The Atheist Holy War

[karrie]

How about one viewpoint disagreeing with the other, that would be accurate.

really? One viewpoint disagreeing with the other?

I questioned Les about how people who tattoo themselves in symbols of atheism or push atheists organizations differ from religious theists. And the result has been cracks about non churches, people freaking out and saying I'm trying to label 'them' as atheists, rather than them actually looking through the website supplied and discussing it with me.

Very few have bothered to discuss what I brought up, and have instead run off on ridiculous tangents about what atheism is to them, and what it's not, and what terms we can't apply to atheism (like how preaching is called challenging instead), rather than addressing what atheism is to the people who have joined the organization in question.

Discussion went out the window 2 pages back and instead we're down to nit picking definitions and mocking.

 

[Dexter Sinister]

I questioned Les about how people who tattoo themselves in symbols of atheism or push atheists organizations differ from religious theists.

The only real difference, and I agree it often looks pretty trivial, is that what the atheists are promoting is not a religion. Some of them push their agenda with a zeal and belligerence no different from a fundamentalist's, and the tactics and attitudes are often depressingly similar and full of the same logical fallacies and non sequiturs, but there is a real difference in world view: is there, or is there not, a deity?

 

[karrie]

The only real difference, and I agree it often looks pretty trivial, is that what the atheists are promoting is not a religion. Some of them push their agenda with a zeal and belligerence no different from a fundamentalist's, and the tactics and attitudes are often depressingly similar and full of the same logical fallacies and non sequiturs, but there is a real difference in world view: is there, or is there not, a deity?

and once again... the definition of religion doesn't always include a deity does it?

 

[Dexter Sinister]

Not always, no, Buddhism's a notable example, but any religion contains assertions about the true nature of things with no supporting evidence. Atheism, properly understood, has no content at all. [url=http://www.skepdic.com/atheism.html] This guy c[/URL]overs the subject nicely.

 

[karrie]

Not always, no, Buddhism's a notable example, but any religion contains assertions about the true nature of things with no supporting evidence. Atheism, properly understood, has no content at all. http://www.skepdic.com/atheism.html]This guy This guy covers the subject nicely.

properly understood....

see, there's the clincher Dex. We're not talking about just atheism. Just like when people look at twisted religions, it's not strictly theism they are discussing, they're discussing the flawed people who can be categorized under that label, whether other want to be associated with them or not.

So are all atheist organizations 'without content'? Are all atheist organizations 'properly understood' atheism?

 

[Dexter Sinister]

I don't know of any organizations whose purpose is promoting atheism, their atheism is just a by-product of a particular mode of thinking they're promoting.

 

[karrie]

I don't know of any organizations whose purpose is promoting atheism, their atheism is just a by-product of a particular mode of thinking they're promoting.

So for ones that put up bulletin boards stating 'there's probably no God so stop worrying', they're not promoting atheism? Really? I think that's a dishonest spin on it frankly Dex. Do you feel you don't promote atheism when you head into religious threads and tear apart a poster's belief in a deity? Because you do. And Les does the same thing, while signing off with a link to an organization to help 'enlighten' them further.

I know you like to speak in negatives... atheism isn't the presence of an opinion, it's the absence of one, etc... but life is all connected. Trying to tear apart someone's belief in a deity IS the same thing as attempting to make them an atheist.

 

[#juan]

So for ones that put up bulletin boards stating 'there's probably no God so stop worrying', they're not promoting atheism? Really? I think that's a dishonest spin on it frankly Dex. Do you feel you don't promote atheism when you head into religious threads and tear apart a poster's belief in a deity? Because you do. And Les does the same thing, while signing off with a link to an organization to help 'enlighten' them further.

I know you like to speak in negatives... atheism isn't the presence of an opinion, it's the absence of one, etc... but life is all connected. Trying to tear apart someone's belief in a deity IS the same thing as attempting to make them an atheist.

I know a lot of very good people who are also devout Christians, and they have my respect. I am too cynical myself and have too many unanswered questions to follow any organized religion. My particular church is private and has a congregation of one.....Me. I don't support tearing apart someone else's belief because that would suggest that I have a better one. What I have is what works for me...:roll:

 

[Ron in Regina]

Like this?

 

[s_lone]

I know you like to speak in negatives... atheism isn't the presence of an opinion, it's the absence of one, etc... but life is all connected. Trying to tear apart someone's belief in a deity IS the same thing as attempting to make them an atheist.

With all respect to Dex, I think you are right to a certain extent...

But...

Imagine I strongly believed that lightning in the sky was literally caused by an all powerful being called Zeus living in the clouds. And then suppose Dex showed me all the evidence to prove that my belief is simply nonsense. Would you accuse Dex of trying to convert me to ''a-Zeusism''?

Me and Dex once had a big debate on the validity of astrology. I argued that there might be something there that was worth investigating... To him it's all bull****. Am I to accuse him of trying to convert me to his non-astrological view of the world? No. Because the burden of proof is on me to show that astrology isn't the pure bull**** he thinks it is. He's not trying to convert me to anything... But you might say he's trying to ''unconvert'' me.

 

[karrie]

I know a lot of very good people who are also devout Christians, and they have my respect. I am too cynical myself and have too many unanswered questions to follow any organized religion. My particular church is private and has a congregation of one.....Me. I don't support tearing apart someone else's belief because that would suggest that I have a better one. What I have is what works for me...:roll:

that's pretty much the way I live my life too. I don't pretend my beliefs are better through the use of language such as 'irrational', 'unintelligent', 'lunatic', etc. But I do see a lot of that judgemental language used when someone has different beliefs, from both sides of the argument. I think perhaps it comes out to be that only those who can only label themselves accurately by 'theist', 'deist', 'atheist', rather than 'Catholic', 'Muslim', or 'Bright', that can really claim to be living a personal belief rather than a group belief/religion.

 

[karrie]

With all respect to Dex, I think you are right to a certain extent...

But...

Imagine I strongly believed that lightning in the sky was literally caused by an all powerful being called Zeus living in the clouds. And then suppose Dex showed me all the evidence to prove that my belief is simply nonsense. Would you accuse Dex of trying to convert me to ''a-Zeusism''?

Me and Dex once had a big debate on the validity of astrology. I argued that there might be something there that was worth investigating... To him it's all bull****. Am I to accuse him of trying to convert me to his non-astrological view of the world? No. Because the burden of proof is on me to show that astrology isn't the pure bull**** he thinks it is. He's not trying to convert me to anything... But you might say he's trying to ''unconvert'' me.

You're right s_lone... it's pretty borderline.... until he were to invite you to join a group who dedicate themselves to spreading the word that the universe has no Zeus in it. That crosses a line for me, from being an absence, to being almost identical to religion.

 

[s_lone]

You're right s_lone... it's pretty borderline.... until he were to invite you to join a group who dedicate themselves to spreading the word that the universe has no Zeus in it. That crosses a line for me, from being an absence, to being almost identical to religion.

I tend to agree. The problem I see with this debate is that there are so many different conceptions of what God can be that it becomes hard to define what an atheist really is.

 

[karrie]

I tend to agree. The problem I see with this debate is that there are so many different conceptions of what God can be that it becomes hard to define what an atheist really is.

well, I think that's an even deeper conversation. lol.

 

[karrie]

I realized that there is something I should clarify here folks, and that is the fact that I think 'the Brights' is a good site, and a good idea. I think telling people your world view is fine, and I think having a voice, an organization, to help do that is a useful tool. I just think once you've chosen to join a group of like minded individuals who share your world view, making fun of other people for joining a group of like minded individuals who share their world view, seems odd.

 

[talloola]

I don't think that stating all of the negative aspects of any religion, by an atheist,
or anyone else, is 'trying' to convert them to 'what' you are.
Telling one they 'should' be what 'you are', is doing that.
One can rant and rave all they want about the foolishness 'they' think that other
faiths have, only tells me, that is what they think.
Until I receive pamphlets, or knocks at the door suggesting that I convert, it is
just their opinion, no different than mine.
Not much would be said at all, if all the opinions were omitted because they
were labelled as advertisements to join a certain faith, or become an atheist.
I don't read between lines, or try to put meanings, that stir up controversy or just assume
what others think, unless they say it 'direct'.
If anything I have said suggests that I am recruiting, then I will just come in
here and say - I am talloola, I am an atheist, how interesting is that, I have
other thoughts, just as religious people do.
Many threads drift along, and veer away from the exact heading by the o.p.
seems to happen all the time, conversations tend to flow along and away then
back again, and I know I am guilty of that quite a bit, so be it, shoot me.

 

[Cliffy]

I realized that there is something I should clarify here folks, and that is the fact that I think 'the Brights' is a good site, and a good idea. I think telling people your world view is fine, and I think having a voice, an organization, to help do that is a useful tool. I just think once you've chosen to join a group of like minded individuals who share your world view, making fun of other people for joining a group of like minded individuals who share their world view, seems odd.

Being an anarchist, I think that joining any group automatically isolates one from the rest of humanity. The very exclusivity of the club requires an us or them attitude. That is the nature of labels whether we wear them, are accused of wearing them or accuse others of wearing them. That is why when someone asks me what my label is I say spiritual anarchist. It is such an oxymoron to most people that they still don't know what to label me.

 

[Dexter Sinister]

So for ones that put up bulletin boards stating 'there's probably no God so stop worrying', they're not promoting atheism?

I didn't say they don't promote atheism, they obviously do, and that's a perfectly legitimate thing to do. But the people doing that aren't doing it solely for that purpose, it's a result of their rationalist world view, which promotes much more than just atheism. That's only one aspect of a much richer and more complex philosophical position.

Do you feel you don't promote atheism when you head into religious threads and tear apart a poster's belief in a deity?

Sure I do those things, why shouldn't I? I'm not promoting atheism as such, I'm promoting rational, critical thinking, to which religious beliefs are a constant challenge. This is a public forum, if people want to make claims here they should be prepared to defend them, they shouldn't get a free pass just because there's a particular label on them. No belief deserves automatic respect. You will note that I have never started a thread attacking religious belief or promoting atheism, but I do respond to what I perceive as sloppy thinking, ignorance, and error.

 

[karrie]

I didn't say they don't promote atheism, they obviously do, and that's a perfectly legitimate thing to do. But the people doing that aren't doing it solely for that purpose,....

since the last half of your post is pretty much answered by the last one I made in this thread, I hope you'll excuse me ignoring it and focusing instead on this one here.

Brotherhood.
Responsibility to community.
Spiritual, emotional, connectedness.
A set of mutual morals and standards.
The search for personal betterment.

These are all things that are promoted, and underlie the purpose of a church. To boil it down to simply the belief in a deity is flawed. That may be the initial thing that brought a group together (like atheism brought together the Brights), but it isn't 'all' there is, anymore than I'd assume atheism is all there is to the Brights. Once again, I see little difference.

 

[Cliffy]

Why is that humans need to polarize every issue?