Should religion be tolerated?

[Storm]

Atheism may not be a religion, but it's pretty hypocritical of atheists to frown on religious tolerance. If that goes, who do you think will get persecuted first?

 

[ChristineES]

Atheism may not be a religion, but it's pretty hypocritical of atheists to frown on religious tolerance. If that goes, who do you think will get persecuted first?

If they were able to get rid of religion (you can't get rid of faith, though), and then all the same problems still existed, I wonder who they would blame then. :areyoucraA new scapegoat, I presume.

 

[Storm]

Going back to the revised question of how the atheist should react should someone convert to a religion he disapproves of, you should treat them with the same courtesy you expect for yourself.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

If they were able to get rid of religion (you can't get rid of faith, though), and then all the same problems still existed, I wonder who they would blame then. :areyoucraA new scapegoat, I presume.

As an atheist, I don't think eradicating religion would have any meaningful effect. I've always seen religion as a symptom of what's wrong with people, not the cause.

 

[challupa]

As an atheist, I don't think eradicating religion would have any meaningful effect. I've always seen religion as a symptom of what's wrong with people, not the cause.

Out of curiousity, do you see a difference between religion and spirituality? Many people are not religious or part of a religious but are nevertheless very spiritual. What do you think of that distinction?

 

[Nepenthe]

It is a bit odd, this statement. Atheism is not a religion, at least 95% of the time. But the way you present here, it almost sounds like one. And it does have a rule- Don't believe in God (which is arguable) Religion does not have to be organized.

How so? To borrow a widely used retort to your claim: Atheism is to religion what hair color is to baldness.
Atheism is simply the lack of belief in a God or gods. There is no ethical or moral structure that comes with it. No guidance or set of rules or rituals. It is simply the philosophical stance of non-theism; all other belief systems that are attached to atheism are extraneous, and do not automatically come with atheism.
So atheism is basically the console you buy, and humanism is the controllers, Marxism the games, existentialism the online gaming service, etc., etc.

 

[Storm]

How so? To borrow a widely used retort to your claim: Atheism is to religion what hair color is to baldness.
Atheism is simply the lack of belief in a God or gods. There is no ethical or moral structure that comes with it. No guidance or set of rules or rituals. It is simply the philosophical stance of non-theism; all other belief systems that are attached to atheism are extraneous, and do not automatically come with atheism.
So atheism is basically the console you buy, and humanism is the controllers, Marxism the games, existentialism the online gaming service, etc., etc.

One can make a religion of any worldview.

 

[Nepenthe]

One can make a religion of any worldview.

I suppose, but doesn't that make the term "religion" meaningless? If a historical set of rituals and commonly held beliefs are considered a religion, and, say, a preference for Pepsi over Coke are considered a religious stance, what use is the term?

There has to be a defining line or any attempt to discuss religion is doomed to ambiguity. We might as well throw our hands up in the air and proclaim the belief in @!!**%:!"+ just as valid as the worship of Shmigglethorpomniplax.

 

[Storm]

I suppose, but doesn't that make the term "religion" meaningless? If a historical set of rituals and commonly held beliefs are considered a religion, and, say, a preference for Pepsi over Coke are considered a religious stance, what use is the term?

There has to be a defining line or any attempt to discuss religion is doomed to ambiguity. We might as well throw our hands up in the air and proclaim the belief in @!!**%:!"+ just as valid as the worship of Shmigglethorpomniplax.

I said "any worldview" not "any opinion." There are atheists out there - and a few in here - who cling to the idea that there is no God with all the fervor and blind faith as the most pathetic fundy, because that's exactly what they are.

 

[Nepenthe]

I said "any worldview" not "any opinion." There are atheists out there - and a few in here - who cling to the idea that there is no God with all the fervor and blind faith as the most pathetic fundy, because that's exactly what they are.

So what constitutes a worldview as opposed to an opinion?

Sure, secular ideaologies can become religious in their dogmatism and stubborn refusal to change their core beliefs (Soviet communism is the obvious secular belief system that comes to mind). And I certainly know of those whose fervent adherence to non-theism are manifestations of religious-like dogma.

But atheism, the concept itself, the basic lack of belief in God(s), is not a religion. Yes, the blind unthinking unquestioning adherence to atheism may be religious components, but atheism itself is not and cannot. Those dogmatic qualities are external and added onto the non-religious concept of atheism.

 

[J Bryson]

I would define rational Atheism ("It cannot be proven, therefore it has no value to me.") as not being religious, and in fact as being the opposite.

I would define some Atheism (such as Ayn Rand's "I refuse to believe in God, as I refuse to believe in anything higher than man's potential.") as being religious.

 

[McBell]

Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall....

 

[Diederick]

I would define rational Atheism ("It cannot be proven, therefore it has no value to me.") as not being religious, and in fact as being the opposite.

The opposite of 1 is not necessarily 0. :areyoucra In this case, it would be more reasonable to say it was -1.

I would define some Atheism (such as Ayn Rand's "I refuse to believe in God, as I refuse to believe in anything higher than man's potential.") as being religious.

Religion without a superbeing? You need to review your definition of religion. I would call such Ayn Randian Atheism superficial sophistication. It's just vaguely spiritual. Religion concerns belief in a higher power or at least some power that has control over human destiny; or the organized, blown-up versions of those essntials which we choke on these days.

 

[J Bryson]

Religion without a superbeing? You need to review your definition of religion. I would call such Ayn Randian Atheism superficial sophistication. It's just vaguely spiritual. Religion concerns belief in a higher power or at least some power that has control over human destiny; or the organized, blown-up versions of those essntials which we choke on these days.

For all of its claims of mathematical and logical simplicity, I believe that Rand's philosophy meets the requirements of your second definition.

 

[jtartar]

This is something I'm a little torn on, on one hand, I'm inclined to feel that everyone should be able to conduct their lives as they see fit, to live and let live as it were. On the other hand, however, religions in general seem to cross a line, where they begin to enforce their 'divine will' onto the rest of the world. Children across the world get brainwashed to believe that some horrible damnation awaits them unless they seek salvation through their parents religion, religious groups fight amongst each other over conflicting ideoligies and of course faith in and of itself has a tendency to make one shortsighted and biased when it comes to new information that might conflict with said beliefs. All in all it seems to be quite destructive.

Just to help get this topic rolling, take the all too recent example of 9/11, where religious zealots whose faith is unquestionable by anyone, these people willingly gave their lives to carry out the 'divine will' of their religion. And in so doing ended the lives of so many innocent people. How can one be an advocate for religion without advocating the actions of those 'terrorists'. And if you think that their religion is misguided or their interpretation flawed, and that your own religion is superior, aren't you propagating the very mindset that leads to yet more bloodshed in the name of God?

BaronVonKaiser,
What you say is largely correct, religion is the worse thing on earth and also the best thing. The difference is: Is the beliefs based on reality??
The Bible tells us that the God that inspired the Holy Scriptures, is Almighty, that He created all things, and is the source of all life, Isa 45:18, Ex 6:3, Ps 36:9. His proper name is, JEHOVAH.
This God says that all other gods called gods are really nonexistent, Ps 115:1-8, 1Cor 8:5,6.
This God says that He is going to destroy all that are called gods and the people who worship them, Jere 10:10-12.
Jesus, God's son came to earth to give his life as a ransom sacrifice so the we could regain what Adam and Eve lost for us; eternal life, John 3:16,17, Matt 20:28.
The religions that cause all the trouble on earth are not God's favored people.
At Rev , chapters 17,18 we are told about a Harlot riding on a wild beast. She is called Babylon the Great. She actually stands for all the false religions on earth today. She is accused of causing all the blood to be shed on earth, Rev 18:24.
Rev 17:12-18, tells about the political nations of the earth, who have been committing fornication with Her. These will all of a sudden turn on her, probably because of all the trouble religion is causing, and destoy her.
This would be good, except for one thing. The politgical nations are enemies of God, having gotten their power from Satan. After they destroy false religion they will then turn on God's favored people. This will bring on Armageddon and the destruction of all ungodly people, 2Pet 3:7, Rev 16:16, 19:11-21.

 

[Storm]

So what constitutes a worldview as opposed to an opinion?

Ugh, I suck at definitions, but I'll try. A worldview is the body of one's philosophical assumptions (and we all make them), through which all other data is interpreted. How was that?

But atheism, the concept itself, the basic lack of belief in God(s), is not a religion. Yes, the blind unthinking unquestioning adherence to atheism may be religious components, but atheism itself is not and cannot. Those dogmatic qualities are external and added onto the non-religious concept of atheism.

This is all I'm saying. It happens, but it isn't representative. It isn't representative, but it happens.

 

[Storm]

Religion without a superbeing? You need to review your definition of religion.

Or you do. Buddhism and UU (just off the top of my head) may be inconvenient to someone wishing to cling to stereotypes, but they are indeed religions.

 

[McBell]

re·li·gion
n.

1.

a. Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
b. A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.
​

2. The life or condition of a person in a religious order.
3. A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
4. A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.
​

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2003. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
​

Seems to me that there are atheists that fit definition 4.

 

[J Bryson]

re·li·gion
n.

1.

a. Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
b. A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.
​

2. The life or condition of a person in a religious order.
3. A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
4. A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.
​

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2003. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
​

Seems to me that there are atheists that fit definition 4.

And not meaning to belabor a point, but it could be argued that Randians fall under both three and four.

 

[ChristineES]

How so? To borrow a widely used retort to your claim: Atheism is to religion what hair color is to baldness.
Atheism is simply the lack of belief in a God or gods. There is no ethical or moral structure that comes with it. No guidance or set of rules or rituals. It is simply the philosophical stance of non-theism; all other belief systems that are attached to atheism are extraneous, and do not automatically come with atheism.
So atheism is basically the console you buy, and humanism is the controllers, Marxism the games, existentialism the online gaming service, etc., etc.

You are right, I meant that for the majority of atheists, but there are few who make it seem as though it is a religion. Let's say it is not a religion to them but they do a lot of the same things that religious people do- they even proselytize (in a manner)
Heck, some people can turn sports, coca-cola, and cartoons into almost a religious experience, while at the same time it is not religious.