Atheism Rules !
- MOmmagusposted 16 years ago
0I've been praying for Mark for a few weeks now, so the more the merrier. He is all but converted.
Even though I'm supposed to be logged off by now, I'm not, and I thought I'd say that I agree with Mark on this one- Sandra I'm having a hard time understanding your reasoning here! I thought it was that my brain is fried from doing all this schoolwork lately, but I'm starting to think I'm just missing what you're trying to say!
You are the weak link Peter
(j/k)I suppose so.
It's not like our manual isn't...oh, I don't know, the biggest selling book ever.It's supposed to be free
I knew it - PROOF LOL
Peter - I agree, but they don't exactly have a good track record in this regard. I guess what I mean is - survive in their present incarnation LOL- sandra rinckposted 16 years ago0
I guess I didn't understand this bit. Are we all the most significant bit of dust? In which case, what about the 100,000+ dead in Iraq? Were they all equal to God? Man needs to win what? LIke I said, not really understanding this. --Mark
We aren't equal in our actions, we aren't equal in our minds, we aren't equal in wealth, we aren't equal to our parents, but we are all equal in that we are all bread the same way, we were all birthed the same way, we all die the same, ( different ways, but still, death is death, what happens prior to death is yours and not equal to anything else, it's yours alone).
So what I mean as the most significant bit of dust is that, there isn't anyone else in the cosmos anywhere yet, that has the ability to destroy or create anything at all, except for the one deviding factor that no ones has the mind to understand, not you, not me, not hard core christians or catholics, not scientist, not philosophers, not doctors or scientist have what it takes to understand the greatestness of what we are in the vast multitudes of space, but what is different is we are the only species that can even attempt to understand it, which in time I think many many many things can be understood and proven but the answer to Why...in the first place will never be answered, which is were I believe God is, just the answers that you look for.
I think that is why people pray, I think it's why we discover what we discover, understand the way we do, eat the things we do, etc. it goes on for ever and ever until, you reach the point in which everything get's reversed because it is perfectly logical from a scientific perspective, that everything will resolve in itself.
I don't see anyways around it, but because humans are the only ones who can even have the capability to even make a question and get an answer in my mind makes us all Gods. I really don't believe in a guy with a white robe, I don't. If I could pick out a name to describe what I try to say, I couldn't anyways, because it hasn't even been discovered yet. Yet we think we have all the knowledge in the world to prove or disprove or think of anything we can think of but when it comes to what God actually is, the only true name for it is something that will never really have a true name. And even with a name, we would never be able to understand it so....
I don't care for hard core religion, I think it takes away from discovering what I call God in the first place, it takes away people ability to think for themselves, and it cause wars and death and stuff like that, but I can see why, and I can see why an atheist is an atheist, I don't consider either of them wrong, but I do believe that both sides should understand both sides, which I think I do, and even though I can't stand Christianity, doesn't mean I don't like the people for what they are, and it really takes a big mind to see both sides. So the bigger the mind the better, or better to have both sides work together than apart because as far as I can tell, science wouldn't have tipped this far if it wasn't for some of those people from a long time ago wanting to seek God. Which the search to me is for the ultimate understanding of life in the first place, you don't have to look for a firely chariot to believe in God, but the word God has been exploited and propagated to point in which God lost all meaning.
- sandra rinckposted 16 years ago0
Jenny, you are quite right. I was trying to explain how species change over time to some one who thinks that the fact there are fish in the sea is proof that evolution is not happening.
You did a much better job. But us as a species changing and becoming taller is also part of the process. We are becoming taller because we are surviving better - we have more food available to us. We have created tools to make this food for us and adapted crops to produce greater yields, therefore we have more food, therefore we are taller (and fatter). This is a distorted version of evolution as Darwin described it, and I guess you could more call it "development."
Good explanation, by the way I am interested to hear any responses.Of course not. But it is proof positive that evolution is occurring.
Well, that is an incorrect summary of the Theory of Evolution. If you think that's what it is, no wonder you disagree with it, LOL. I would too. That's just a completely ridiculous idea. Not even a completely deluded cult member would ... no, actually, they just might ... but nobody who has actually listened in high school biology (in a place where they teach it, of course, which is not a given in the US) would think that was what the Theory of Evolution says.
This is incorrect - there is DNA in every form of living creature, even viruses which are smaller than a single cell, and there is also DNA in soil and other products of decomposition.
Well the creationists say that's what happened, not the evolutionists. Evolution says it was a process which took billions of years and a complex interplay between random mutation and environmental culling. It's creationists who say it just happened in an instant.
Ahem, the DNA of those bugs that developed resistance is different now, is it not?
As far as I can tell, the ability to watch creatures evolving in response to a changing environment is pretty solid proof that the process occurs. You don't even have to use a microscope to watch it happening. You can see it in fruit flies and mice and rats in laboratory settings, for example.
You seem to be totally misunderstanding the whole theory of evolution. An individual's DNA doesn't suddenly and dramatically change - sexual reproduction produces offspring which are automatically different from either parent, and before sexual reproduction developed there was random mutation. That still occurs, but its impact is much less than sexual reproduction because so many mutations make the offspring unviable.
RNA works with DNA to reproduce the DNA strand. There was reproduction before there were cells, let alone animals. And there was asexual reproduction for billions of years before there was sexual reproduction.
Without reproduction there cannot be evolution.
Creation, on the other hand, can happen without reproduction. And did, as the story goes, with Adam and Eve.
Therefore, as far as I can see, the existence of reproduction is more of a problem for creationists than evolutionists.
(I'm joking, of course, there is no logical way to conclude anything from the fact that reproduction exists. It could be something the Flying Spaghetti Monster thought up to keep his noodly appendages occupied, for example, and all the evidence for evolution may have been noodled by Him for His own inscrutable reasons ...)
Jenny
Sprinkler man,
I am certainly glad you entered the discussion, although I must admit to being a little perplexed as to where you get your idea of evolution from. I can only imagine it is from some one who is trying to muddy the waters.
Looking forward to your response to Jenny's comments. I won't add anything - she does a much better job of explaining the scientific stuff than I canBoth of you are hilarious....
Please teach me what the theory of evolution is. How did I get to be what I am today?
How did I evolve into this? With my somewhat perfect body, eyes spaced proportionately, nose sort of in the center of my face, mouth right under my nose, so I know what to watch out for before I stuff it in my mouth.
Bugs that can grow stronger or viruses getting stronger, does not come close to a theory on evolution. They are still the same bugs just getting stronger, they are not going to change into humans or little cute kitty cats or caterpillars . They are going to stay what they are and reproduce into what they are.
I can inject myself with snake venom until I am not affected by certain types of snake bites. I am not going to turn into a snake or anything else.
OK - DNA similar to human DNA.........
Not following your comment on if reproduction exists, care to follow up? Do you have any children? How about parents? I am pretty sure reproduction exists.
Still thinking about the Flying Spaghetti Monster though. Maybe we need a new topic
Thom, if I had to answer your question as to why the US doesn't fully accept evolution, I'd say this:
1st, I'm not an expert!
2nd I think it goes back to the Christian heritage of the United States. Disagree if you'd like, but I think the U.S. has always been a couple steps behind Europe in it's moral standards. The Netherlands, for example, is (I believe) the ONLY country that has legalized the euthanasia for humans. (As we speak, my Dutch grandmother is considering this!) Along with that, there is legal prostitution, legal "hash," and so on. Will America eventually become this way? Well, I don't know, but I think we're going that direction, unfortunately!
Getting back to the answer- all of America hasn't fully accepted evolution but is on the path to moral degradation.
What is next? haha
Yes, Jenny should be a teacher
Sprinkler man - why hilarious? If you don't see that the Spaghetti monster is just the same as an all-powerful Christian God - you are the hilarious one LOL Personally, I prefer the Star Goat or A'Tuin the turtle.
Here is an adequate explanation of the theory of evolution. And you can't go in and edit this one as some of your like-thinking friends have tried to do. No mention of making people from dirt instantaneously either
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EvolutionMark,
That is a generalization at best. Why would I or anyone else try to edit it? What exactly do you believe? How did we evolve? What did we evolve from?
As humans, we cannot think forever or infinity, we can only think in terms of a beginning and an end. At one point something had to start evolving, so where did that one thing come from? How was it created? How did it form?
This is how I generalized the theory of evolution. I am not a scholar on the subject and I don't think anyone in this forum is either. It is just a good discussion.
Origin of life
The origin of life is a necessary precursor for biological evolution, but understanding that evolution occurred once organisms appeared and investigating how this happens, does not depend on understanding exactly how life began.[144] The current scientific consensus is that the complex biochemistry that makes up life came from simpler chemical reactions, but it is unclear how this occurred.[145] Not much is certain about the earliest developments in life, the structure of the first living things, or the identity and nature of any last universal common ancestor or ancestral gene pool.[146][147] Consequently, there is no scientific consensus on how life began, but proposals include self-replicating molecules such as RNA,[148] and the assembly of simple cells.[149]
The assembly of simple cells - This is what I am talking about when simple elements had to come in contact with each other and develop into something. There are only so many elements that are on this planet.
Sprinkler Man wrote:
The Theory of Evolution from evolutionists/scientists/atheists is summed up that we evolved from water, dirt, electricity, the sun and other elements coming together and forming our bodies the way they are now. (assembly of simple cells) Write from the definition....
Well, that is an incorrect summary of the Theory of Evolution. If you think that's what it is, no wonder you disagree with it, LOL. I would too. That's just a completely ridiculous idea. Not even a completely deluded cult member would ... no, actually, they just might ... but nobody who has actually listened in high school biology (in a place where they teach it, of course, which is not a given in the US) would think that was what the Theory of Evolution says.
That wasn't my idea or any cult member - unless you are referring to the scientists who created the definition
Of course it is a generalization. It's only one page, but there are any number of specific examples if you wish to read them:
http://www.santafe.edu/~hag/ecal95/node8.html
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/a … 5/5682/371
http://anthro.palomar.edu/evolve/evolve_3.htm
http://www.gate.net/~rwms/EvoEvidence.html
http://www.gate.net/~rwms/EvoEvidence.html
http://www.stsci.edu/resources/
Creationists have, in the past, attempted to edit that page to match what you think of as evolution. i.e that we were turned from dirt to humans in a short space of time.
Nobody believes this and the only people propagating this idea are those who wish to destroy any credibility of evolution as a theory.
No one knows for certain how life began, and over the centuries there have been any number of creationist theories. All of them as believable as the current Christian model. i.e. that the earth was created in six days by an all-powerful being
We evolved from hominids, which evolved from another ape-like creature which evolved from a simpler version back down to the primordial ooze. A human did not just stand up out of the basic building blocks. It took millions of years of trial and error development before we evolved into our current form. That's what I believe.
http://www.sciencenetlinks.com/sci_update.cfm?DocID=298
And I believe it because there is substantial evidence that this happened. I also "believe" that there were other species on the planet before us called dinosaurs.
As I understand it, the theory suggests that life as we know it started 4000 million years ago and sexual reproduction first started around 1200 million years ago. If you are interested in the full time line it is here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_o … _evolution
So, I guess we did evolve from water, dirt, electricity, the sun - it just took 4000 million years.
Peter - LOL The Star Goat is from a Douglas Adams book, A'Tuin from a Terry Pratchet book, and I worship many "Gods" LOLWell, I think America is on the path to moral degradation, period. It's not necessarily because it hasn't fully accepted evolution (although in my opinion that wouldn't help!
)
I think this movement toward moral relativism and wishy-washy beliefs is encouraging America's move toward accepting things such as evolution.
Maybe we're asking which comes first, the chicken (belief in evolution- for example) or the egg (moral relativism- for example)? My answer is the egg!Correct me if I'm wrong, but I got an impression that "moral degradation" in WeddingConsultants interpretation equals allowing people to do what they want to do - in other words "freedom". At least how it follows from the set of examples he gave... Accordingly, high morale equals police state...
I suppose I should clarify:
Mark said: "Are you saying that the only reason belief in evolution comes about is because of a drop in moral standards? Nothing to do with the evidence?"
Not necessarily. This goes back to my comment about America being founded on freedom of religion grounds. Using Christianity as an example, I think we'd agree that there is a direct correlation between belief in Christianity and belief in creationism. Since these two factors are true (1- that US was to be a country with freedom of religion- but established by Christians and 2- that Christians = creationists mostly), then doesn't it make sense that when America seems to denigrate it's Christian heritage it also moves toward evolution?
Hopefully that helps to clear up what I was trying to say.
Misha wrote: Correct me if I'm wrong, but I got an impression that "moral degradation" in WeddingConsultants interpretation equals allowing people to do what they want to do - in other words "freedom". At least how it follows from the set of examples he gave...
For clarification purposes, I was using the 2nd definition from Merriam-Webster's dictionary
Thom commented: "I may be wrong (well, anything's possible!) but I'm not aware that these countries are spiralling rapidly into a maelstrom of moral degradation.
There probably aren't any really effective measures of morality. But it is demonstrably true that countries such as Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Holland, Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the UK (all secular countries) give a higher proportion of their gross national product to internal and external charitable causes than "religious" countries such as the US."
The second paragraph of what you wrote is true and disheartening. I'm just not sure we can make a direct correlation between two, very complex things (moral degradation and the overall state of countries!). So maybe I opened a larger can of worms than I realized because it's not possible (is it?) to point to a country and say things about it because it won't always be true across the board. So I should probably stress that (again, my opinion) moral degradation is a contributing factor to America's gradual acceptance of evolution as truth. Now, I know you won't agree, but did I at least make sense this time around? Sometimes the limitations of communication over the internet can be a hindrance!
Peter- Maybe you should just stick with calling me "ed." Courtesy of your baby names hub, another hub and threads I've been called wedding planner, wedding consultant, wedding singer and, my favorite, stalker!Not really
because you are implying that belief in evolution stems from a denigration of it's christian heritage, and that this in some way is a moral decline.
And there were a lot of people already living in America who held a completely different set iof beliefs than christian ones
You don't need to be a christian to have high moral standards
So, perhaps I am putting you on the spot, but do you believe that the only reason people believe in evolution is because they have low morals?
And freedom of religious grounds also means the freedom to not believe in any religionThis exact definition by Merriam-Webster does not say anything about moral degradation, neither it explains your examples
Hmm, that's an interesting take. I know you don't want to argue over it, but may I offer one final comment? I was just attempting to define "moral degradation" for clarification purposes. That's why I borrowed the definition of degradation from Merriam-Webster. And there is no mention of the word "degradation" in the definition because one is not suppose to use the vocabulary word when attempting to define that same vocabulary word!
In any case, I appreciate what you bring to the table with your Russian background! You bring up an interesting point when you say, "perceived right of a person to do what [they] want to do within the boundaries of law and custom" as this might differ from country to country.
- MOmmagusposted 16 years ago0
- sandra rinckposted 16 years ago0
LOL - If the "Church" practiced what it preaches, I would be far less an atheist than I am.
On the other hand, I also hold many of the "Scientific Advances," in the same contempt.
For instance - mad cow disease. It is largely accepted that the root cause of this "disease," comes from feeding cows with sheep's brains. WTF? No one stopped to say -"hold on, this might not be a great idea."?
And now the latest attempt to "hold dominion over all animals," is to attempt to introduce a genetically-engineered mosquito that doesn't carry malaria? Insane. This is one area where I can agree with the "Christians."
- RFoxposted 16 years ago0
Wow! You don't log on to your computer for a week and look what happens while you're away.
I must say I agree with Thom on the whole: why is the evolution/creation debate still raging? (Although I think I come at this from a different angle.) It does seem though that when Christians and Atheists get together it inevitably turns into arguments for and against evolution and I personally don't understand it.
Of course my belief system doesn't care how the world was created only that 'it is'. I don't spend any energy thinking about how I came to be here, only that I am, but that's one of the biggest differences between Eastern and Western philosophies.
Something that piqued my curiosity when I started reading this thread was: If I don't believe God is in control of the universe does that make me an Atheist?
I believe in many states of being as do most Buddhists. So I have faith that there are states of existence I can't physically see or touch but I do not believe a 'higher power' is the architect of the universe or that this God or Gods control the universe.
So does that technically mean I'm an Atheist?Sorry, I guess you don't have a new member then.
Lol.
Except I don't believe in 'God' either. Heaven is a state of existence but it is transitory just like human rebirth. You could be reborn as a divine entity Thom and then a human being and then a flea. Lol.
So I guess I'm wondering how my non-belief in God is different from your non-belief in God?
I have never really thought about this question until now. It's not something I really have to contemplate but I'm a curious person.
Thank you Jenny, that is why I have to consider myself agnostic - respect for other´s opinions and options. That is why I think atheists are no "better" than God believers, as they both try to convince each other they are the ones who are right
. And I guess this thread it´s the living proof of that but please don´t stop because of me I´m loving to read it .I respect others' opinions and options also. Unless they try and insist I believe them too. In fact, I could care less who believes what, but when they impinge on me, I rebel
Take abortion for instance. When the anti-abortionists try and insist that abortion be made illegal because their belief in God tells them abortion is wrong, that's where I get upset. Especially when the same anti-abortionists also insist that they are not in any way responsible for the unwanted baby after the birth. If they said, "Abortion should be illegal and we pledge to feed, educate and generally look after the baby," I would have a different opinion of them.
It's fair to say that I have a low opinion of most Christian religious sects. Not because of what they preach, but their lack of ability to follow their own teachings. And they do insist on trying to inflict their warped values on others. If you had spent as much time being forced into church as I have you would probably hold a similar view.
Plus, there are so many other options who consider themselves to be RIGHT, how on earth can anyone make a valued judgment?
And any one who denies that evolution is happening based on a 2,000-year-old rewritten book with no provenance and the fact that there are fish in the sea as "proof," that evolution doesn't happen? Well........
Interesting thought. Is Buddhism a religion or simply a philosophy? It has been elevated to a religion because it is practiced in a way that mirrors other religions but there is no belief in God or a creator figure.
Buddhism was founded by Buddha ( a man) on the principles of the 4 Noble Truths:
1. Life contains suffering
2. Suffering is caused by desire and attachment
3. Cessation of suffering is possible
4. The way to end suffering is to follow the Noble Eightfold Path; that is, right view, right intention, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration or:
1. Correct thought: avoiding covetousness, the wish to harm others and wrong views (like thinking: actions have no consequences, I never have any problems, there are no ways to end suffering etc.)
2. Correct speech: avoid lying, divisive and harsh speech and idle gossip.
3. Correct actions: avoid killing, stealing and sexual misconduct
4. Correct livelihood: try to make a living with the above attitude of thought, speech and actions.
5. Correct understanding: developing genuine wisdom.
6. Correct effort: after the first real step we need joyful perseverance to continue.
7. Correct mindfulness: try to be aware of the "here and now", instead of dreaming in the "there and then".
8. Correct concentration: to keep a steady, calm and attentive state of mind.
All of this is designed as a way to create compassion, empathy, joy and non-attachment to our lives. But as you can see there is no God or creator figure mentioned.
An Atheist can achieve enlightenment the same as a religious person can because it is determined by your actions not your personal belief system.
And Karma is not a creator figure either. It is simply the mechanism that perpetuates the universe. Like the scientific principle: 'Every action has an equal and opposite reaction'. Karma just 'is' like the moon and the tides and the seasons, it is simply a self perpetuating mechanism.
So I do not believe in a God nor is Buddha my savior. He cannot save me, only I can save myself because I am responsible for my actions in this life and others.
In this respect I definitely have more in common with Atheists than Believers (for want of a better word) because I do not give over control of my life to a higher power.
Mark, I think you know that I agree with you on that (and "thanks to God"/"My father"
I have never been forced to go to church) but you have to admit that no matter who´s right (if any) atheists also try to covert or convince others about their believes. Personally I tend to prefer atheist logic if compared with other more intuitive believes but that don´t mean I ever try to convince someone that his/her God doesn´t really exists . But you made your point, I believe you respect others opinions .funride - I'm just messin' with ya
Peter - Perhaps I should rephrase that to - "Far less antagonistic towards the church."
Although, I have to say, their behavior was one of the things that first led me to doubt the things I had been "taught," as a child/young man, so perhaps the former is true also.LOL Jewel, as hectic as my own thoughts are on the subject, yours seem to be even more eclectic
First I would state that the TRUE freedom does not depend on any external factors, including any moral. As I understand it, it is listening to your own inner self and doing whatever it's telling you to do. Even kill... And I don't think there is any common denominator to it - definitely not ten commandments
What I was referring to in my post is more common definition of freedom consistent with western culture, i.e. perceived right of a person to do what them want to do within the boundaries of law and custom. And what WC was saying looked like he was associating the expansion of those boundaries in some countries with "moral degradation"...- sandra rinckposted 16 years ago0
Yes, he also said "Do not worship me as I am not a God". There are some people who haven't followed this advice, however, there is also a lot of misunderstanding regarding the temples and images of the Buddha in Mayahana Buddhism.
When people see Buddhists bowing or prostrating in front of the statues they take it as worship when it really isn't. Prostrating in public is a way to remove the ego and humble yourself. Pride and ego are the enemy, so to speak, and bowing down in public is a very humbling experience.
It's the same with giving offerings. The idea behind offerings is that it helps to remind you to be generous in spirit. To get in the habit of giving freely, so this will hopefully translate into daily life with the people around you.
These practices are easily misconstrued by people who haven't read the Dharma.
I love the name 'zen atheist'. From what I have read of your beliefs in other threads they are very similar to mine. Of course zen has always played a big part in Buddhist philosophy and God is irrelevant to the Dharma path, so it's not surprising our beliefs cross over.
Glad to hear people agree that ethics and God are not one in the same.
Lol.
Tell me about it! My fingers have gone sore from clicking 'report' for all this heresy.
Just kidding!
Well, I must warn you, math was my favorite and strongest subject!
No worries about putting me on the spot! As tedious as it is sometimes to write out explanations, I happen to enjoy it (mostly!).
I don't believe that the only reason people believe in evolution is because they have low morals. To say that would be ignorance on my part. I would say that to accept evolution would be a show of low Christian morals. I think that much is clear, but maybe someone will find a reason to disagree with me?
Absolutely! And although I don't believe the pilgrims went to America with that in mind, that door was certainly left open. This is evidenced by the fact that many of the founding fathers varied in faiths.- sandra rinckposted 16 years ago0
- sandra rinckposted 16 years ago0
some can wonder if anything at all makes sense to you, if it does, then what are you looking for?
First of all, apologies to those I am not responding to. Too many different tacks on this thread.
I couldn't resist this one though
I have one word for you: Fossils
I don't see you providing any evidence or proof whatsoever for your theory that the world was spoken into being in six days. If you could please provide me with some, I would be happy to change my tune.
I personally have seen evidence that the world has been around for longer than christians would suggest. I am also aware of the many previous religions that christianity stole it's ideas from. Christianity is more about politics and power than anything else. If there is a version I respect, it's Peter's version. Yours is based on nothing, as far as I can tell. Nothing.
But let's also be clear on one thing -
I am not an atheist because of the theory of evolution. I came to the conclusion that there was no such thing as a God by a simple process. I looked at all the information I had available, which included a study of the bible, and came to the conclusion it was wrong. Based on my own observations and experiences. It just doesn't make any sense. Simple as that. It relies 100% on a belief in something that clearly does not exist.
The next step for me was to then ask myself the question. "OK, if the bible is a work of fiction - how did we come to be?"
So, I looked at all the other theories available and chose one that made the most sense to me, based on my own observations and experiences.
Guess which one wins? - Yes, the theory of evolution. And make no mistake either - Darwinian Natural Selection is not the same thing as evolution.
You have demonstrated a complete ignorance of both Darwinian Natural Selection and Evolution. I do not believe you understand either the underlying theory or the wealth of evidence for both processes. If you would care to educate yourself, I would hope that you could provide some sensible counter-arguments. The fact that there are fish in the sea as being "proof," that evolution does not occur just didn't cut it for me
If christians had any sense, they would be saying, "Of course evolution happens - It's proof that there is a God controlling things." I would have a tough time arguing against that LOL
And I thought you were fed up of coming down to my level of ignorance?
- sandra rinckposted 16 years ago0
- RFoxposted 16 years ago0
Persecute?
I have said on several occasions that I would welcome an intelligent discussion with you. And you can take it from me that if I saw you bring someone back from the dead, I would switch my belief system in a heartbeat.
Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for you. You are closed to all arguments and I very much doubt you looked at any of the resources either Jenny or I linked to for you.
I would love to say it is interesting to see how you react, unfortunately, you are rather predictable. Almost as though you got it all out of a book you read, but didn't understand.
Ciao
Related Discussions
- 12
What are the pros and cons of Atheists?
From another thread on the religious side of pros and cons. No one gave a list. Let see if any atheist are afraid trying this out.From not being an atheist nor religious, I made my own pros and cons list anyways. Found out I am either.Pros-1. Focus on what's really important in life. Don't concern...
- 114
How can atheists improve their image?
How can atheists improve their image?For whatever reason, the mainstream theists in the U.S. have trouble separating average atheists from the extremists in the news. Not all atheists want to watch Christianity crumble or start their own dictatorship. But how can we spread the image of a more...
- 16
Religion and Atheism Jokes
The best way to get out aggression is through laughter.Post your jokes here.No getting offended. Remember they are jokes. Don't take it personal..Its not always about YOU!
- 28
Theists/Atheists: Can you compliment the opposite belief system?
Theists/Atheists: Can you compliment the opposite belief system?If you're a theist, what's something positive you could say about atheists? If you're an atheist, what's something positive you could say about theists? Please no sarcastic or passive-aggressive responses.
- 135
Do you really know the difference between agnostic and atheist?
I find most people are clueless. They say they are atheist, but can't properly form an argument as to WHY, or they say they are agnostic, with zero clue as to WHAT that is.Ignorance, above all, is our weakness. Not religion. Although ignorance and religion are good bedfellows.
- 263
I was asked to pray at an atheist funeral. why?
Next week I am to pray for a young man at his funeral who tragically died in a car accident. Our boys grew up together. It is very disheartening to see a promising young man be cut short of life. My boys are devestated as well. The father has asked me to lead the service, including a prayer. They...
working
