Why do Atheists Debate Religion?

[Uberpod]

Every religious discussion forum that I've seen has had a bunch of atheists on it.

That's a pride of atheists! Just like lions.

 

[Willamena]

I personally don't know of any atheists that definition fits.

It would seem to fit some (if not most) atheists who are into Satanism.

 

[LuisDantas]

You remind me of my favourite definition of atheists: those who cannot conceive that the universe could contain anything superior to themselves.

As definitions go, that is a grossly mishappen one. It can only identify an atheist by utter dumb luck.

 

[Bunyip]

You remind me of my favourite definition of atheists: those who cannot conceive that the universe could contain anything superior to themselves.

Wow! The irony is spectacular - Christian believe in a worldview in wbich the universe was made for the benefit of humanity and in which you have a personal relationship with the creator of the universe - but you think that atheists have a superiority complex!

Stunning.

 

[viole]

Here's a question to debate. I'm on a road to search for knowledge, and I find something intriguing. When I joined, I expected a fair number of Spiritualists, Christians, Jews, Muslims, Agnostics, Pagans, etc. The one thing I didn't count on was the number of Atheists, I expected a few, but the number was much larger then I expected. I found that intriguing.

I understand people with a religion talking about their religion. I don't understand why some people talk so much about their lack of a religion. Am I wrong to not understand?

Why do Atheists debate religion?

I'm not going to take part in this debate, except to ask questions and dig further into ideas and thoughts.

Side Note: I grew up in a rather Christian community, and do not know many atheists. I expect that I could learn a lot about atheism from this discussion.

Because the claim "God exists" is a claim that deserves rational analysis.

The absence of belief is not always a sufficient condition to ignore debate.

For instance, If I were a physicist that does not believe in dark matter, it woukd pretty odd to abstain from any debate concerning the subject of dark matter.


Ciao

- viole

 

[NewGuyOnTheBlock]

I try to mind my manners, but I do debate theists (as an atheist). The primary reason I do so is because of the power of religious doctrines over peoples' lives; including mine, where I live in a nation where there are way, way too many laws and policies that are strictly religiously grounded. I do my best to remain polite when people believe in something without evidence; I find that irrational, but "oh well"; but when people believe in something in SPITE of evidence, I find that incredibly dangerous and speak up. It's not just theists I debate; it's also Conspiracy Hoaxsters. The same dangerous philosophy of believing in a given thing in spite of evidence goes there as well; and maybe even more so. Those are a couple quick reasons why I do what I do.

 

[MD]

Atheism is a parasitic philosophy whose very existence is dependant on theism. It derives its own self worth by debating theism. It has no other real value to it.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

You remind me of my favourite definition of atheists: those who cannot conceive that the universe could contain anything superior to themselves.

I can conceive of many things far superior to me in numerous ways. However, people who don't apply reason and who are blind to their own irony and hypocrisy certainly do not fall into this category.

 

[LuisDantas]

Atheism is a parasitic philosophy whose very existence is dependant on theism. It derives its own self worth by debating theism. It has no other real value to it.

Care to help me understand what you mean?

 

[NewGuyOnTheBlock]

Atheism is a parasitic philosophy whose very existence is dependant on theism. It derives its own self worth by debating theism. It has no other real value to it.

Oh? Do tell.

Assume that Gaza and Israel were comprised mostly of Atheists instead of the conglomerate of religions now inhabiting the place. How many men, women and children do you think would still be alive without the Bible's "promise" that all that land belongs to them and the Muslim's "doctrines" demanding that these "invaders" be removed or that Jerusalem was promised to them by their Allah? If Uganda and Iran were comprised mostly of Atheists instead of fanatical Christians and Muslims, do you think these countries would still be publicly hanging and lynching our fellow human beings who just happen to be gay? Should we "parasitic" atheists remain silent while more than one nutjob is in America's congress claiming we should do nothing about climate change based on a verse in Genesis?

Or, maybe, we should just sit back on our parasitic behinds with our deepest apologies, and let a religiously-indoctrinated America destroy destroy the environment and allow the slaughter of men, women and children?

Would a religious symbol devoted to Christianity on the graves of fallen service men marginalize or humiliate the sacrifices of your fellow Zoroastrians who were marked by the Christian cross? Is it offensive to see the Ten Commandments in public courtrooms where, if you are summoned, you are told by that sight that this court, this land, thus you are subject to Christian doctrines and commandments, including "Though shalt have no other Gods before me" [including Ahura Mazda]; does that really sit okay with you? Are you comfortable with Christian Creationists teaching their myth of Creation as truth in science classrooms, including "In the Beginning, God said, 'let there be light'; and it was so", suggesting their God created the embodiment of light?

It is the Atheist who stands against every bit of this; so maybe, just maybe, Atheism has value.

I don't know about you, but I feel that all life; human life; has intrinsic and immense value and worth, regardless of the beliefs they hold to be true.

 

[Revoltingest]

Atheism is a parasitic philosophy whose very existence is dependant on theism. It derives its own self worth by debating theism. It has no other real value to it.

Oh, I see it so differently. Atheism doesn't even qualify as a philosophy.
Our single belief isn't even a belief....it's only a disbelief in gods.
I say that you give atheism too much credit.....like calling lone cricket a "swarm".

I suppose it is parasitic though, in the sense that "normal" is parasitic cuz without
"abnormal", we wouldn't need a word to describe the condition of being normal.

 

[GoodbyeDave]

If you disbelieve without evidence, that's irrational. And if you think that a negative can be proved, that's illogical. Since most people are one or the other, often both, at least you can claim to be normal in one respect.

 

[Sir Doom]

If you disbelieve without evidence, that's irrational.

I don't really understand how you can believe that. If no one (including me) presents evidence that convinces me of something, then it is rational to disbelieve that something. Its also rational to believe it, which should lead to your search for evidence of it. Both are perfectly rational positions to take.

And if you think that a negative can be proved, that's illogical.

People often say this, but it isn't true either. As long as there is data you can prove anything including the lack of something. Its a function of people's general disagreement on what God is and how one manages to detect it that makes it impossible to disprove. Not the simple fact that this is 'proving a negative'. Proving a positive suffers the same drawback. Without data, no proof can happen. That is why people remain both atheist and theist. There is no effective way to convince them otherwise. They have to redefine God themselves in order to get rid of it or make it emerge, and that isn't likely to happen without some perceived necessity for doing so.

Since most people are one or the other, often both, at least you can claim to be normal in one respect.

That I won't dispute.

 

[paarsurrey]

Atheism is a parasitic philosophy whose very existence is dependant on theism. It derives its own self worth by debating theism. It has no other real value to it.

I endorse you.

Thanks and regards

 

[viole]

You remind me of my favourite definition of atheists: those who cannot conceive that the universe could contain anything superior to themselves.

And you remind me of my favorite definition of theists: those who think that the universe exists because of them

Ciao

- viole

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Atheism is a parasitic philosophy whose very existence is dependant on theism. It derives its own self worth by debating theism. It has no other real value to it.

It's a response to theism. It's only "parasitic" in the same sense that abolitionism is "parasitic" toward slavery.

 

[samosasauce]

Because religion is fascinating?

 

[outhouse]

Atheism is a parasitic philosophy whose very existence is dependant on theism. It derives its own self worth by debating theism. It has no other real value to it.

So what your saying is you hate all education and knowledge

 

[outhouse]

I endorse you.

Thanks and regards

Im so supprised :biglaugh:

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I understand people with a religion talking about their religion. I don't understand why some people talk so much about their lack of a religion. Am I wrong to not understand?

Why do Atheists debate religion?

The prescience of George Orwell shows in 1984's Ministry of Truth's slogans...War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.

This is post 1984 and we now know he should have included...Atheism is Religion. As such, most Atheists here, imho, appear to feel the same as all other religious groups, and want to be recognized as a major player in shaping the world going forward,