Do Atheists Have More Freedom?

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

I'm sure this narrative plays out fine in your head, but it appears to have no resemblance to life.
How many atheists have you actually been around on a personal level for 'the long term'?
What's your sample size?

Well I'm about 50 years old so how old are you and how many people have you met in your life?
About half of them are atheist?

Typically atheists are owned by their excessive possessions,
running around frantically in a paranoid fear of death and poverty,
as if money will buy them eternal life. All it does is attract quacks
in old-age, that prey on them like flies on a corpse.

Then of course there are those who claim faith for socio-economic
appearances, but have little of the stuff. Lets not forget that little trick.

I think the Vikings of myth and antiquity had a good thing going
by claiming that death by old-age was a great dishonor.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Does their lack of religious beliefs allow them more freedom?

Too broad of a question. The answer to your question would depend entirely on the religion.

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

How on Earth can you reason that we'd blame
a god which doesn't exist for anything at all?
Oh, wait....you're joking. I get it now!

Perhaps read the post again, this time carefully note the phrase
'...contemplate the possibility...'

All true insight follows the method of suspending belief of one's convictions
in order to carefully consider the other point of view, in case we have erred.

Or do you just dogmatically parrot away without considering the other point of view?
Is you entire metaphysic based on belligerence, hegemony and compulsive giggling?

 

[Nakosis]

I am not an atheist and I have 100% freedom.

You're no longer a slave to your passions?

 

[Kemosloby]

No, they are like a ship with no anchor tossed about a stormy sea. They may feel free from anchors but not at all free.

 

[bobhikes]

No-one has complete freedom. It's just not possible. I honestly don't know what it would even look like.
Perhaps living as a hermit?

Freedom is being able to do what you want. Anybody can do what they want, there will of course be consequences. The question is basically about who has greater consequences.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

No more than anyone else, necessarily.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

In the short term, the appear to have more options,
but the options they take that Theists are unlikely to take,
end up restricting them in the long term.

This makes them frustrated, and in those moments
where they contemplate the possibility of God,
they blame God for allowing them to make the restricting choices,
instead of just admitting their errors, and making amends,
and moving towards a more free state of mind.

Ya, I don't think any of that is true.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

This is a good point. In some religions, like Christianity, the burden of responsibility is carried by the savior.

Wait, is Christianity the only religion that does this?

But does not Christianity also have a rule book? Rules that atheists are not spirituality bound to.

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

Ya, I don't think any of that is true.

I don't reckon you appreciate the concept of backing up your claim with reasons.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

I don't reckon you appreciate the concept of backing up your claim with reasons.

For that I would need a rational respondent.

 

[Erebus]

As a whole and by default? No, not really.

Lacking the more restrictive brands of theism could be viewed as a form of freedom, certainly. However, that's not a freedom that's exclusively available to atheists.

 

[Nakosis]

But does not Christianity also have a rule book? Rules that atheists are not spirituality bound to.

The Jews do.

How many rules do Christians really have to follow? Believe in Jesus as your Lord and Savior?

Are there any other requirements?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Does their lack of religious beliefs allow them more freedom?

Lack of belief in god? If you mean the abrahamic one, yes, atheist have more freedom. Freedom from what. Depends on the person. I meet a lot of christians who feel they have freedom in christ/god but constrained in sin without him/god. Abrahmic faiths are displinine faiths. Has nothing to do with god in and of itself. Just the specific religion that defines god and how one should see and worship him.

This is a "depends on the person" question.

 

[NewGuyOnTheBlock]

In the short term, the appear to have more options,
but the options they take that Theists are unlikely to take,
end up restricting them in the long term.

This makes them frustrated, and in those moments
where they contemplate the possibility of God,
they blame God for allowing them to make the restricting choices,
instead of just admitting their errors, and making amends,
and moving towards a more free state of mind.

Well I'm about 50 years old so how old are you and how many people have you met in your life?
About half of them are atheist?

Typically atheists are owned by their excessive possessions,
running around frantically in a paranoid fear of death and poverty,
as if money will buy them eternal life. All it does is attract quacks
in old-age, that prey on them like flies on a corpse.

Then of course there are those who claim faith for socio-economic
appearances, but have little of the stuff. Lets not forget that little trick.

I think the Vikings of myth and antiquity had a good thing going
by claiming that death by old-age was a great dishonor.

You are parroting theist propaganda.

 

[sun rise]

My answer is no. We are ruled by our desires, both positive and negative and our lower emotions. The intellectual gloss put on top of this is not of any real significance.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Does their lack of religious beliefs allow them more freedom?

Well, as an atheist I certainly think I have more ability to actually think than many religious believers do. After all, if you've got an all-seeing deity looking into your every thought (and judging you for them) you have to be pretty careful about what you think!

That's one thing, at least, that the atheist never has to worry about.

 

[Revoltingest]

Perhaps read the post again, this time carefully note the phrase
'...contemplate the possibility...'

I read that.
I contemplate such things.
This doesn't lead me where you imagine.

All true insight follows the method of suspending belief of one's convictions
in order to carefully consider the other point of view, in case we have erred.

And I'm left with no evidence whatsoever for supreme beings.
My default is to not believe in things which give no reason to believe.
Regarding some things, the best insight is that one has no insight.

Or do you just dogmatically parrot away without considering the other point of view?

No.
Are you just dogmatically parroting somethings?
(Not a very nice question, is it?)

Is you entire metaphysic based on belligerence, hegemony and compulsive giggling?

No.
Is yours?
(Another antagonistic question, eh?)
I sense some hostility there.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

OK, I may have been thinking of the question differently (as in religiously dictated rules restricting personal freedom).

As usual, the question can be torn apart....moving on

Lol...all good. To be clear, I don't think religious people necessarily have less freedom. It would depend entirely on their particular belief system and religion.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Well I'm about 50 years old so how old are you and how many people have you met in your life?
About half of them are atheist?

Typically atheists are owned by their excessive possessions,
running around frantically in a paranoid fear of death and poverty,
as if money will buy them eternal life. All it does is attract quacks
in old-age, that prey on them like flies on a corpse.

Then of course there are those who claim faith for socio-economic
appearances, but have little of the stuff. Lets not forget that little trick.

I think the Vikings of myth and antiquity had a good thing going
by claiming that death by old-age was a great dishonor.

I'm 42, and live in a largely secular society (Australia), so a fairly high percentage of society (relative to the US) is at least non-religious.

If your supposition was true, Australians should be substantially more materialistic than Americans, on average. And Scandanavians should be more materialistic than both. (I work for a Swedish company, and have quite a few Swedish friends).

I just don't see it. You're talking about a characterture of atheists which serves your narrative. It could be what you legitimately have seen, but only if it's a small sample size.

People are people. Good, bad, shallow, deep.