variety of ideologies, including communism. Leninist/Stallinist communism had much in common with religions, much like fascism. The Leader becomes the god-like, infallible, figure.