jump to last post 1-6 of 6 discussions (90 posts)

Is, "Freedom of Religion", an acceptable principle for an Atheist?

  1. cjhunsinger profile image66
    cjhunsingerposted 2 years ago

    Unlike theistic belief, which is couched in a mandate to believe, Atheism is a single statement of belief that makes no claim of a universal truth, nor is there a demand to believe or to entice followers with promise or threat.
    Freedom of religious practice is crucial to the evolution away from such belief as, even now it's influence wanes in the wake of scientific advancements. That man is now doing things and answering questions that were once only in the domain of a god measures that movement. In order for a society to be free there can be no religious mandate and too, there can be no mandate barring religious practice.

    A free society is not measured by it's scientific advancements, but whether an individual is free to express and to practice his own conscience. In that freedom, condemnation of others and the belief held by others should not be included as an inherent part of Freedom of Religion, as there is no freedom to condemn. This would be a difficult line for the theist to adhere to, as often  such condemnation is a mandate to a belief in a particular god.

    Should such a line be obeyed that too, would hasten the further decline of religious belief. The black and white line of a godly defined good and evil would blur even more diminishing a universal truth or constant.

    1. wilderness profile image97
      wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      "A free society is not measured by it's scientific advancements, but whether an individual is free to express and to practice his own conscience."

      And yet that freedom is impossible to measure or even define.  Consider the loss of freedom to:
      Erect monuments and icons to personal Gods on public land, using public funding
      Teach the young the beauty and wonder of God
      Avoid those that violate God's will, such as homosexuals
      Require or even expect others to respect/participate in public displays of worship (although the rash of foot washing/worship stations going up around the country makes one wonder).

      The problem, of course, is the old saw about freedom to swing one's fist - an inevitable one when people live in close proximity to each other.

      1. cjhunsinger profile image66
        cjhunsingerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Wilderness
        Yes, this is where all things begin to fog over. And to your point of religious icons on public property and foot washing stations; is one being used to over shadow or replace the other in the push for a political correctness--by government?
        With regard to your comment on homosexuals, shall we force integration as we did with civil rights and again violate the the 1st Amendment and one's freedom of association?
        The belief in gods will fade and that is inevitable. The question, I think, is what will seep into the void. People, generally speaking, are not strong enough to live individually, but require a 'faith' of deliverance, meaning and purpose in their lives and if not a god what? Can government replace the gods and provide that purpose and meaning? I would not think so, as government tends to be as religions self servicing. Does government then become the state religion omnipotent and all-providing. So many questions and so little time.

        1. 0
          Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          This is sad really. It's just another case where a believer is unable to understand how anyone can live without a parent figure telling what to do and when to do it, so they assume all others think the same. Sorry, I'm an adult and no longer need a sky daddy to tuck me in at night. I have purpose and direction in my life and wish more were able to mature into adulthood as well.

          The government doesn't have to replace any Gods, it's job is to protect you and your rights.

          Do you really feels your rights were violated during the civil rights movement? Do you feel integration should not have been forced. Should people of colour be forced to the back of the bus?

          1. God shet profile image61
            God shetposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            You've confused religion ~ with spirituality.

            1. 0
              Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              No, I've not done that. Why would you make that comment in light of the comment I was responding to. Why didn't you ask him to clarify his position on homosexuality and racism. Those things should not be confused with religion or spirituality and yet you tell me I'm confused?

              Did you not read his opinion that humans require a belief in God? He made no mention of spirituality. You do realize that you don't have to believe in any God to get the feeling associated with spirituality right?

              1. God shet profile image61
                God shetposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                That's right. But many people might be pointing to a spiritual 'fact' when they use the word "God".

                1. 0
                  Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  What does the word "word" have to do with this conversation and why did you not speak to the apparent homophobia and racism?

                  1. God shet profile image61
                    God shetposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    I have corrected that reply. That was a typo. I meant "God".

                  2. God shet profile image61
                    God shetposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    What you have called 'homophobia' and 'racism' ~ can be explained as 'spiritual aberrations'. It mostly occurs when we are not perceiving reality as it actually 'is'.

          2. cjhunsinger profile image66
            cjhunsingerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Rad
            In my opening I did not address you by name or accuse you of possessing such a weakness. The great majority of the worlds population does suffer from this ailment. Not everything said is directed at you or about you.
            You are right in that the government does not have to replace the gods, but it will, as that is the historical nature of the beast. To your questions, yes, yes and no. A question for you. Who are people of color? Are you saying that Caucasians are colorless, invisible perhaps?

            1. 0
              Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Wow, I'm speechless. You seem to be more concerned about your rights than your fellow American who was forced to sit at the back of the bus and use separate washrooms. Are you upset because African Americans were forced upon you by allowing them to sit next to you and be your equal in the eyes of the law? And just how is allowing homosexuals to marry and be equal in the eyes of the law effecting your rights?

              Are you offended by the term "people of colour" because it excludes you? I'm not really fond of African American because they may also be equally European American as well.

              1. cjhunsinger profile image66
                cjhunsingerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Rad
                "Wow." For the most part of your response, you assume to much and are poised to attack rather then to ask for clarification, which I was hoping you would do.
                The term, 'people of color' is to say that some are not and that is exclusionary, racist perhaps. Do you think that by spelling the word color to colour that it brings a different connotation? As too, African American; I am of direct German ancestry, but I am an American, no more no less. I do not feel the need for further identification to quantify or mitigate my allegiance, nor the need for a greater purpose, which only divides.
                I am of the conviction that my ancestry can be traced to Africa and that the all of humanity is defined as homo sapiens-sapiens. I believe in equality under the law and that the Civil Rights Act did more harm than good. I never mentioned same sex marriage and are you putting words in place that have not been spoken?

                1. 0
                  Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Right, you simply don't want integration with African American (or whatever term you'd like to us) or homosexuals. And you did bring up the integration of homosexuals.
                  "With regard to your comment on homosexuals, shall we force integration as we did with civil rights and again violate the the 1st Amendment and one's freedom of association?"

                  In other words you are not concerned with the rights or equality of others or and I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, are you simple not happy with the way equality was given?

                  1. cjhunsinger profile image66
                    cjhunsingerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    rad
                    You are right I did bring it up, Maybe it is I who is in the attack mode.
                    I have a problem when the government tells me that I must associate with those, who I would not necessarily have association with. To presume that I am racist or anything else because of that position is wrong. Because I do not associate with drug addicts, should I be forced to? Does it violate their rights.
                    The integration of schools was a correct path and many other public arenas, forced busing was wrong.
                    If my rights are violated to the benefit of others, what has been accomplished?
                    I will continue later or tomorrow. This is an important issue and look forward to more dialogue.

                2. cjhunsinger profile image66
                  cjhunsingerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Rad

                  Did not stop to think that you may be British and colour there is color here. Sorry about that if you are a Brit. Old English and all that. Could be wrong again  though.

                  1. 0
                    Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Canadian.

  2. 69
    paarsurreyposted 2 years ago

    Is, "Freedom of Religion", an acceptable principle for an Atheist?

    The Atheists only want freedom of religion for themselves, they are not tolerant enough to allow it to others, generally.

    Regards

    1. 0
      Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Actually what they want is your Religious ideas to stop impeding in their lives. Simple really.

      1. 69
        paarsurreyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        To tolerate opposing ideas is called tolerance. Humans are social, everybody effects everybody.

        Regards

        1. 0
          Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Like how the religious oppose gay marriage? And in doing so affect and hurt others?

          1. 69
            paarsurreyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            This is off-topic.

            Regards

            1. cjhunsinger profile image66
              cjhunsingerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              paar

              rad usually has his own agenda and normally it has nothing to do with the topic.

              1. 69
                paarsurreyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Thanks for the information.

                Regards

            2. 0
              Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              No, it's on topic because it's shows how some religious people interfere in the lives of others by imposing their religious views.

              1. 69
                paarsurreyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                That is called difference of opinion. That will always exist where there are human beings and freedom of thought is allowed as a civil right.
                If Atheists people are not with 0 % tolerance, then they should tolerate it.

                Regards.

                1. 0
                  Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  LOL, sure we should just tolerate your religious beliefs forging inequality? I suppose the Christians living in the middle east should just tolerate the higher taxes they pay for being a Christian in a Muslim state? The should just tolerate Sharia law. Gay people should just tolerate the hated and inequality bestowed upon them because of your religion.

                  1. cjhunsinger profile image66
                    cjhunsingerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    As an Atheist I would support much of paars sentiment.

  3. 69
    paarsurreyposted 2 years ago

    1.    It is not one of the prime or core beliefs of Muslims to have more than one wife. It is not a must for a Muslims to have more than one wife.
    2.    Catholics should not be forced for abortions.
    3.    Public funded hospitals are different; they should follow the secular law of the country.

    Regards

    1. 0
      Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      1. But they can?
      2. That's why all hospitals should be publicly funded, and/or if they are not then they have to live by the rules of the country, if they means they have to hire someone who will perform tasks they don't want then so be it. Does the hospital also get to say they don't perform surgery on homosexuals?
      3. Don't you think all hospitals should follow the secular laws of the country?

  4. 69
    paarsurreyposted 2 years ago

    Muhammad upheld the principle of "freedom of religion" all his life.
    The Atheists instead of supporting Muhammad they support Meccans who persecuted Muhammad and his followers.
    They should support Muhammad .

    Regards

    1. 0
      Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Mohammad was a war general who allowed people of other faiths to exist (and married a 7 year old girl and only waited a few year before consummating the marriage), but said they should be taxed excessively. Tell us what the punishment for leaving Islam is?

      1. 69
        paarsurreyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Please quote from some reliable sources.

        1.    Muhammad was a prophet/messenger of G-d like Moses and Jesus etc. He was never trained to be a soldier even, not to speak of being a General.
        2.    Muhammad did not tax others excessively.
        3.    There is no punishment for leaving Islam in this world.

        Muhammad was a peaceful person and upheld right of freedom of religion the most. All his life was full of struggle for that.

        Regards

        1. 0
          Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Ali burnt some people and this news reached Ibn 'Abbas, who said, "Had I been in his place I would not have burnt them, as the Prophet said, 'Don't punish (anybody) with Allah's Punishment.' No doubt, I would have killed them, for the Prophet said, 'If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.'
          — Sahih al-Bukhari, 4:52:260

          Allah's Apostle said, "The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Apostle, cannot be shed except in three cases: In Qisas for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam (apostate) and leaves the Muslims."
          — Sahih al-Bukhari, 9:83:17

          He who disbelieves in Allah after his having believed, not he who is compelled while his heart is at rest on account of faith, but he who opens (his) breast to disbelief-- on these is the wrath of Allah, and they shall have a grievous chastisement.
          — Quran 16:106

          Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
          —Qur'an, [Quran 9:29]

          Muhammad spent his last ten years, from 622 to 632, as the leader of Medina in a state of war with pagan Mecca.

          1. 69
            paarsurreyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Hadith was collected 250/300 years after Muhammad. It is only accepted if it does not differ with Quran. Quran is the first and the foremost source of guidance of Muslims whatever the denomination.

            Regards

            1. 0
              Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Well, I gave you a few quotes from the Quran as well. It appears many Muslims and Muslim countries agree with these quotes. Here are a few more.

              Quran (2:216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not."

              Quran (3:56) - "As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help."

              Quran (4:74) - "Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward."

              Quran (4:89) - "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks."

              Quran (8:12) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them"  No reasonable person would interpret this to mean a spiritual struggle.


              Need I continue?

              1. 69
                paarsurreyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Have you read Quran from cover to cover? Just for information.

                With a view that you must have chosen the strongest verse that supports your viewpoint at number one; I give the verse with the verses in the context:

                The Holy Quran : Chapter 2: Al-Baqarah

                [2:215] Do you think that you will enter Heaven while there has not come over you the condition of those who passed away before you? Poverty and afflictions befell them, and they were violently shaken until the Messenger and those who believed along with him said: ‘When will come the help of Allah?’ Yea, surely the help of Allah is nigh.
                [2:216] They ask thee what they shall spend. Say: ‘Whatever of good and abundant wealth you spend should be for parents and near relatives and orphans and the needy and the wayfarer. And whatever good you do, surely Allah knows it well.’
                [2:217] Fighting is ordained for you, though it is repugnant to you; but it may be that you dislike a thing while it is good for you, and it may be that you like a thing while it is bad for you. Allah knows all things, and you know not.
                [2:218] They ask thee about fighting in the Sacred Month. Say: ‘Fighting therein is a greattransgression, but to hinder men from the way of Allah, and to be ungrateful to Him and to hinder men from the Sacred Mosque, and to turn out its people therefrom, is a greater sinwith Allah; and persecution is worse than killing.’ And they will not cease fighting you until they turn you back from your faith, if they can. And whoso from among you turns back from his faith and dies while he is a disbeliever, it is they whose works shall be vain in this world and the next. These are the inmates of the Fire and therein shall they abide.
                [2:219] Those who believe and those who emigrate and strive hard in the cause of Allah, it is these who hope for Allah’s mercy; and Allah is Most Forgiving, Merciful.
                [2:220] They ask thee concerning wine and the game of hazard. Say: ‘In both there is great sin and also some advantages for men; but their sin is greater than their advantage.’ And they ask thee what they should spend. Say: ‘What you can spare.’ Thus does Allah make His commandments clear to you that you may reflect.
                [2:221] Upon this world and the next. And they ask thee concerning the orphans. Say: ‘Promotion of their welfare is an act of great goodness. And if you intermix with them, they are your brethren. And Allah knows the mischief-maker from the reformer. And if Allah had so willed, He would have put you to hardship. Surely, Allah is Mighty, Wise.’
                [2:222] And marry not idolatrous women until they believe; even a believing bond-woman is better than an idolatress, although she may highly please you. And give not believing women in marriage to idolaters until they believe; even a believing slave is better than an idolater, although he may highly please you. These call to the Fire, but Allah calls to Heaven and to forgiveness by His command. And He makes His Signs clear to the people that they may remember.
                [2:223] And they ask thee concerning menstruation. Say: ‘It is a harmful thing, so keep away from women during menstruation, and go not in unto them until they are clean. But when they have cleansed themselves, go in unto them as Allah has commanded you. Allah loves those who turn to Him and loves those who keep themselves clean.’
                [2:224] Your wives are a tilth for you; so approach your tilth when and how you like and send ahead some good for yourselves; and fear Allah and know that you shall meet Him; and give good tidings to those who obey.

                http://www.alislam.org/quran/search2/sh … ;verse=216

                Now please prove your viewpoint from the verse you quoted and the verses in the context.

                Regards

                1. 0
                  Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Do you really think posting that is helping your cause?

                  Rather than comment on each verse I posted you post your own post which doesn't help your cause.

                  "even a believing slave is better than an idolater"

                  Is that message from Allah? "Even a believing slave is better…" Are slaves less than?

                  Quran (8:12) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them"

                  1. 69
                    paarsurreyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    This would be off-topic.
                    We are talking freedom of religion. One quoted a list of verses, we will first finish discussion it, then we could discuss other .

                    If one is keen one could start another thread, where everybody would participate to understand the new topic one intends to discuss.

                    Regards

  5. 69
    paarsurreyposted 2 years ago

    @ RAD MAN
    Now please prove your viewpoint from the verse you quoted and the verses in the context given in the preceding post.

    Regards

    1. 0
      Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Paarsurrey, are you a women, I've gotten that impression and I apologies if I'm wrong. That said, do you believe a women's value and word half that of a man?

      1. 69
        paarsurreyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        This would also be off-topic.
        Please see my response on the preceding post.

        Regards

        1. 0
          Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          It's on topic because it addresses your Freedoms. Please answer the very fair questions.

  6. 69
    paarsurreyposted 2 years ago

    Is, "Freedom of Religion", an acceptable principle for an Atheist?


    Muhammad upheld the principle of "freedom of religion" all his life.

    One could observe starting for the 53 years of his life spent Mecca.

    The Atheists instead of supporting Muhammad they support Meccans who persecuted Muhammad and his followers.

    They should support Muhammad .

    Regards

    1. 0
      Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Freedom of Religion is what we find in secular societies. It's mandated in my country, it's the law. It has to be because Toronto is the most diverse city in the world. Respect is given to everyone and it's expected by everyone.

      We do not find Freedom of Religion in Muslim countries especially those who use Muslim laws as the law of the land. Mohammad taxed none Muslims excessively, made them none citizens and treated women like they are worth half of any man.

      Is this what you belief is Freedom?

      1. 69
        paarsurreyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Canada is not an Atheist country.

        Regards

        1. 0
          Rad Manposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          No, it's secular, as I said.

          1. 69
            paarsurreyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            So the example of Toronto is not related to this thread.

            Regards

 
working