It's Begun

[idea]

You kind of get used to be called stupid and deluded. It used to bother me, too, but I know good and well that I am not stupid and that I am not deluded, so who cares what others may think about me. And I know good and well that you, DonP are not stupid and are quite mature for a 14 year old .

name calling is just a distraction technique. Instead of dealing with issues, they make you defend yourself. Politicians use the same thing.

So... what do the athiests want out of this? Hmmm what would a world without religion be like? The soviet union?

Why do communists not like religion? don't like the idea that another entity is more powerful than the gov? anyone who dissuades anyone from any line of reasoning is going for thought control IMO... just power hungry people trying to control everyone one yet one more level... I don't understand why anyone would want to be all-powerful.

 

[themadhair]

So... what do the athiests want out of this? Hmmm what would a world without religion be like? The soviet union?

I fully believe that the above comment is deserving of ridicule.

ETA: And I just received some frubals for it.

 

[ChristineES]

I am not talking about offering an opinion, I am talking about actively seeking to convert others and denigrating people based on their beliefs, this is one of my own greatest problems with some religious people, and I don't want to be associated with it

She has a valid point. If one you do the same thing you didn't like about another group, what would make you any better?

 

[Storm]

I was just pointing out that you are generalizing, Storm. When you say it so broadly "atheists" then yes you are referring to me also.

You can see it if you turn your head and squint....

I think it rather obvious that when I said "the atheists," I was referring to the atheists in question, not making sweeping generalizations.

 

[Storm]

Oh, I agree: It does sound extremely arrogant and presumptuous.

I do think that was just the OP though.

I only gave the site a cursory glance, so I'll take your word for it.

The mission statement, per the website, says that the group's aim is to "encourage critical thinking and erode the influence of dogmatism, superstition, and bigotry in our world." Hardly a "final assault", though certainly a slow and steady approach to their ultimate goal (I would think) of eradicating religion.

Except that none of the things listed are necessary or inherent to religion. (Not to say they're not common.)

 

[idea]

I fully believe that the above comment is deserving of ridicule.

ETA: And I just received some frubals for it.

again, name calling is just a distraction technique. Can anyone give another example of an athiest society? Communism/ soviet union is athiest.


The Forbidden Book (Why Kings & Communists Fear The Bible)

Communists are athiests who want to take religion from everyone.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`
anti-religion vs. non-religion.

IMO an agnostic is non-religion. Athiests are anti. (No one can prove anything, so why not just be agnostic? athiests - even though they cannot prove there is no God, "believe" there is no God, they are against God. Agnostics are impartial, athiests are not.)

 

[Storm]

Communists are athiests who want to take religion from everyone.

No, that's anti-theism. Communists are followers of a specific political system that is also anti-theistic.

IMO an agnostic is non-religion. Athiests are anti. (No one can prove anything, so why not just be agnostic? athiests - even though they cannot prove there is no God, "believe" there is no God, they are against God. Agnostics are impartial, athiests are not.)

Not all atheists are anti-theists. Stereotypes are not useful.

 

[idea]

No, that's anti-theism. Communists are followers of a specific political system that is also anti-theistic.


Not all atheists are anti-theists. Stereotypes are not useful.

how is an atheist not anti-thesist? Wouldn't that make you agnostic if you were not against the possibiloity that God exists?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnostic

Agnosticism (Greek: α- a-, without + γνώσις gnōsis, knowledge; after Gnosticism) is the philosophical view that the truth value of certain claims — particularly metaphysical claims regarding theology, afterlife or the existence of deities, spiritual-beings, or even ultimate reality — is unknown or, depending on the form of agnosticism, inherently impossible to prove or disprove. It is often put forth as a middle ground between theism and atheism,[1] though it is not a religious declaration in itself, and it is occasionally argued that the terms are not mutually exclusive, since agnosticism refers to knowledge, while atheism and theism refer to belief.[2]

 

[Storm]

how is an atheist not anti-thesist? Wouldn't that make you agnostic if you were not against the possibiloity that God exists?

Simple. Atheists do not believe in God, full stop. Anti-theists believe that religion should be eradicated. Not all atheists believe this.

 

[idea]

Simple. Atheists do not believe in God, full stop. Anti-theists believe that religion should be eradicated. Not all atheists believe this.

OK - I'll start using "anti-theist" then. This thread is about anti's right?
The Reason Project: A Non-Profit Dedicated to Reason

 

[Storm]

OK - I'll start using "anti-theist" then. This thread is about anti's right?
The Reason Project: A Non-Profit Dedicated to Reason

Yeppers.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

They’ve officially launched the final assault on religion

Even if through some hypothetical miracle, religion was eliminated, it wouldn't make people any less ignorant, intolerant, or ignoble. Religion isn't the cause, it's a symptom.

 

[Jackytar]

Can anyone give another example of an athiest society? Communism/ soviet union is athiest.

I see very little political distinction between religion and communism. Both are irrational, imperialistic belief systems that seeks to vault itself into power.

Jackytar

 

[Storm]

I see very little political distinction between religion and communism. Both are irrational, imperialistic belief systems that seeks to vault itself into power.

Jackytar

There are similarities, sure, but Communism is pretty dedicated to stamping out religion, which makes it rather silly to say they're the same thing. Also, not every religion has such goals. The ones that do admittedly have more power, but that's pretty unsurprising given that they seek it.

 

[Jackytar]

There are similarities, sure, but Communism is pretty dedicated to stamping out religion, which makes it rather silly to say they're the same thing.

Except that religion is pretty dedicated to stamping out other religions.

Jackytar

 

[Storm]

Except that religion is pretty dedicated to stamping out other religions.

Jackytar

No, it's not. A couple of specific religionS are, and they make the most noise. But going by religions, as opposed to adherents, they're a tiny minority.

 

[Nepenthe]

So... what do the athiests want out of this? Hmmm what would a world without religion be like? The soviet union?

Why do communists not like religion? don't like the idea that another entity is more powerful than the gov? anyone who dissuades anyone from any line of reasoning is going for thought control IMO... just power hungry people trying to control everyone one yet one more level... I don't understand why anyone would want to be all-powerful.

Oh my....
Sometimes responding to posts like this are about as fruitful as debating creationists or Holocaust deniers. Themadhair and Storm have already touched upon it so I won't continue.
Anyway, it's about as fruitful as discussing communism since it's so often mischaracterized as this thread repeatedly demonstrates.

again, name calling is just a distraction technique. Can anyone give another example of an athiest society? Communism/ soviet union is athiest.

The Forbidden Book (Why Kings & Communists Fear The Bible)

Communists are athiests who want to take religion from everyone.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`
anti-religion vs. non-religion.

There are plenty of religious communists; some communists were very comfortable with religion and used it in their revolutions. As for the Soviet Union and communism, Lenin and the Russian Orthodox church were intimately connected. Some of the clergy enjoyed the benefits of being aligned with state leaders. Of course religious institutions were persecuted and members executed, but it was never a simple case of communism being anti-theism much less atheistic. Here's a great article by Paul Dixon written in 1945 that describes the complicated relationship between communist Soviet Union and religion:
Socialist Appeal - Religion in the Soviet Union

IMO an agnostic is non-religion. Athiests are anti. (No one can prove anything, so why not just be agnostic? athiests - even though they cannot prove there is no God, "believe" there is no God, they are against God. Agnostics are impartial, athiests are not.)

This creeps up again and again. The burden of proof is not on the atheist. But that may be for another thread.

 

[themadhair]

Relevant thread for debating the definition of what atheism/agnosticism is:
http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...ostic-doesnt-fall-between-theist-atheist.html

 

[Jackytar]

No, it's not. A couple of specific religionS are, and they make the most noise. But going by religions, as opposed to adherents, they're a tiny minority.

Political distinctions, Storm. Insofar as religion is apolitical, we have no argument. The point being that atheists would not create a communist state. Why would we expect them to reject one irrational, imperialistic ideology (religion) only to embrace another (communism - or the more commonly cited Nazism)?

Jackytar

 

[Nepenthe]

I see very little political distinction between religion and communism. Both are irrational, imperialistic belief systems that seeks to vault itself into power.

Jackytar

I have no idea what definition of communism or religion you're using, but they have very little resemblance. If you're equating some general similarities then of course those exist- I can claim that religion, car enthusiasts, and religion all have things in common. That sure as hell doesn't mean they're comparable on any meaningful level, much less irrational or imperialistic.
I do find it amusing since I'd use the words "irrational" and "imperialistic" to describe capitalism as well.