Thread: I'm an atheist, but....

I don't need money. I don't need sex or power or education. I don't need tolerance or empathy or morals or ethics.

Why should anyone else?

Originally Posted by pj

I don't need money. I don't need sex or power or education. I don't need tolerance or empathy or morals or ethics.

Why should anyone else?

What Spartiate said.

Originally Posted by pj

I don't need money. I don't need sex or power or education. I don't need tolerance or empathy or morals or ethics.

Why should anyone else?

Actually, you do, society collapses without all those things, but not without religion...

Its actually quite possible it wound. Society has been based on religion for the longest time, governments everywhere still have got the Church's hand in them. Only a few are beginning to truly severe these ties.

Considering society was largely based on religion, removing it entirely could cause society to collapse. Just like society has been based on money and economic power. Its the same deal.

But you're missing PJs point Spart, you basically just stated what he was trying to. You don't need these things, but they're basically essentials to society. Religion is quite different from the need for money, power or sex, but the point hes making still stands.

The problem is religion has been an ideal held for too long to just remove. It would leave too many people confused and lost. It doesn't matter if they're right or wrong, but for a lot of people, while they may not even act religious, they feel as if theres something to their religious beliefs guiding them. To steal that would be chaotic.

But, realistically, no one wants to just get rid of religion up and out of the blue and getting rid of it out of the blue would never happen. If its a gradual, slow process where people become convinced that religion is wrong, then no one would care, and that is happening more and more.

Originally Posted by ExoByte

Its actually quite possible it wound. Society has been based on religion for the longest time, governments everywhere still have got the Church's hand in them. Only a few are beginning to truly severe these ties.

Considering society was largely based on religion, removing it entirely could cause society to collapse. Just like society has been based on money and economic power. Its the same deal.

But you're missing PJs point Spart, you basically just stated what he was trying to. You don't need these things, but they're basically essentials to society. Religion is quite different from the need for money, power or sex, but the point hes making still stands.

The problem is religion has been an ideal held for too long to just remove. It would leave too many people confused and lost. It doesn't matter if they're right or wrong, but for a lot of people, while they may not even act religious, they feel as if theres something to their religious beliefs guiding them. To steal that would be chaotic.

But, realistically, no one wants to just get rid of religion up and out of the blue and getting rid of it out of the blue would never happen. If its a gradual, slow process where people become convinced that religion is wrong, then no one would care, and that is happening more and more.

I disagree, society may have been founded on religious terms, but religion no longer plays an important part in most western governments. To put it into contrast, someone who doesn't need religion can live without it, but no one can live without money.

I can see why someone would be religious, I just didn't think the comparison was valid.

Bush himself has said he doesn't think Atheists should be considered citizens. Religion still plays a prominent role, even though it may not be as out stretched. Religions still receive tax exempt status and other benefits. It may not be where we're killing each other in the name of the lord or we may not be a fully religiously ran government, but religion still has its hand deep in the government.

You're all missing my point.

What business of yours is it what somebody else 'needs' or wants or chooses to believe?

You ask why anybody would need religion if you don't. I ask why you would need life itself if I don't.

Is that more clear?

What I need or want or choose is not within yours or anybody else's purvue to decide or judge, just as your belief that there is no spiritual reality isn't any of my business. Your MAKING it your business makes it my business, and that only to the point where you concede the boundary between your volition and mine.

Originally Posted by ExoByte

Bush himself has said he doesn't think Atheists should be considered citizens. Religion still plays a prominent role, even though it may not be as out stretched. Religions still receive tax exempt status and other benefits. It may not be where we're killing each other in the name of the lord or we may not be a fully religiously ran government, but religion still has its hand deep in the government.

Quoting Bush ? Anyways, all I'm saying is that public functions won't suddenly grind to a halt if all bibles disappear one day. What influences people these days is the morals that religion conveys, but not the actual practises.

Originally Posted by pj

You're all missing my point.

What business of yours is it what somebody else 'needs' or wants or chooses to believe?

You ask why anybody would need religion if you don't. I ask why you would need life itself if I don't.

Is that more clear?

What I need or want or choose is not within yours or anybody else's purvue to decide or judge, just as your belief that there is no spiritual reality isn't any of my business. Your MAKING it your business makes it my business, and that only to the point where you concede the boundary between your volition and mine.

I always understood that.

Originally Posted by Spartiate

I disagree, society may have been founded on religious terms, but religion no longer plays an important part in most western governments. To put it into contrast, someone who doesn't need religion can live without it, but no one can live without money.

I can see why someone would be religious, I just didn't think the comparison was valid.

Religion no longer plays an important part in most western governments? How many presidents have we had that were atheist? People have, do, and will continue to vote for candidates that have similar beliefs to them; that includes religious beliefs at times.

Atheism is the religion of little faith. Which is really easy. However this is why atheist never achieve much greatness. Generally a person with a dull imagination.

Originally Posted by Mystic7

Atheism is the religion of little faith. Which is really easy. However this is why atheist never achieve much greatness. Generally a person with a dull imagination.

Yet more insight from the wise one...

Originally Posted by Mystic7

Atheism is the religion of little faith. Which is really easy. However this is why atheist never achieve much greatness. Generally a person with a dull imagination.

What a misconception it is to think atheists are all passionless robots "without imaginations." I could argue the opposite, in fact. Atheists see this life as a one time thing, and thus it is to be enjoyed so much more and cherised. We do not waste time - or "devote our life" - preparing for "another life." It seems to me that all the atheists I know are just as imaginative, creative, passionate, inspiring people as anyone else. If anything, moreso than thiests, who life in such a way to "please their god" or whatever you call it.

I am sorry, I just really despise it when people see athiests as cold, scientific people who have no interests, passions, aspirations in life. Atheism isn't like that. It is just not believing in "something more," that's all. That doesn't mean we consider life any less valuable (as said, it is in fact considered more valuable in the fact that we only have one), or are as you or others describe us often. Just don't get pulled into that misconception.

Originally Posted by Mystic7

Atheism is the religion of little faith. Which is really easy. However this is why atheist never achieve much greatness. Generally a person with a dull imagination.

Little faith heh. Actually I think that is quite beneficial. I mean, look at what (mostly blind) faith does to people.

But you can't say atheism is "easy" - actually it is quite the opposite. People don't choose to deny the existance of god just because it's "easier" that way, or because it's "cool". Actually atheists research religions and see that most of them (if not all) make the silliest mistakes, that they believe blindly on things (including god), and that they preach the most dumb things (stoning infidel women to death is actually encouraged on the bible, but people turn a blind eye to it). We (atheists) often find we have to explain to people why we don't believe in any religion, actually to people like you who challenge our beliefs. It takes a lot of wisdom to be atheist. And what's with the imagination thing? I can imagine many many things, but I know they're not more than imagination. Why should I regard the imaginary (herein read as "god") as true?

I'd much rather try my efforts at learning different religions and choosing the one that suits me (which may actually be none), than wasting my efforts praying or worshipping something so falsiable.


Anyway, there's so much prejudice in your statements that I don't even know what made me reply to them. So anyone with a different opinion than yours is foolish? Anyone who chooses to be skeptical is foolish? You make me sick.

---back to original topic---

I think the "I'm an atheist, but" thing is used to give credibility to what you say. It is just like saying like "I've done it and I don't like it" - it's more credible than saying you don't like it but have never tried it. People love to use false statements to give credibility to what they say. It's almost like more evidence human beings came from apes -.-

Originally Posted by Mystic7

Atheism is the religion of little faith. Which is really easy. However this is why atheist never achieve much greatness. Generally a person with a dull imagination.

Really now? So atheists don't believe in God because they can't imagine him? That's absurd. Please tell me how your imagination is superior to those of Mark Twain, Isaac Asimov, Aldous Huxley, Albert Einstein, Arthur C. Clarke, Frank Zappa, Ernest Hemingway, and John Lennon. A lot of atheists have superincredible imaginations. They just know the difference between their imaginations and reality.

Here is a longer list of some people who have dull imaginations.

http://www.wonderfulatheistsofcfl.org/Quotes.htm

Originally Posted by pj

I don't need money. I don't need sex or power or education. I don't need tolerance or empathy or morals or ethics.

Why should anyone else?

wow...

you have my utmost respect, pj.

O'nus: that was brilliant, thanks for sharing. (I really admire Dawkins' word power..)