Anti-theist? Why?

[illykitty]

You shouldn't be angry at religion, you should be angry at the people who use it to do bad.

If there wasn't religion, extremists would use some other excuse. A crazy person is crazy regardless.

 

[HerDotness]

You shouldn't be angry at religion, you should be angry at the people who use it to do bad.

Where's there any anger at religion in the OP? And how do you see that the OP isn't angry at (or at least strongly disapproving of) those who use religion to harm others?

 

[JustWondering]

If the foundation of a person's worldview is based on stories about an invisible sky daddy and his demands, I think that will greatly hinder that person's critical thinking skills. After all, the invisible sky daddy has all the answers right? No need to figure things out for yourself using logic or reason.

 

[Quagmire]

If the foundation of a person's worldview is based on stories about an invisible sky daddy and his demands, I think that will greatly hinder that person's critical thinking skills. After all, the invisible sky daddy has all the answers right? No need to figure things out for yourself using logic or reason.

People will always find some excuse not to have to figure things out for themselves.

 

[cablescavenger]

Firstly sheer weight of numbers, the amount of extremists that derive their ideology from religion dwarfs all other kinds of extremism combined.
Secondly views based on fait can inspire a fervour and fanaticism far more intense than anything else.
For instance I consider myself an extreme anti-theist, while I would like it if religion ceased to be, I acknowledge that is unrealistic and see secularism as a pretty good compromise. And I would never consider physically harming someone for merely disagreeing with me.

I share that same view.

 

[Apex]

I wonder what kind of welcome someone would get on this site if they came out as an anti-atheist.

 

[waitasec]

Extremists suck no matter what their variety. Why pick on the religious?

why not?

 

[waitasec]

I wonder what kind of welcome someone would get on this site if they came out as an anti-atheist.

aren't all theists anti-atheist?
:sarcastic

 

[Nobody]

Thanks to all who have replied. Good points have been made by all sides, makes me glad to have started this thread.

<snip>...The magical garden story. The rejection of others. Fortunately we seem to have just recently clawed our way out of witch burnings. Crusades. Terrorism. Extremism of one kind or another. Opposition to condom use in aids-ridden countries. Charlatans. The attempt by some religious folks to prevent science from being taught. The general pattern of religions to oppose the progress of science at every step.

All good examples of how people can and have use religion to feel good abut doing harmful things, unfortunately the list can go on almost indefinitely.

Having said all that, Im certain there is a place for religion in Humanity that will be beneficial for society. There are a lot of good ideas out there.

I disagree, but sincerely hope you are correct.

The thing about extreme is that it is, and we are.

The thing about strangeness is, if you think about how strange everything is for about five seconds, it becomes pretty strange.

Xeper

Damn, trust a Satanist to mess with my mind.

(On extremists)And I'm saying the qualifier of "with faith" is not only unnecessary, but sheer bias.

I disagree, but admittedly I am biased.

"Religion makes a fantastic scapegoat for those who refuse to see that within the hearts of all men is a darkness."

I don't know if I agree with this statement in full, but it it is apparently easier for some people to believe it's religion's fault, not human nature. That hits too close to home for them if they admit that darkness lies in every heart. They'd rather detach themselves from the "bad people" by creating a scapegoat instead of conceding that they too have the potential to have a fervent rampage.

Fantastic point, who said that btw? Of course these problems are a part of human nature, anyone, religious or not, can have pretty distasteful views. My problem with religion is that it is used as justification for beliefs that otherwise would be wholly unsupportable.

I would agree that false religion has been, and continues to be, a source of evil, whether you call it extremism or just wicked conduct. That does not mean that all religion is wicked, but most of it is. The Bible lays at the feet of false worship the blood shed on earth. "Yes, in her was found the blood of prophets and of holy ones and of all those who have been slaughtered on the earth." (Revelation 18:24) I believe there is only one true religion that truly follows the Christ. One faith out of thousands. No wonder Christ said that few would find the road to life. (Matthew 7:13,14)

I'm sorry, but when I hear reasons about why one religion is true and all others are false, or given quotes from holy texts, as much as I may try I simply fail to see any meaning to them. You must bear in mind that to me these texts have no inherent value.

You shouldn't be angry at religion, you should be angry at the people who use it to do bad.

I hope I didn't come across as angry, I try to be as dispassionate as i can when discussing religion. But on feelings, I reserve my anger/hate for the (violent) extremists for the harm they cause, and disappointment/shame for the moderates who dress the worst parts of religion in, frankly weak excuses rather than outright reject the objectionable parts of their religion.

If there wasn't religion, extremists would use some other excuse. A crazy person is crazy regardless.

True enough, but nothing promises absolute certainty for your actions as religion does.

I wonder what kind of welcome someone would get on this site if they came out as an anti-atheist.

While new here I doubt it would be remarked upon, "anti-atheism" seems to be taken for granted in many religious world views.

Could someone who considers themselves a moderate Christian/Muslim, please tell me why it is better to excuse or deny the parts of scripture you disagree with, rather than reject and remove them?

 

[Quintessence]

aren't all theists anti-atheist?
:sarcastic

Why do you think that?

 

[waitasec]

Why do you think that?

sarcasm...

 

[ImmortalFlame]

You shouldn't be angry at religion, you should be angry at the people who use it to do bad.

If there wasn't religion, extremists would use some other excuse. A crazy person is crazy regardless.

Because religion provides the moral justification for crazy acts. A crazy person will do crazy things regardless of whether they are religious or not, but a religious person can justify almost any manner of evil act through religious faith regardless of how sane or reasonable they are in all other aspects of their lives. Religion doesn't make people crazy, but it has the power to make sane people justify doing crazy things.

 

[JustWondering]

Because religion provides the moral justification for crazy acts. A crazy person will do crazy things regardless of whether they are religious or not, but a religious person can justify almost any manner of evil act through religious faith regardless of how sane or reasonable they are in all other aspects of their lives. Religion doesn't make people crazy, but it has the power to make sane people justify doing crazy things.

I have a couple friends who are jehovah's witnesses and they have never reasonably explained why they would refuse blood transfusions (even if they would die). They point to a passage in the bible that says you will not spill your brothers blood and another that says you will not drink blood as part of pagan rituals. Their both intelligent people but because of their religion they will choose to die before excepting a blood transfusion. Without their religion I'm sure they'd have no problem excepting a blood transfusion. So I for one do blame religion for causing people to do crazy things.

 

[HerDotness]

aren't all theists anti-atheist?
:sarcastic

I think so, because even though some people sidestep saying so, deep down they think that what they believe really is true in some grand, all-prevailing sense whereas any contradictory beliefs are false. This attitude is what so easily enables many Christians to label Mormons or any other Christian sect whose beliefs they think aren't valid somehow as "not really Christians."

And atheism is without a doubt false because it hits at the essence of theism, deities.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I have a couple friends who are jehovah's witnesses and they have never reasonably explained why they would refuse blood transfusions (even if they would die). They point to a passage in the bible that says you will not spill your brothers blood and another that says you will not drink blood as part of pagan rituals. Their both intelligent people but because of their religion they will choose to die before excepting a blood transfusion. Without their religion I'm sure they'd have no problem excepting a blood transfusion. So I for one do blame religion for causing people to do crazy things.

That's a very good example of what I was talking about. The problem with religion isn't what certain religions teach, but the fact that all religions are based on the premise that, on some level, you have to believe certain things out of faith and without recourse to reason. This is why people who are otherwise personally reasonable can end up just as you've described about particular, very important aspects of their lives. Religion is really the only kind of ideological system that does that.

 

[HerDotness]

The problem with religion isn't what certain religions teach, but the fact that all religions are based on the premise that, on some level, you have to believe certain things out of faith and without recourse to reason.

Which goes hand-in-hand with cherrypicking the parts of your scriptures that you like, focusing upon those, and ignoring the ones that are troublesome or could incite violence. Then, you create excuses for why the bothersome portions aren't really the way they seem when you're pressed to explain how those parts can be from God.

"God is a loving, merciful father" is a good example of this.

"Okay, so show me all this loving mercy in the OT. Sending a flood to wipe out every person but Noah's family, for instance. Killing the firstborn sons of all the Egyptians for another just because Pharoah was stubborn--and GOD had made him be so stubborn! Worse still, sending your own son to a brutal death as some kind of bizarre sacrifice for people's sins."

"Well, Jesus's way of loving everyone supersedes how angry and cruel God seems to be in a lot of the OT. Besides, God had to have had good reasons for judging people and punishing them in the OT in ways that seem harsh to us. We mustn't question what we're told God did. He knows more than we do, and He must have had good reasons for doing what he did. Besides, Jesus didn't die forever, so that's how we know that God is loving, that He didn't allow his Son to die and remain dead but rather brought about the glory of the resurrection."

There's no end to the cherrypicking and excuse-making.

 

[Nobody]

"Well, Jesus's way of loving everyone supersedes how angry and cruel God seems to be in a lot of the OT. Besides, God had to have had good reasons for judging people and punishing them in the OT in ways that seem harsh to us. We mustn't question what we're told God did. He knows more than we do, and He must have had good reasons for doing what he did. Besides, Jesus didn't die forever, so that's how we know that God is loving, that He didn't allow his Son to die and remain dead but rather brought about the glory of the resurrection."

There's no end to the cherrypicking and excuse-making.

Exactly, this I think lies at the heart of the problem.

If you can suspend your disbelief and actually consider what it is to believe in an all powerful, all knowing and purely 'good' deity, it is IMPOSSIBLE to accept such a being could do, say, or cause something 'evil'. So no matter how appalling something this being has done is, it MUST have been necessary and in the interest of the greater good, even though we do not understand why, because after all this being can do no wrong.

And of course just by association, the holy book this 'perfect' being supposedly inspired and/or wrote must be absolutely 'perfect' too.

 

[Quintessence]

sarcasm...

Just checking. Not everybody uses the "sarcasm" smiley to actually mean sarcasm. Usually if I'm being sarcastic, I use sarcasm tags. >_<;

[sarcasm][/sarcasm]

 

[waitasec]

Just checking. Not everybody uses the "sarcasm" smiley to actually mean sarcasm. Usually if I'm being sarcastic, I use sarcasm tags. >_<;

[sarcasm][/sarcasm]

what do you think of this response to my sarcasm?
i think she made a really good point.

I think so, because even though some people sidestep saying so, deep down they think that what they believe really is true in some grand, all-prevailing sense whereas any contradictory beliefs are false. This attitude is what so easily enables many Christians to label Mormons or any other Christian sect whose beliefs they think aren't valid somehow as "not really Christians."

And atheism is without a doubt false because it hits at the essence of theism, deities.

 

[Prophet]

Fundamentalist extremism is a problem of people in general who see being uncivil towards beings who don't think the same way as them as the most effective way to furthering their aims, and not exclusively a problem of those possessesing religious worldviews as some here would say. I can easily demonstrate this by pointing out by pointing out the so called Reason Rally and its brainwashed supporters.