Do Atheists "Proselytize"?

[ReligionandMMA]

Well my friend... MANY MANY positive influences... You think all those things in the Constitution people came up with without religious influence? If it wasn't for religion and religious people you would likely be living an oppressed life... In truth I believe religious people are more tolerant than atheists like yourself....

 

[Storm]

Well my friend... MANY MANY positive influences... You think all those things in the Constitution people came up with without religious influence? If it wasn't for religion and religious people you would likely be living an oppressed life... In truth I believe religious people are more tolerant than atheists like yourself....

Individuals are tolerant or otherwise, belief systems are not.

 

[LuisDantas]

I can see your argument in favor of those things.... But both same sex marriage and stem cell research can turn into problems fast....

I doubt they will, at least to a degree that justifies banning them, but that is besides the point. They shouldn't have been attacked on religious grounds.

Stem cell research, as long as the stem cells are not... well ever cable of being alive.. I do not see a problem with it... But the abuse of the research could be a real problem if no one opposed it...

That is probably true, but to what degree? And why should religious arguments be used to oppose it at all?

Same sex marriage.... Tricky subject... What you have to understand is it is not... well productive... Humans need to breed to continue their lines.. It is necessary for the continuation of our species... If everyone started openly allowing gay marriage it could become a problem to simply keep the planet populated... Granted, it may take years and years.... But eventually that would stand a very good chance of becoming a problem... NOOO offense to you...

There are threads - quite a few, in fact - expanding on this matter, but for the moment let me just say that you're seeing a problem where there is in fact none. SSM is needed and there is little to no justification for opposing it.

 

[Breathe]

"Religion is for people too weak to cope with reality," etc..

Basically, by an obnoxious insistence that their way is the only valid one. Just like every other proselytizer.

Yup, that.

I find things like "There is no God.", "God is fiction", "God doesn't exist", "Religions are for the ignorant" to be proselytising, too. I've even seen this on here from a few members (who are now on my ignore list, although I won't drop names).


Statements such as "God is about as real as unicorns are." and "Religions are just superstitions that have stayed." could, arguably, be seen as proselytising by some (not by me, I just see such statements as rude ways of getting one's point across), but regardless of whether they are or not though, they are pretty arrogant statements in my personal opinion.

My $0.02

 

[LuisDantas]

Well my friend... MANY MANY positive influences... You think all those things in the Constitution people came up with without religious influence? If it wasn't for religion and religious people you would likely be living an oppressed life... In truth I believe religious people are more tolerant than atheists like yourself....

I'm afraid you don't know we atheists very well, then. Religion is one form of expression of moral values. It shouldn't be overvalued, and it is somewhat misleading to credit it with the development of morals.

To some degree, in fact, the reverse holds true. Many religions did and should remain reevaluating their moral principles due to external advances in moral thought. And that is certainly a good thing.

 

[logician]

Seriously, do they?

Seriously, no, ever seen an atheist pushing their beliefs on TV like many Christian channels do 24/7?

Nuff said.:sleep:

 

[Storm]

Seriously, no, ever seen an atheist pushing their beliefs on TV like many Christian channels do 24/7?

Nuff said.:sleep:

On tv? No. On RF? Absolutely.

 

[logician]

On tv? No. On RF? Absolutely.

No comparison between evangelizing over the public airways, and expressing opinions on a forum.:sleep:

 

[Storm]

No comparison between evangelizing over the public airways, and expressing opinions on a forum.:sleep:

Yeah, there is. It's the same attitude, the same goal. The only difference is medium.

 

[Comicaze247]

Some do, some don't. Just like everyone else.

.....

 

[yourhopeboundheart]

when it comes to most of the examples people are giving of 'atheistic proselytizing' it's not clear where the line is between such behavior and simply having an opinion that you are free to share openly.

Since atheists believe in science and facts rather than fairytale

atheists believe that there is not such a thing as gods. they dont share any other beliefs, and many of us do not believe in science or facts.

You're denying the word exists? Really?

i can see why that seems outlandish, but i do personally agree with satan(lol) when he says that the word isn't useful. i find myself being frustrated time and time again by someone who, say, accuses me of proselytizing just like an 'atheist' simply because i share one component of belief with someone that offended them in the past. it gets even more frustrating when people blame me and my lack of belief in gods for, say, the actions of Joseph Stalin. it's mostly this unfortunate confusion that leads me to call myself a Secularist rather than an Atheist unless someone actually asks me about my belief in a god or gods.

It seems they are so desperate to be right that they usually just resort to name calling... It is odd... I think that the need they feel to be right is a large reason that they are atheists... To believe in God means there is something much much more intelligent than you.. And I do not believe atheists can accept this....

here is a list of names i dont like to be called: sinner, fallen, empty, searching, bitter... i personally think that if we're going to keep score - humanity gets called more nasty names by religion than any religious person has ever been called by a non-theist. and while we're discussing things that hurt my feelings, i would strongly suggest learning to be a little more sensitive to the kinds of implications you are making. what that last sentence(?) is saying is that even though i think that my belief system is just as valid as anyone else's - i did the research and the leg work, i spent sleepless night after sleepless night rolling over the facts and rumors in my head, i climbed to the top of the mountain of my own mind and stood precariously on the edge of sanity just to find answers and the ones i have found i cherish more than my own life, these beliefs make my heart pound and my blood pump, if it wasn't for the things i observe in the world i would have a gray and lonely corpse of an existence - but you, someone i've never met in my life, has it all figured out and the real reason i think the way that i do is not because i must, but because i'm a bratty little twerp who doesnt like the idea of anyone on the playground being smarter than him. i have a few names i would like to call you for making a statement like that...

If everyone started openly allowing gay marriage it could become a problem to simply keep the planet populated...

if i really responded to this the way that i want to, i fear that the "h" key and the "a" key would wear out from over-utilization.

Seriously, no, ever seen an atheist pushing their beliefs on TV like many Christian channels do 24/7?

there is a show on public television in Texas, it's really sweet.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I can see your argument in favor of those things.... But both same sex marriage and stem cell research can turn into problems fast.... Stem cell research, as long as the stem cells are not... well ever cable of being alive.. I do not see a problem with it...

You just touched on one harmful impact of religion on the morals of politics. IMO, it's immoral to legislate policies that needlessly tie the hands of people working to prevent real death and suffering.

But the abuse of the research could be a real problem if no one opposed it... Same sex marriage.... Tricky subject... What you have to understand is it is not... well productive...

Going to church isn't "productive" either. Should we ban that?

Humans need to breed to continue their lines.. It is necessary for the continuation of our species... If everyone started openly allowing gay marriage it could become a problem to simply keep the planet populated... Granted, it may take years and years.... But eventually that would stand a very good chance of becoming a problem... NOOO offense to you...

Wait... so you think that allowing same-sex marriage would turn everyone gay? How would that work, exactly?

Well my friend... MANY MANY positive influences... You think all those things in the Constitution people came up with without religious influence?

Which Constitution? Do you mean the deliberately secular American one?

If it wasn't for religion and religious people you would likely be living an oppressed life...

In one respect, I think you're right: in the case of the American Constitution, the Founding Fathers were able to look back on a long history of violence in Britain and continental Europe that had come out of state sanction of religion and sectarianism, and were prompted by it to adopt a system of laws that tried to guard against this... but I don't think that's the sort of religious influence you're talking about.

In truth I believe religious people are more tolerant than atheists like yourself....

In what way do you think I'm intolerant?

 

[Azakel]

Thats not proselytizing, thats trolling.

There's really not a differences in the long run.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

pros·e·ly·tize (pr

s

-l

-t

z

)
v. pros·e·ly·tized, pros·e·ly·tiz·ing, pros·e·ly·tiz·es
1. To induce someone to convert to one's own religious faith.
2. To induce someone to join one's own political party or to espouse one's doctrine.

Seeing that atheism is neither a religion, nor a politcal party - nor is there an atheist doctrine - no, atheists do no proselytize.

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

You're denying the word exists? Really?

Well no, Storm. If I were to deny the word exists I would have said that, and I didn't. Reading slower may help you.

What I DID say is that 'atheist' is a meaningless classification. Whether one believes in 'god' is just as important as if one believes in leprechauns or garden fairies. It's meaningless, and ultimately the word itself is a clever bit of linguistic apologetics in the form of special pleading for god belief. Any extraordinary claim without evidence to back it up is on equal footing with any other. God belief isn't special.

 

[Peacewise]

The atheist doctrine is "deny or disbelieve in God(s)", hence atheists can proselytize.

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

The atheist doctrine is "deny or disbelieve in God(s)", hence atheists can proselytize.

There is no such thing as 'atheist doctrine'

 

[Peacewise]

"doctrine - A doctrine is a set of principles or beliefs, especially religious ones. "google dictionary lookup.
"Atheism is the belief that there is no God. "ibid.

A set can have one item in it.
Therefore Atheism is a doctrine.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

The atheist doctrine is "deny or disbelieve in God(s)", hence atheists can proselytize.

Ah, sort of like the tree doctrine is "A perennial woody plant having a main trunk and usually a distinct crown."

 

[Storm]

Well no, Storm. If I were to deny the word exists I would have said that, and I didn't. Reading slower may help you.

What I DID say is that 'atheist' is a meaningless classification. Whether one believes in 'god' is just as important as if one believes in leprechauns or garden fairies. It's meaningless, and ultimately the word itself is a clever bit of linguistic apologetics in the form of special pleading for god belief. Any extraordinary claim without evidence to back it up is on equal footing with any other. God belief isn't special.

Well, no, that's not quite what you said. You said "there is no group called atheists," which is clearly false.

If that's not what you meant, fine. But it IS what you SAID.