What do you think has driven atheists to hate religion?

Jump to Last Post 51-100 of 107 discussions (575 posts)

59
chukra Gposted 15 years ago
foulness of religion followers themselves
reply report
61
h.a.borcichposted 15 years ago
Thank you Shadesbreath
Both the "how to" advice and for navigating through my botched post to get to my question/thoughts! When I tried to fix it - well it would not allow me to.
I see so many posts get railroaded, ridiculed, hijacked and twisted that I am not suprised there is so much arguing and banning. The conversation with you and PB was refreshing.
Hope to catch more of you both. Holly
reply report
1. 75
  Shadesbreathposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  I think a lot of people are just on the forums for a "sound byte" opportunity or a chance to stir up trouble for a laugh. Which is fine. I do it too sometimes. There are lots of games to play on this sort of playground. But it is nice when you find a few folks with great ideas and thoughts and the ability to articulate them in a civil yet spirited way. The essence of the truly deliberative argument as it was meant to be. It's not about being "right" or "wrong" but about getting a better concept of where the edges are, the true shape of the larger idea. So many don't get that, or want it. They just want to "win."
  reply report
  76
  Mikel G Robertsposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Amen. I would love to have you read some of my stuff and debate it with me sometime shades. Mikel
  reply report
  75
  Shadesbreathposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Certainly. Do you have a particular suggestion for me? And who knows, we may find ourselves in harmonious accord!
  reply report
  76
  Mikel G Robertsposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  I think a good place to start might be my hub on why I believe in God.
  
  ...and I hope we do find ourselves in harmonious accord.
  
  ...or harmonious discord...
  reply report
  75
  Shadesbreathposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  
  Oh, the second one sounds like so much more fun!
  reply report
61
Pandoras Boxposted 15 years ago
Well darn. I'm sorry to report that I was drinking a bit last night, and I regret that I did indeed post such a long long post. The drinking was also a bad idea because my daughter's science olympiad was today. I was thinking throughout the morning that I should have deleted this, but now I see I can't, I guess the editing functions disappear after a certain time.

Well, for now I'm going to take a nap, and I'm not reading anything, cuz I only got about an hour's sleep last night, but I am sorry for having written a book.

The good news is my daughter took first in her individual event, third in her team event, and her school took third over all and are going to state!

So anyway, sorry about that. Oops.
reply report
1. 75
  Shadesbreathposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  In my opinion you shouldn't apologize for having thoughts that go deeper or are more complicated than can be encapsulated in 50 words or less. The lazy or uninterested can roll their mousewheels right on by. The rest of us can chew on the meat of your ideas. Have a nice nap.
  reply report
2. 69
  Rod Marsdenposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Good for you and your daughter Pandoras Box!
  reply report
61
Jeramiposted 15 years ago
@Pandoras Box I read every word.. Well stated piece of thrut that was.
reply report
1. 61
  Pandoras Boxposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Thank you! I am glad you think so. Maybe I will make a hub out of that one. It's certainly long enough!
  reply report
76
Mikel G Robertsposted 15 years ago
Ok I think we might have to spring for a room for the two of you...
reply report
1. 61
  Pandoras Boxposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Aw jeez, already, Mikel?
  
  Don't be inappropriately crude.
  reply report
  76
  Mikel G Robertsposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Why would you assume I was talking about you?
  reply report
61
h.a.borcichposted 15 years ago
Hi PB,
Thanks for the response and I certainly was not annoyed at the length of your post. No offense was taken either. I also appreciate digging through the botched post without throwing insults. I am in the US btw. This is the kind of conversation I had hoped to find on the forums - something with a point and civility:) I'll be pondering and looking forward to more discussion soon.
Holly
reply report
59
Mark Knowlesposted 15 years ago
So - it seems we all agree on something.

It is religious people that drive atheists to hate religion.
reply report
76
IntimatEvolutionposted 15 years ago
My personal opinion would be:

1. They don't hate it. Most Atheists I know, simply have no tolerance for it. Big difference.

2. Pushy, fake, pretentious people. Wait, maybe this should be my first answer.
reply report
0
Twenty One Daysposted 15 years ago
the position of certain atheist moral philosophers (I'm not talking about Dawkins or any of that crowd, many of whom wouldn't know a philosophical argument if it hit them in the head

Well said.
Just had this conversation elsewhere in the internet.
Seems philosophers, of all sectors, dislike that guy.

-sorry for barging in.
reply report
1. 78
  thisisoliposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  It's mostly theologians, not philosophers, who dislike dawkins.
  reply report
  69
  AdsenseStrategiesposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  That is not true. Honest
  reply report
2. 69
  AdsenseStrategiesposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  I suspect he is a good biologist, but the suggestion that religion is wholesale evil and should be eradicated is preposterous. It's fine to debate such a statement on threads such as this, but he claims to be a serious, thinking academic. Yet this statement has no basis in analysis. In fact, a very simple "analysis" shows that religion produces much good, alongside the evil it produces. When he chooses to ignore that fact, he looks like a buffoon.
  Which is a shame, because what he has to say about human nature from an evolutionary perspective is interesting.
  reply report
  0
  Twenty One Daysposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Hhe, like others, is using philosophy to promote their side of the Ism. I would say, religion has -if anything- complimented on science findings. Which is why it's painful to see scientists so hellbent on the removal of all theism. After all, they are generally the same. The house of Duality, now building a roof of Quality. Funny, because I am writing about this, in my book.
  reply report
  69
  AdsenseStrategiesposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  
  I don't think he uses philosophy as defined by any self-respecting professional philosopher. I am not even sure he would claim to be using philosophy, in fact, truth be told.
  
  Many scientists are themselves theists. (I've known many... there's one in my immediate family).
  
  I don't agree that science and religion always dovetail... they often contradict. And on many issues science has nothing to say about topics with which religion might deal, and vice versa.
  reply report
0
Twenty One Daysposted 15 years ago
indeed.
i was learning toward the notion of his, and other views regarding "critical thinking" aka critique. Which from a philos view -and me being one- wonder where the premise for his conclusions comes from. Especially since any lucid philosopher looks at all sides without bias.

Truth be told, he is just promoting himself, more than anything. Leading me to consider he doesn't care for the atheist view as much as he would like many to believe. I chuckled looking at his 'online retail superstore'.
reply report
60
Dr. Larkinposted 15 years ago
Eh, just some cliche's about the crusades and not being allowed to eat the crackers until the preacher tells you to I suppose.

I remember when I ate the cracker before the preacher told me to. I got glares.
reply report
69
Rod Marsdenposted 15 years ago
Atheists may or may not hate religion. What I do believe is that Atheists and Agnostics have some pretty good reasons to fear religion especially when it is practiced by religious nutters.

Yes, of course the crusades do come to mind when it comes to Christians going insane. Muslim nutters have been showing their stuff of late and Christian nutters in the USA have unfortunately responded with violence of their own. In the bible belt anyone who isn't a Christian is no longer safe. Anyone who believes there is substance in Darwin's ideas isn't safe. Anyone who thinks creationism is nonsense is no longer safe.

During the Cold War one thing became clear to me as a kid. The USA and the West in general were not going to start a nuclear war because the men and women of the USA and the West in general love their children and their communities. The Russians and the Red Chinese weren't going to create an irradiated holocaust for the same reasons. Neither side wanted the other to retaliate and kill off loved ones. The result? Stalemate and eventual peaceful end of Cold War. Add religion and I strongly suspect we would have been very quickly standing on a cinder watching our flesh fall off.

Religious nutters can have suicidal tendencies and can dismiss concern for family and friends in order to defend their God or gods. The nutters can come from any religion you want to name but the ones likely to do the most harm are the Muslim crazies and the Christian crazies. Oh, and I do agree that there are Christians and Muslims around who cherish their families and their communities and would not seek to do anyone any harm. These Christians and Muslims, however, are not nutters and there is no reason to fear them. Peaceful and loving Muslims are welcome just as peaceful and loving Christians, Jews, ect...Its the crazies, the nutters who scare the hell out of me!
reply report
1. 51
  paarsurreyposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  "Religious nutters"
  
  Hi friend
  
  The same way there are "Atheist Nutters" who are simply hate mongers and preachers of hate.The pretend to be scientists while they are not; they only follow blindly the Atheism meme.
  
  Thanks
  
  I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim
  reply report
  69
  Rod Marsdenposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  What Atheism theme? By their very nature Atheists don't have a theme. they don't believe in any God. Agnostics on the other hand want to believe but can't quite get there.
  
  Not too many Atheist nutters around. What do they need to hate monger about? They don't preach hate and have no need to except maybe against those who would endanger our planet.
  
  Scientists have known for many decades now that the planet is overpopulated. religious nutters often cannot see this scientific truth and in not seeing it they do make some Atheists and agnostics and moderate Christians and I would say moderate Muslims very angry.
  
  You live in poverty and have a large family and expect to produce a large family with the world's resources shrinking? Sounds to me that if you bank on religion to relieve your stress and to make things better and not do something for yourself then you are an idiot .
  
  Too many Muslims are not heeding the facts that are there for everyone to see. Too many children means that none of the children in the end will get enough of an education, none of the children will be fed well enough or clothed well enough. Send the excess overseas? You can't keep doing it because the world is a finite place and in order to save themselves countries with close their doors to immigration. try acting responsibly. Try being real for a change.
  
  Instead of strapping bombs to yourself why not pick up the occasional science text? Why not study family planning? Why not look around and see how you can improve your place in this world?
  
  Not many Atheists and Agnostics pretend to be scientists. Many are scientists. There are also many Christian scientists who want to do something about global warming and diminishing fish stocks throughout the world. If you don't let your religion blind you to what is real then you are okay in my book but if you cannot see the world tragedy unfolding from too many humans on this world then I feel sorry for you whereas others would find more displeasure in your ignorance and need to be ignorant.
  reply report
  51
  paarsurreyposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Hi friend Rod Marsden
  
  I used the word "Atheism meme" not the words "Atheism theme"; for "meme", please access the following link:
  
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meme
  
  Thanks
  
  I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim
  reply report
  59
  Mark Knowlesposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Wow - thanks for this. The Muslim Meme - it explains everything.
  
  Meme - Wow. Awesome. People think wot they get tole to think. No wonder you Muslims think the same lies - Memes.
  
  Thanks again.
  
  Mark - Peaceful, Well respected, Logical. Rational Atheist.
  
  No wonder you guys cannot think for yourselves. Well done. Very, very well done Friend Usmanali.
  
  By - why are you so antagonistic? Look it up.
  reply report
60
The10DollarMarkposted 15 years ago
Not all atheists "hate" religion. Just because we don't believe in any god, doesn't mean we have to "hate" the religions that preach them.

I'm an atheist and I think religion is wonderful. It can provide a sense of hope and camaraderie during hard times. It provides a moral code to refer to (though that doesn't meaIn Atheists don't follow a moral code either). And it attempts to explain all of things that still can't be explained with science.

There's quite a lot of good from religion and there are atheists, like me, who acknowledge that. We just happen not to believe in the existence of a god because we lack faith.
reply report
1. 69
  Rod Marsdenposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  I agree with you that religion practiced by good people can produce good.
  reply report
2. 51
  paarsurreyposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Hi friend The10DollarMark
  
  I appreciate your stance. If the Atheists are peaceful; they should not hate anybody. I don't hate Atheists; why should thye hate me. I respect Atheists being just human beings by birth; the same kind of respect they are expected to do. I think those Atheists who hate religion or hate the people who follow a religion; they do it in confusion.
  
  Thanks
  
  I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim
  reply report
69
AdsenseStrategiesposted 15 years ago
I'm an atheist and I don't hate religion
reply report
1. 69
  Rod Marsdenposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  I am an Agnostic and I don't appreciate the sort of stupidity that will mean I can't go fishing when I am old because all the fish have long since gone. I also don't appreciate the sort of stupidity that creates crowded suburbs that turn into slums.
  
  Religion can do good but right now a lot of religious people are either doing evil or putting blinkers on so they don't see the truth around them.
  reply report
0
Denno66posted 15 years ago
I am not an Atheist, but I despise religion. What about that angle?
reply report
1. 70
  wyanjenposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  sheepie!!!
  
  hi there
  
  I'll say your angle is: common sense.
  reply report
  0
  Denno66posted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Heya jen! Thanks and how are you?
  reply report
  70
  wyanjenposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  (I'm real good. Happy to see you pop in.
  School going good, I hope?)
  
  I'm an atheist who does hate religion. I hate the brutal and criminal acts that have been done in the name of religion, and the controlling nature of organized religion.
  
  Mostly I hate that religion exploits the basic human need for hope and faith.
  Faith should not have rules and requirements attached to it.
  
  reply report
  0
  Denno66posted 15 years agoin reply to this
  I wholeheartedly agree.
  reply report
  70
  wyanjenposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  see how nice we get along?
  
  reply report
  69
  earnestshubposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  This thread may even get a "Nice fellows" award.
  
  I am waiting for a fundie but I guess that's what happens, ya get cynical!
  reply report
  70
  wyanjenposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Go figure right?
  
  It has both "atheist" and "hate" in the title...
  Maybe we're not all a bunch of meanies after all
  
  reply report
  69
  Rod Marsdenposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Take away my fishing hole and my future quiet retirement and the continuing possibility of three square meals a day and watch me get mean!
  reply report
  51
  paarsurreyposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Hi friend wyanjen
  
  The routinist do all sorts of thins even in the Atheists. If peopl from a religion exploit others in the name of religion that is condemnable. The same type of exploitation is being done by the Atheists Agnostics in the name of humanity and freedom of thought.
  
  Thanks
  
  I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim
  reply report
  70
  wyanjenposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Hmm. Humanity and freedom of thought - such terrible qualities...
  
  Look, atheists do not exploit faith.
  Atheists do not impose moral and ethical standards on others who are looking for a source of faith. You will not ever hear an atheist say that a person can only be happy and spiritually healthy IF they abide by a set of rules and live by a certain code.
  
  Atheists do not control people by holding their faith hostage. We do not pressure people to hand over their money. We do not limit access to knowledge or impose our own philosophy on children who are to young to understand that the tooth fairy isn't real.
  
  What is it that you think the word exploitation means?
  reply report
  69
  Rod Marsdenposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Agreed wyanjen Atheists do tend to go in for the human argument such as saving our world from the idiots around and promoting freedom of thought...
  
  Agreed wyanjen Atheists can't really exploit faith because they don't have any to exploit.
  reply report
  70
  wyanjenposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  I'm not sure how a person could be exploited in the name of free thought.
  That's like a double negative.
  reply report
2. 51
  paarsurreyposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Hi friend Denno66
  
  It is OK with me. If you have some reasons to despise and the same are not personal, you can express it here.
  
  Thanks
  
  I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim
  reply report
61
h.a.borcichposted 15 years ago
Hi Jen and Denno - haven't seen you folks in a bit! Hope you are enjoying spring Holly
reply report
1. 70
  wyanjenposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Denno AND Holly on the same night! Look at that!
  
  Spring took a wrong turn here. No snow, but it sure could have
  reply report
59
Disturbiaposted 15 years ago
What do you think has driven atheists to hate religion?

Oh I don't know... maybe stupid threads like this one.
reply report
60
atomswifeyposted 15 years ago
I do not believe atheist hate religion. I think atheists deep down inside fear it.
They fear what they choose to ignore. Being accountable to God is too much for some people.
reply report
1. 60
  Ron Montgomeryposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  The reverse of your theory makes more sense. Religionists fear the logical reality that there is only one life to live, a finite number of years to make the most of. The promise of redemption in a second life is comforting to those who are wasting this one.
  reply report
  60
  atomswifeyposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  We have the promise of redemption in this life so I miss your point.
  reply report
  60
  Ron Montgomeryposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  The point is that no matter how screwed up a religionist's life is on Earth, all will be made better in the magical place promised to them after death.
  
  Abandoning the thought of this mythical place causes people to take the one life that actually exists more seriously. They have to deal with things now rather than wait for it all to be made better in the future.
  
  It puts a little pressure on us, but logical people can work their way through it. Those who believe in the supernatural often cannot.
  reply report
  60
  atomswifeyposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  I don't think a "religionist's" life is any more screwed up than an atheists life. Our lives are what they are. It's what we make of it here.
  Abandoning the thought of a heaven does not make me take anything MORE serious here. In fact the opposite. I take my faith very seriously. I take life seriously. I take death seriously. It's just one of many reasons (that I take those things seriously), that propels my beliefs and makes them stronger.
  
  If I chose not to believe in God, there is no accountability to Him. Therefor, I could go on with my sinful nature and I would be inclined to think there are no consequences for that. And how "serious" would I think that to be? Not very if I do not believe.
  
  So WHO is it exactly that does not take or deal with things in this life seriously?
  The person who recognizes the problem(s) and deals with it both physically and spiritually? Or the one who cannot see the problem(s) in the first place?
  reply report
  0
  cosetteposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  
  i hate to tell you but you contradicted yourself (see bolded comments)
  
  p.s. aren't the Christian God's followers supposed to "fear" him?
  reply report
  60
  atomswifeyposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  I don't think I contradicted myself at all. I believe people choose NOT to believe in God just as much as the choice is there for them to believe.
  And the "fear" you mentioned is a reverence, a respect for.
  reply report
  60
  The10DollarMarkposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  This can actually be a double edged sword.
  
  Yes there are religious people who do good things because they know they are accountable to God's will.
  
  Yes there are atheist people who do bad things because they don't have to be accountable to a God.
  
  These are true statements you've said, but they're not complete.
  
  There are also religious people who do bad things because of the way they interpret their religion (crusades, jihad, belief that your God will forgive any wrongdoings as long as you ask for forgiveness [Christianity], etc.....)
  
  There are also atheist people who do good things because they're not accountable to a God. They "know" this is their one and only life and you should live it as best you could, and that means being kind to those who help you get there.
  
  So overall, I don't think religion has anything to do with whether a person does bad or good things. Good people will adapt their religion (or lack of) to support their good nature. Bad people will adapt their religion (or lack of) to promote their evil nature.
  
  And it's the same for hate mongerers. There are plenty of religious people that act very hostile towards atheists. Believe me, I get lots of slack from religious people for being an atheist and many will accuse me of not having a moral code and ruining society (harsh...but I do get that often), even though - as a Humanist Atheist - I strongly believe that we have to be kind and respectful to fellow humans in order to have the best life possible. Humanist Atheists may not be accountable to God, but they are accountable to their fellow humans.
  
  Likewise, there are atheists who bash on religions. I won't deny it, I've also seen a lot of atheist friends/classmates go on extreme tirades ridiculizing other religions.
  
  But like I said, that's more because of the nature of the person, not the orientation of their religious beliefs. Those haters, whether religious or atheistic, are scared to admit they don't actually fully know whether their beliefs are right, and use ignorant ideals to bash the other in order to make themselves feel better.
  
  So I would say both people (in general) take their lives as seriously as the other. Individual people, however, can be less serious than others, but that lies more with their own decision and logic making abilities, than with their faith. Since, after all, both religion and the lack of religion can cloud your judgement. In the end, a serious atheist would be just as serious had he been religious, and vice versa. (And a fool would still be a fool regardless of religion/atheism).
  reply report
  60
  atomswifeyposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  true. Very true
  reply report
2. 60
  Beelzedadposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  I'm accountable to all gods. The problem is that they are not accountable to each other.
  reply report
  0
  Twenty One Daysposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  They have accountants?! man, I picked the wrong career, again! jeje
  reply report
  69
  Rod Marsdenposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  The accountants are called priests in some religions and if you get high enough up in an order you can make a fair bit o' cash.
  reply report
  0
  Twenty One Daysposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  wicked!
  reply report
  69
  Rod Marsdenposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Wicked?! You bet!
  reply report
3. 59
  Mark Knowlesposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  I hate religion. I fear it as well.
  
  Your invisible super being? Laughable.
  
  But - people who think they are speaking for an invisible super being in the sky? Dangerous, scary people. People who think the earth is a few thousand years old and all science is a lie? Very, very scary people. Read any history book. They will fly planes into buildings and die for this invisible super being. They will murder in the name of the invisible super being. They will stand up and say condoms do not prevent AIDS when speaking to their followers and defend their brethren who have sex with children. Very, scary people.
  
  I would be a fool not to be frightened of some one who thinks they speak for an invisible god. Especially a psychopathic nutcase like your invisible super being.
  
  Yup - scary. You are right - I am scared of people like this. No way of reasoning with them. None. Can only end in violence. Read any history book. The End is Nigh!
  reply report
  60
  atomswifeyposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  So as a result of someone else's actions in the name of something you hate and fear the something?
  
  People are fallible. People are not perfect. People over thousands of years have twisted truth. They twist it to conform to their OWN system of beliefs. Does that then make ALL beliefs something to fear or hate?
  
  I can use a car to drive my kids to school. I can also use my car to kill someone. If I chose the latter, would that make all drivers murderers?
  
  My Bible does not instruct people to kill, but to love. Have some people twisted my Bible to kill? Yes. So where does the blame lie? With the person or the Bible?
  
  In the same respect and this is really a mute point for me as I believe nothing would be here were it not for the existence of God but, if God and religion did not exist, would there be people still flying planes into buildings? Yes. Would there be people still spouting condoms do not prevent AIDS? yes. Would there still be people killing each other? yes. Would there still be people defending people who molest children? yes.
  
  Do any of these things prevent me from living my life and believing in God? No. I do not let the things in this life dictate who I am, what I do or what I believe or do not believe in. I make the choice(s). I choose what path to walk and the direction of my life.
  reply report
  59
  Mark Knowlesposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  No. You are wrong. And did not read a word I said. Why? Because you have all the answers - very, very scary.
  
  And yes - I am scared of cars also. I am well aware they can kill people and treat them accordingly. The only reason I do not step in front of cars is because I am scared of them. Fear is a very healthy emotion. It keeps us alive.
  
  What nonsense are you talking? You think the world is 6000 years old and evolution is a lie because you cannot reconcile it with you ridiculous religious beliefs that you got from the bible.
  
  Interesting that you defend the Pope as though he is just another man rather than a religious leader and his words mean no more than anyone else.
  
  Why? To defend your irrational beliefs. Scary. very scary. As I tried to explain - impossible to reason with you. Thanks for reminding me why I fear and hate religion. It creates people like you.
  
  Your god does not exist. See how scary that makes you?
  reply report
  60
  atomswifeyposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  I'm wrong? Why is that? Because I disagree with your reasoning?
  
  You fear cars? wow. I thought the fear would come from the drivers. A car parked in a garage or in the driveway cannot cause someones death. But I get your point. It's just that you made made my point in the latter part of that sentence. YOU treat them accordingly.
  Fear is a healthy emotion. When it is not taken to extremes. Otherwise you end up being paranoid.
  
  I can reconcile it just fine. I do not believe ALL science is a lie. Maybe in the end Mark we will find out we were both right to some extent.
  
  I did not defend the pope. And yes he is just a man. Religious leader as well. But just a man. And his words are just words as you and I speak. Nothing more nothing less. Do they possess more power than yours or mine? I think that depends on who's listening.
  
  Scary because I believe in a loving God who loves me and everyone in the world?
  Scary because I choose to believe in acting on Godly principles of faith, love, hope, kindness and charity?
  You equate me and others like me to the ones who fly planes into buildings, who kill others and themselves, who defend child molestors etc. There lies the problem with your perception of those who believe in God.
  You want to group us all together with people who obviously have severe mental and anger issues fueled by hate to justify your own lack of faith, hate and fear.
  The truth is My faith is fueled by love not hate. In other words, I just as you use the car to drive safely and do not use it as a weapon.
  reply report
  59
  Mark Knowlesposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  And here you are once again trying to change my mind and defend your ridiculous beliefs with strong words. I feel the "love."
  
  See the title of the thread?
  
  Thank you.
  reply report
  60
  atomswifeyposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  I am not trying to change your mind Mark. You responded to me remember? I simply posted on this thread as have others. I have not shown you anything less than love in my comments. I have not bashed you verbally nor fueled your hate as a result of what I have wrote.
  To end this with you,
  We all make choices.
  reply report
  59
  Mark Knowlesposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Yes. You choose to think the earth is 6000 years old and evolution is a lie. This is because that is what you think your bible says. I responded to you because you told me what you think I believe. And I agreed that your religion scares me and I hate it. We all make choices. I agree, People who choose irrational beliefs over reason scare me and are one of the many reasons I hate your religion. Thank you for the reminder.
  
  I do not hate you. I love you in a non-sexual way. I hate your ridiculous beliefs.
  reply report
  61
  luvpassionposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Actually the bible does not say the earth is 6000 yrs old, read this article.
  
  http://www.mountainretreatorg.net/bible/timeline.shtml
  reply report
  59
  Mark Knowlesposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  I don't care what the bible says. Pretty sure you can interpret it to say almost anything you like. That is not where I get my science from thanks.
  
  She thinks her bible says the earth is 6000 years old.
  reply report
  61
  luvpassionposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Unfortunatly I am not a bible scholar. Sorry to intrude sir.
  reply report
  60
  atomswifeyposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  
  Actually Mark and I appreciate you answering that sort of question for me, (note the sarcasm) but uhm, when did I ever say that? How do you know what I think about any of that?
  reply report
  59
  Mark Knowlesposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Oh - my mistake if I got that wrong. In which case I apologize profusely for making that mistake.
  
  How old do you think the earth is?
  reply report
  61
  Valerie Fposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Such are the remarks people make of religion when they don't know what it really teaches.
  reply report
  59
  Mark Knowlesposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  No - such are the remarks of people who can see with their own eyes and listen with their own ears to people who claim to be speaking for an invisible super being.
  
  Still - here you are again - fighting over it.
  
  Love the condescending "you are too dumb and ignorant to understand what my book really says." Seeing as you Kristians all agree and there have never, ever been any wars fought over this. And you get along with the other religions so well. Never any conflict.
  
  See how that is scary?
  reply report
4. 51
  paarsurreyposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Hi friend atomswifey
  
  I agree with you; that might be the case.
  
  Thanks
  
  I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim
  reply report
  60
  Ron Montgomeryposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Hi friend paarsurrey,
  
  I know, Right?
  
  Thanks
  
  I am a peaceful Rastafarian
  reply report
  51
  paarsurreyposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Hi friend Ron Montgomery
  
  OK; thank you
  
  Regards
  reply report
  70
  wyanjenposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Ron, I always pegged you for a Pastafarian, not a Rastafarian.
  Although, they are not mutually exclusive...
  reply report
  61
  Pandoras Boxposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  I'd think they'd go great together!
  reply report
75
Deborah Demanderposted 15 years ago
I am not an atheist. I do, however, hate religion. "Religion" is made up by people. Mostly, they make up stupid rules for controlling other groups of people. That is what I hate. I love God, and have a great spiritual life, but I do not condone organized religion. It typically tends to bring out the very worst in people. If you want to see ego in full force, go to a church. While some churches have good qualities, I believe this is a reflection of select persons attending said church. People bring out the best and the worst in each other, and in their perception of God.
reply report
61
The Last Quillposted 15 years ago
They don't hate God per se, they just don't know that God exist. They beleive that whatever happen to him or her is just a consequence of their actions, and for this, they like no one reign over their life.
reply report
70
wyanjenposted 15 years ago
I'm pretty sure Jefferson would be less than thrilled to hear that his nickel says "in god we trust".
Y'know, because the separation of church and state thingy that he and his pals wrote when they formed the nation.
Oh, and because he did not believe in god. That too.
reply report
76
Mikel G Robertsposted 15 years ago
Pannie said that Atheists didn't want to limit Religious practices, I was merely pointing out the obviously flawed portion of her statement.

Pandoras Box wrote: "Nobody wants to suppress religious rights or practices."

Obviously, that is not true.
reply report
1. 70
  wyanjenposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  It's completely true.
  
  Freedom of religion is exactly the same as freedom from religion.
  
  Taking "in god we trust" off of our money is not suppressing religious rights or practices. It shouldn't be there in the first place, as is the case with all of your examples. America is not a christian nation.
  
  reply report
  76
  Mikel G Robertsposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Whether it is right or wrong in your opinion that 'In God We Trust' is on the currency, does not negate the fact that it is there and taking it off means placing a limit, or restricting, a religious practice.
  
  And the protest demonstrations and rallys against the Nativity scenes on Government properties? That isn't an attempt (successful attempt BTW) to restrict a religious practice either???
  
  Come on.
  reply report
  60
  The10DollarMarkposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Not really. You don't practice religion on your coins.
  
  You practice it at home, in your heart, in your respective place of faith...
  
  But having a random "in god we trust" on a national coin isn't religious practice. For something to be considered "religious practice" it actually has to bring out religious actions which, unless you're worshipping your coin, is not covered by a mere coin.
  
  So taking off a random "in god we trust" on a non iconic item that bears no religious effect is not taking away religious practice - only religious propaganda.
  
  You're more than welcome to disagree and try to refute me of course ^^ I love a good debate.
  
  Edit: The 2nd one, about the nativity, though I will admit I'm on the fence about. It is a sort of limiting, though really government shouldn't have religious bearings unless it can account for all religions. But I will agree the 2nd example is a lot tougher to decide whether or not it's really limiting.
  
  But the coin example (I think) is clear cut - it's not limiting to take it out.
  reply report
  61
  Pandoras Boxposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  What you complain about is merely the upholding of the separation of church and state. Which is pretty sad because it betrays your lack of wisdom and understanding.
  
  Sorry to put it that way, but that is honestly how I see it. I cannot understand, appreciate or respect your position. It squeezes the eyes shut and ignores history and human nature.
  
  I won't argue with you about it, because I'm sure others here and probably elsewhere have and also I know it's pointless.
  
  But I will insist that the separation of church and state do not in any way suppress anybody's religious beliefs or practices.
  reply report
  76
  Mikel G Robertsposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  
  She said... it's completely true...
  reply report
  70
  wyanjenposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  your point is?
  
  "Nobody wants to suppress religious rights or practices."
  
  This statement is completely true. I'm glad you find it amusing.
  
  There is no National Religion. There should be no religious declarations on our currency, in our courtrooms, and in the oaths we are forced to take.
  
  These things you are claiming to be religious rights and practices are no such thing.
  They do, however, suppress MY religious rights. Are my rights not as valuable as your rights are?
  reply report
  61
  h.a.borcichposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Hi Jen,
  I wanted to ask this for quite a while, but I have waited to pose it to someone who won't blast me out the forums just for asking it.
  I know some courtrooms have the commandments on their walls. What do you think in re that? Remove? Remain?
  Part of me feels that if they are mirrors of the laws - thou shalt not kill, etc - then I would think it fine.What are your thoughts?
  Friendly asking is all Best to you, Holly
  PS I do value your rights too btw !
  reply report
  70
  wyanjenposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Hi Holly
  (sorry, super busy working, I missed your post)
  Of course I wouldn't blast you out. I won't even smack you upside the head.
  
  Well I mentioned earlier today that I'm not thrilled with christmas trees at the state capital, but I understand that they are a holiday celebration, not government policy.
  
  The ten commandments in a court of law is worse than any motto on money, and any sly "under god" addition to a national oath.
  
  I mentioned also that I dropped out of that group because of their silly protest but had the protest been against the commandments, not a christmas tree, I would have been all in.
  
  !
  
  The ten commandments mirror any set of laws that represent a successful society because (some of them) are fundamental concepts that any community needs. I mean, you're gonna find "don't kill each other" every place you look.
  
  U.S. law has no basis on the ten commandments whatsoever. The framers specifically stated that they in no way influence our laws.
  
  So yep, I have a huge problem with them hanging in a courtroom. It is due process. Every citizen has the right to appear in a court of law regardless of race, religion, or creed. It may seem harmless to you but to me it is not harmless to get summoned to a court of law that is supposed to be free from the influence of religious dogma and then be confronted with the ten commandments.
  
  I'm not one to be intimidated, but this kind of thing can be pretty stressful to some people. I don't know if that is something you can relate to because the commandments are second nature in your mind.
  
  Imagine if you were in this position:
  You are in court and you asked "Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth so help you satan?" You are supposed to get up and testify to the absolute truth as you know it, but you lied the minute you said "I do."
  
  (kaPOWIE!)
  j/k
  
  Hope you are feeling well Holly!
  reply report
  75
  Shadesbreathposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  If we get rid of those symbols from religion, we have to get rid all of them. All statues and references to the Greek and Roman pantheon of gods must go. All pyramids and other references to Egyptian mythology must go. All symbols from pagan mythology must also be removed. As must anything from any other religious belief system. Nothing but cinder block buildings!!!!! We must wipe history even from the record because that was driven by religion in many, many ways. In fact, I think it's best if we have everyone's memory wiped, burn all the books, and start clipping the vocal chords of everyone at birth. Maybe snip the fingers off too so they don't start using sign language... a pair of sharp wire cutters will do the trick, they're only babies after all.
  reply report
  71
  Cagsilposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  reply report
  70
  wyanjenposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Yup.
  It's all gotta go.
  
  A court house is an institution whose sole purpose is to interpret the laws of the United States. Not the laws of the Vatican.
  
  Or Mt. Olympus.
  reply report
  69
  Rod Marsdenposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Glad to hear it. The French feel the same way.
  reply report
  61
  h.a.borcichposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  
  Hi Shades,
  Forgive me if I am mistaking your irony or sentiments here. I gather you are saying America would have to root out all symbols and reminders of any and all religions/faiths to make our government/public property "nuetral". And if we go that far, we might as well fully erase the diverse history of each and every citizen and eliminate the possibility for our young. ?
  If America is indeed the melting pot of all people, then we should expect to be diverse. Our history is rich, yet it is not devoid of faiths. Granted there are historical moments to not be proud of, but that is how much of history is. To try and fully remove every reminder is to say much of America should be scrapped. I don't think it should be. The seperation of church and state seems to me more preserving the law from religious influence.
  I realize this is overly condensed and likely to be twisted, but I wonder if there is much difference between forcing someone to be part of a specific religion or going to such great legnths to deny there ever has been religious roots in America.
  Again, I am civilly sharing a point of view hoping for discussion. Holly
  reply report
  75
  Shadesbreathposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  I respect your civility and hope to be as cordial in return.
  
  And yes, you got the thrust of my point. As you may realize by now, I'm not amongst the ranks of people who can claim certainty regarding god or any religion, however, I do love history and I detest hypocricy, and when I see people outside a courthouse swarming a statue of the Ten Commandments, screaming, "No religion in government," as they stand in the shadows of a marbled Justitia or at the very least her scales, I cannot help but sigh and want to spit a gout of ironic saliva at their ignorance.
  reply report
  70
  wyanjenposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Because you said here that you hoped to be cordial, I will go ahead and ignore the part where you accuse atheists - and me - of ignorance.
  
  Let me just skip to the part where I explain to you that you don't understand what you are talking about. (That is the same thing as me calling you ignorant, 'cept without the spitting.)
  
  We're not discussing allegorical imagery or cultural history.
  Like I stated before, maybe you didn't read it, a court is obligated to the laws and the constitution of the United States. The ten commandments are not part of the constitution, and they are not federal laws.
  They do not belong in a court house.
  
  If you are thinking that Lady Justice and the ten commandments hold the same significance, then you have missed the entire point of our conversation.
  
  The commandments are a set of laws based on a religion that the state does not sanction. These commandments are not concurrent with the laws of our nation, and they should not be displayed.
  
  Blind justice, on the other hand, is a symbolic concept. See the difference?
  reply report
  61
  Pandoras Boxposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Holly I don't think very many atheists would subscribe to shades sarcastic suggestions. Historical architecture and monuments should be preserved whenever practical, even when the traditions they represent have been outgrown. It's another subject, but I wouldn't want you to think anybody is really advocating that, nor are we advocating an atheist government.
  
  Also keep in mind that the separation works both ways. I don't want religion meddling in my country's government, and I'm sure you don't want the government meddling in your religion.
  reply report
  61
  h.a.borcichposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Hi Jen,
  Thanks for understanding the spirit in which I asked the question - I was sure you would!
  I had not considered the implications for one not of christian beliefs, and it does strike me as it does you. It would be hard to take the oath seriously when you have to lie to begin with!
  I am feeling ok - Hope Spring will hit MI soon Holly
  reply report
  70
  wyanjenposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Thanks for asking an honest question.
  Most times people are just throwing out pieces of bait
  
  But you and I know each other well enough...
  
  We are mid 40's here. Perfect for me. No furnace or AC - It can stay like this all summer.
  cha-ching $$$$
  
  (that's me cha-ching-ing, NOT Detroit Edison!)
  
  Keep on smiling
  reply report
2. 60
  The10DollarMarkposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Actually it is true.
  
  Let's take the example you first used: school prayer.
  
  You meant that, because school prayers were taken out, atheists were limiting religious practices. However, that's not true.
  
  There is nothing stopping a christian (or whatever) student from praying at school. I had a Christian classmate who, before eating lunch, would say grace. Required School Prayers may have been taken out, but the individual right for each student to pray wasn't. Therefore it wasn't limited.
  
  However it did free non-christian students from having to perform prepared prayers they didn't believe in. And that's good.
  reply report
  76
  Mikel G Robertsposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Ok let me get this straight...
  
  We use to be able to do something. Now we are no longer allowed to. So Atheists said we cannot do that something we use to be able to do...but that is not limiting us from doing the something we use to do, that we can't do anymore???
  
  You a Politician by chance?
  
  (again, you're arguing the rightness or wrongness of the action. I'm simply stating that the action took place, even though an Atheist said the action did not occur. By arguing the rightness or wrongness of the 'pretend action' you are proving that it did and does in fact happen, and that it is part of the agenda of the Active Atheist Religion.)
  reply report
  60
  The10DollarMarkposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Unless you used to worship your coins (worship in a religious sense), I don't think you're being limited.
  
  Edit: Also, yes, it is limiting in a sense. However it's not limiting religious practice (as I've mentioned already). It's limiting religious spread, and there's nothing in the constitution that says you have the right to force a religion onto people (which is what the coins do).
  reply report
  76
  Mikel G Robertsposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Here is an example of a religious practice:
  
  Printing "In GOD We Trust" on our currency.
  
  The removal of the phrase "In GOD We Trust" from our currency, (Right or Wrong notwithstanding) is the stopping of A Religious Practice.
  
  Religious Spread is a Religious practice. Limiting the spread, is Limiting... by definition. Which is the suppression of religion and religious practices.
  
  Pandoras Box wrote: "Nobody wants to suppress religious rights or practices." which is still obviously untrue.
  reply report
  60
  The10DollarMarkposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  But it's not a religious practice.
  
  For it to be a religious practice, it has to invoke religious behavior. Religious holidays are practice, because a special behavior is required.
  
  Praying is practice, because a special religious behavior is required.
  
  Having "In God we Trust" posted on coins is not religious practice, it's religious spread. It's the spreading of religion across a nation.
  
  Therefore, taking that out doesn't limit religious practice, it limits religious spread (also known as propaganda but that sounds so negative...). Completely different things, only one of which is considered to be constitutionally backed up.
  
  And no, not all limitings are alike. There's no such thing as a truly free country as everything is limited to some extent. Your only guarantees are what are constitutionally supported, and religious spread is not constitutionally supported.
  reply report
  76
  Mikel G Robertsposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  reply report
  70
  wyanjenposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  you seem to do that an awful lot.
  reply report
  60
  The10DollarMarkposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  You seem to be in a good mood lol
  
  reply report
  76
  Mikel G Robertsposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Always am... It is a bright beautiful sunshiny day...
  reply report
  60
  The10DollarMarkposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  It's so nice when people are friendly ^^
  
  I'm always scared of participating in religious/political forums because I keep hearing some people get overzealous and go on flame wars and insults and start to make babbling arguments...
  
  But hey, not this time It's nice to keep things in a good mood.
  reply report
  76
  Mikel G Robertsposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Babbling Arguments like???
  
  "Actually it is true.
  
  Let's take the example you first used: school prayer.
  
  You meant that, because school prayers were taken out, atheists were limiting religious practices. However, that's not true.
  
  There is nothing stopping a christian (or whatever) student from praying at school. I had a Christian classmate who, before eating lunch, would say grace. Required School Prayers may have been taken out, but the individual right for each student to pray wasn't. Therefore it wasn't limited.
  
  However it did free non-christian students from having to perform prepared prayers they didn't believe in. And that's good."
  
  ???? How is not allowing something NOT limiting something????
  reply report
  60
  The10DollarMarkposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Well actually that's not a babbling argument (A babbling argument is something like "I know it's true because the Bible said so")
  
  Anyway, that didn't limit because those who chose to practice can and still do so.
  reply report
  76
  Mikel G Robertsposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  It didn't limit the teacher from standing in front of the class and leading a prayer? (that Atheist children could 'in their minds' just not do?)
  report
  60
  The10DollarMarkposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Considering I've had teachers lead prayers (and keep in mind I'm only 21 so it wasn't that long ago), then no. It didn't limit them.
  
  They just don't do it right in the middle of class , nor do they force us nonbelievers to participate. Instead those teachers would lead them after school, or during clubs, and maybe at lunch with people who chose to pray.
  report
  61
  Pandoras Boxposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Ha! How about if an atheist teacher stood at the front of a classroom and expounded on the fallacies of religious beliefs, or a muslim teacher prayed islamic prayers, or a rastafarian teacher discussed the benefits of smoking weed with the class? Couldn't all the christian children (and their parents) just overlook that?
  
  Yeah right. Again, you demand rights you more than deny to others.
  report
  61
  Pandoras Boxposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Your religion dictates that any government issued money you utilize be printed with In God We Trust?
  
  What a strange religion you have Mikel. Guess that's what happens when you make them up on your own.
  
  When I use terms such as "anybody" I am not refering to governmental entities. Yes. We would like to suppress our government from expressing religious beliefs and demonstrating religious practices. That is not the function of our government, that is the function of a church.
  
  When a government meddles in religion it never turns out well. You know that.
  
  Besides which, In God We Trust on our money is only like a 50 year old tradition. You act like it's in the bible or something. Jesus, even Jesus could tell the difference between church and state.
  
  Furthermore, I am an American. I was born an American, raised an American, and my family on both sides has been American for so long that nobody is really sure when we came here. My forefathers fought in every war since at least the civil war, excepting WW1 as far as I've been able to determine.
  
  I am an atheist, yes, and also an American. I do not place my trust in any mythical or new age or self imagined god, thank you very much. Why should I be forced to use currency which bears a motto I do not agree with? Why should I be forced to pledge an allegiance 'under god' to my country? Why should I be forced to listen to prayers that -
  
  Oh heck. Why am I wasting my time.
  
  You're wrong. That's all I can say. Why do you wish to suppress my irreligious beliefs and practices? Why don't you believe in my freedom of religion?
  reply report
  70
  wyanjenposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  The thing you used to do, as you put it, is unconstitutional.
  
  Like I said, freedom of religion is the same thing as freedom FROM religion. The point is not to limit you (although it should not be done in the first place) but to exercise our own rights.
  What you do for your religion is your own business, and enjoy yourself with it. But including religious imagery etc. on government property is unconstitutional. The government represents the nation, not just the christians. (and what 10Dollar said - it is not a religious practice. It is a declaration.)
  
  BTW may I add to you: I dropped my membership in an atheist organization because they were protesting a christmas tree at our state capital. I thought it was a ridiculous waste of resources. I would rather not see it there, but it is simply a holiday celebration, not a statement of policy.
  Before you go on thinking I'm an unreasonable person...
  
  reply report
  61
  Pandoras Boxposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Christmas trees don't bother me because I don't see them as religious symbols really, and if I did it would be a pagan symbol, not a christian one. Creches on government property bother me though, although not for my own sake really, but I see it as a suggestion of exclusion rather than inclusion to those of other religions.
  reply report
  61
  Pandoras Boxposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  No you're asserting that the action(s) directly affected peoples' freedom to believe and practice their beliefs.
  
  Are you trying to claim that part of your religious beliefs dictates that you live somewhere that has christmas trees on government property?
  reply report
3. 61
  Pandoras Boxposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Eh, maybe some people do. Maybe some people would like to make all religious practices illegal and then also they'd like to kill all believers and destroy all religious writings and artifacts. That would be the only way to suppress religious beliefs and practices.
  
  I have never met or heard of any such person, however. Have you?
  reply report
61
Obscure Divineposted 15 years ago
Is nearly everyone seeking the perpetuity of "knowing" or something? Even though I'm not into organized religions, I'm yet to see the real point or goal of an atheist - other than they don't know, either. Scientific mind, got ya down? Dogma got ya saying silly things? What's the difference?
It is foolish to deny or follow anyone, but your own self. I really don't think atheist follow a damn thing, other than the fact that they rebel against a lie or think they are too smart to admit there is something going on that they don't understand.
Hell, I'd rather self-absorb than self-destruct into an android bliss of robotic bull-sh*t!
reply report
1. 76
  Mikel G Robertsposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Rebel against a lie like:
  
  Pandoras Box wrote: "Nobody wants to suppress religious rights or practices."
  
  ?????
  reply report
  61
  Obscure Divineposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Yep! A lot of the atheists "used to" believe whether from childhood or whatnot, and many simply rebel without any further thought.
  PB, thinks otherwise; I've heard some of her remarks about how religion should be abolished...please......
  What's your query?
  reply report
  76
  Mikel G Robertsposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  nothing, you said Pannie's statement was completely true, now you say it is a lie...
  
  that is my point.
  
  Have a Nice Day!!!
  reply report
  61
  Obscure Divineposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  You have misconstrue, but what's new? I did not; how foolish. Is English your primary language, just curious? PB doesn't believe in that crapola! Ha-ha!
  reply report
  61
  Obscure Divineposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  You quoted her; you never said anything. Speak for yourself, that way, there will be less misunderstanding before you go run off......
  reply report
  61
  Pandoras Boxposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  I doubt it. I seriously doubt it. Since you choose to libel me, show me the proof. Show me where I have said I wanted religion abolished. In fact, show me where I have said it more than once, since you refer to "some" of my remarks.
  
  That has never been my position. I can only conclude that you have serious reading comprehension issues.
  reply report
  61
  Obscure Divineposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  On your hub "Life After God - The Loss of Religious Faith" (nice hub, by the way)......towards the end, you wrote:
  
  "Without religion to fill our codes of ethics, we would have developed stronger leaders instead of stalling on the distorted tales of leaders past. We would advance along, exploring our fullest potentials and perfecting the systems of love and life put forth by those who came before us. It is senseless to sanctify and go no further than the philosophies of the leaders of the past.
  
  Without religion to demand our devotion, we might devote ourselves to the earth, we might worship the principle of love, we might promote a unity so pure in its purpose and undefiled in its truth that it would inspire others to join us. If we could only free the spark within ourselves and others, and believe in the abilities of mankind, we would have a higher respect for life in general."
  
  ---That was a few remarks that sounded like you were not for religion. Abolish means to "do away with." I don't know how that can be took any other way. Plus, it sounded good to me...
  
  As for the other, I have known several people that used to "believe" and have now turned atheist. I never said they all did.
  reply report
  61
  Pandoras Boxposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Besides the fact that your opinion of my statements seem to change between the time you posted the slander against me to the time you posted your latest reply, the hub had nothing to do with abolishing religion. It was regarding the claims of religionists that only with religion and belief in god can people be worth-while, moral, creative.
  
  It was regarding the natural loss of faith, and NEVER ANYWHERE EVEN SUGGESTS THAT WE SHOULD ABOLISH FAITH.
  
  So I'm sorry, but I still have to think you have seriously misunderstood my written words.
  
  At any rate, I am just shocked to find this thread going on and on slandering me after I had left it. I've been checking in the forums only easy topics lately, just to stay in touch you could say, because I've been working on some other things lately and didn't want to get caught up in anything here.
  
  I happened to see this one bumped up last night and was just really dismayed to see myself slandered in this way by people. One of you claims falsely that I want to suppress religious belief and calls me a liar, the other claims falsely that I want religion abolished.
  
  This is just B.S., but it does rather betray the lie of the original O.P., doesn't it?
  reply report
  61
  Obscure Divineposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Abolish faith? I never said that... I spoke about abolishing religions; you can have faith without organized religions, by the way. Oh, you changed it on me. I never slandered you. I know, you are talking about a few of us, but that's okay.
  I didn't know you were so religious, until just now. How many times have you questioned others about their faith - on the forums - in the past? I'm not into organized religions, that's for sure, but you seem to misunderstand your own message, at times.
  
  You know, that hub of yours that I was talking about, you do have (unless you go and change it) an image of a big "cross-out slash" over a church building! Ha-ha! What is one to think? LOL!
  reply report
  61
  Pandoras Boxposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Whatever one wishes, apparently. Haha!
  reply report
  61
  Obscure Divineposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  reply report
  61
  Pandoras Boxposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Still trying to figure out what it is you think I changed on you. I didn't edit anything. Faith, religion, either or, I don't believe I have ever suggested that either should be abolished.
  
  I know the weak-minded have their needs, too.
  reply report
  61
  Obscure Divineposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  You said, "Show me where I have said I wanted religion abolished."
  
  Then, you said, "It was regarding the natural loss of faith, and NEVER ANYWHERE EVEN SUGGESTS THAT WE SHOULD ABOLISH FAITH."
  
  Hmm, religion and faith doesn't have to relate, as you can have faith in something without religion; so...you changed your wording; that's all I meant.
  
  Oh, so you are all in favor of religious beliefs? Answer that!
  
  Weak-minded? Ha-ha! Yes, there is plenty of those out there, so I suppose we should be nice?
  reply report
  61
  Pandoras Boxposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Of course we should be nice. But not at the expense of honesty or the rights of others.
  
  Am I all in favor of religious beliefs? All in favor? No I wouldn't say that. But I certainly am not all in favor of "abolishing" religion. To do so would be wrong, probably impossible without extremely drastic measures which would also be wrong, and likely counter-productive anyway.
  
  Surely you don't see things as either strictly black or white.
  reply report
  61
  Obscure Divineposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  No, I don't. But, some things shouldn't be funded and some people shouldn't have tax free (in whatever degree of tax free aspects) preaching jobs, either. I know, BS makes the big bucks, but WTF?
  report
  61
  Pandoras Boxposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Indeed, truth doesn't go over too well. Funny that they all call themselves truth-seekers.
  
  Preachers don't have to pay income taxes?
  report
  61
  Jeramiposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  I think that the preacher does pay an Income tax but at a diffrent rate. He does get many perks that are tax exempt.
  The Church itself i Believe is totaly exempt.
  The answers will be found proffitable mostly when examining their style of Bookeeping practices. Or something like that.
  report
  61
  Pandoras Boxposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Huh. Never knew that. I'm gonna have to check that out and think about it.
  report
  61
  Jeramiposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  This has something to do with the fact that all recorded contrabutions to the Church are Tax deductable on your individual tax returns,as is all other charities.
  I don't think that you even have to have proof of your contrabution up to a certain amount.
  I think that the preacher does pay a self employment tax. This equates as the same as social security taxes.
  report
  61
  Obscure Divineposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Oh, geez; we got religionists taking up for atheists; that figures... Humanity, at its finest... Turmoil at the brink of madness...
  reply report
  0
  Twenty One Daysposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  yup, the Ism in full swing. *sigh*
  reply report
  61
  Obscure Divineposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Damn right, ha-ha! Thanks, 21!
  reply report
  61
  Pandoras Boxposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Now you're calling me a liar?
  
  reply report
2. 60
  The10DollarMarkposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  I'm an atheist (well to be precise, I'm a Humanist Atheist)
  
  My goal: To live a good life while being as kind to my fellow humans because I know that my happiness also relies on that of others.
  
  Do I deny religion:
  -Because I think it's a lie: Nope. I strongly considered it
  
  -Becuase I think I'm smarter: Nope. I see plenty of good in religion and understand why people follow it. I don't think you have to be smart or dumb to be influenced by religion or lack thereof
  
  -Because it's a trend: Nope, was an atheist before I even knew there was a word for atheists.
  
  -Because I lack faith: yup. I've never been one to believe in things I can't see or sense or don't make logical sense. Does that mean they don't exist? I don't know. But I've always had a hard time. Even as a child I never believed in santa or the easter bunny or the tooth fairy (seriously, ask my family, I've been like this since I was a wee bit). I just lack the ability to believe in something that sounds incredulous - even though (for all I know) it just may be true.
  reply report
  61
  Obscure Divineposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  If ya don't think it is a lie, then what's your problem?
  That made no sense, whatsoever.
  reply report
  60
  The10DollarMarkposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  We have different definitions of the word "lie"
  
  If you just mean "something I don't believe in", then sure...religion is a lie to me since I can't seem to muster up enough faith to believe in.
  
  But to me, lie is a very strong word, and it has to be something I KNOW is wrong. I don't know that religion is definitely wrong, so it's not a lie , it's just something that doesn't make sense to me, but I would never be arrogant enough to consider it a lie if I can't prove it wrong by universal standards.
  reply report
  61
  Obscure Divineposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  OMG? Holy Sh*t? Oh, okay, we did get a little astray on the word lie. But, really, a lie is still a lie... Dang!
  Anyway, what's your beliefs - if any? Just curious...
  reply report
  60
  The10DollarMarkposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Like I said Humanist Atheist.
  
  I don't believe in any spiritual being because I lack the faith and it just doens't make sense to me. (That's the Atheist part)
  
  I also believe that what makes us important as a people are the behavior we have with others and how we treat them. Respect, Kindness, A Helping Hand, and Tolerance are very important to me (Humanist)
  reply report
  61
  Obscure Divineposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Yeah, you're a "Humanitarian." Philanthropic properties is all good; nothing wrong with that...
  reply report
  60
  The10DollarMarkposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Humanitarian and Humanism aren't the same, though I am both.
  
  Humanism is placing fellow man above all in your life and upholding justice, rationality, and dignity.
  
  But, to me, to be a dignified person you need to respect and be kind to others, which are humanitarian beliefs.
  
  So I guess technically I'm a Humanist Humanitarian Atheist, but that's too long for me to write, so I'd rather just write Humanist Atheist.
  reply report
  61
  Obscure Divineposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Ney, my label towards you was more concise and accurate.
  reply report
59
Mark Knowlesposted 15 years ago
Well Mikel - You have certainly reminded me why I hate religion.

Thanks Dude.

We used to be able to force atheists to pray in school - now we cannot. Waaaaah!! That is limiting my religious Rights !!!

We used to force OUR religion in to government instead of any of the other religions. Now we cannot do that. Waaah! Atheists are stopping my religious freedom!!
reply report
1. 76
  Mikel G Robertsposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Glad I helped to keep you motivated, to NOT limit religious practices...
  
  Have a great Day Mark, Peace, Love and God Bless.
  reply report
  59
  Mark Knowlesposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Hey - I agree with you. Children should be allowed to sacrifice chickens on government property. And atheists should be allowed to publicly ridicule any religionisms they deem too funny.
  
  I assume you are in favor of allowing ALL religious practices.
  
  Not just yours.
  
  Right?
  reply report
  76
  Mikel G Robertsposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Nooooo, In fact I am in complete agreement with the removal of religious practices from Government/schools.
  
  Christianity had become too overbearing in nature and the "limiting" of the Christian Prayers and practices was Good and Necessary. I for one, am all for the seperation of Churches and Government.
  
  To my way of thinking a "Christian Government" should be an unthinkable occurance, because it would exclude, or at the very least make secondary, everything that is not a Christian belief. (Pagans, Jews, Muslims, Atheists..etc.)
  
  A Passively Atheist Government is the way to go IMHO. A Government who's Bible is the Law and the Legal Code, only. (definately not the Active Atheism however, which is as bad as Christianity In my Opinion.)
  reply report
  59
  Mark Knowlesposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  But you cannot have a passively atheist government without the actively atheist movement. Passive atheism will not remove the active religionism.
  
  or do you think that people who believe God is speaking to them will merely stop spreading the Wurd?
  
  What is wrong with active atheism exactly? You don't like it when I tell you that your beliefs are funny?
  reply report
  76
  Mikel G Robertsposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  "What is wrong with active atheism exactly?"
  
  It is almost Identical to Bible-Thumping Christianity. Just from the opposite extreme.
  
  IMHO.
  reply report
  59
  Mark Knowlesposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  I see. Is this the same argument as "ATHEISM IS A RELIGION!"?
  
  Let me know the next time you see pairs of atheists flying all over the world to convert the believers. This is called "going on a mission," or "advertising."
  
  Still - get all the active atheists to shut up and we are back to religionists fighting with other religionists over who has the best God. About the only time I see Muslims and X-tians agreeing is when they attack atheism.
  reply report
2. 60
  The10DollarMarkposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Yes. Us evil atheists are out to make sure you can't do anything.
  
  Just give us a few years and you won't even be allowed to pray in public.
  
  (I'm kidding...Though there may be people trying to get that done, but even I'd agree that'd be wrong).
  reply report
3. 61
  Pandoras Boxposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Exactly! They want religious rights which they more than deny everybody else.
  reply report
0
Twenty One Daysposted 15 years ago
Suprising, Christianity it at the lower end of the proverbial gene pool. Islam, Judaism and Hindi/Buddhism are much bigger individually and collectively -yet not as influential as the Christian organization, even adding Catholicism to the mix.
Makes me wonder if western government was only using Christianity to escape the Church of England, build up power using slave and scatter techniques, then turn to socialism -which most christian Lots do- eventually.
reply report
76
Mikel G Robertsposted 15 years ago
Ummmm AREN'T Catholics the original "Christian" church?
reply report
1. 0
  Twenty One Daysposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  i disagree, but that's just me.
  
  the largest land based/continental country -spanning over 20 million square kilometers- adopted Christian standards, until eventually turning to socialism around 1917. For almost 900 years, this country flourished under a guise of Christianity, have no influence from the roman ideology, per say and became the cultural hub of Europe, even to this day, carries the weight of art, music and literature. In less than 30 years, under socialistic ideology, became the weakest, most influenced and recently became a democratic-liberal society...
  reply report
2. 69
  Rod Marsdenposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Mikel the Catholics can claim to be the first Roman state approved Christian religion. Accept no substitutes or else! The Gnostics entered Rome about the same time as the faith we now call Catholic and their belief system was and is as old as that of the Catholics. Also there was the Jewish branch of Christianity which quickly faded out of existence after a terrible war between the Romans and the Jews. So calling the Catholics the original church might be stretching things a might. They have however been very successful.
  
  I am a person who fears that the religious of our world are trapped in the past and cannot see the things that need to be done to save our planet from destruction. Most religions hark back to a time when the world was underpopulated and so being fruitful and multiplying seemed and indeed was a great idea back then. In medieval times a man was lucky to reach the age of thirty and a lot of babies were either still born or died soon after birth. So your are only going to live to thirty? Well sunny Jim you better hop to it and marry and have children, ect or there won't be a next generation...
  
  The same cannot be said for today. Our planet is choking from too many humans running around. What really scares the hell out of me is that the religious among us will keep crying out for more children, more children and won't see what is really going on. This is one really, really bad aspect to most religions.
  reply report
73
KeithTaxposted 15 years ago
Atheist hate is an illusion.
reply report
1. 70
  wyanjenposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Still laffing my head off. One of my favorite hubs.
  
  How about a nice cup of....
  
  reply report
0
Twenty One Daysposted 15 years ago
Which means you NEED religion to exist. You ARE apart of religion whether you like it or not. Not that you ARE a religion, because you are not organized or have documents to promote/propagate your ideology, accpet for a few flyers.

As for time served. Can you say you actually were educated in the full doctrine, when in fact that doctrine is negated, improperly defined and regurgitated? I do not think so.
Just by stating you were a 'born again christian' proves you do not understand the concept of the Creator, but rather a modified doctrine of man to trick you into believing and disbelieving five years later. either way, the Ism got you and still has you under its control.

wow, anyone else need a cigarette after that.. lol brb.
reply report
1. 69
  AdsenseStrategiesposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  I have a degree in religious studies
  reply report
  0
  Twenty One Daysposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  As do I -in biblical studies from the Christian viewpoint AND separately from the Torah/Talmud viewpoint. In addition to non-theistic Applied Philosophies and Quantum Physics, what's your point?
  
  Religious? As in ALL religions or a specific type of?
  reply report
61
Jeramiposted 15 years ago
Not to change the subject or anything But concerning the OP

What do you think has driven atheists to hate religion?

What drives anyone to hate anything is HATE
Why is it directed at Religion? It has Gotta be directed at something. If not religion then something else.
I don't think Religion is the only thing that these people are hating?
Hate strikes out in many directions from both the Theist and Atheist camps.

There is nothing constructive comes out of HATE.
reply report
1. 59
  Mark Knowlesposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  That depends. If you analyze and understand your feelings, then direct the energy appropriately, then something positive can come from HATE.
  
  It is only an emotion and unlike the Kristian good vs bad war nonsense - it can be healthy to acknowledge all feelings.
  
  Misdirected love can be just as destructive. Stealing children from Haiti for their own good as an example.
  reply report
61
Jeramiposted 15 years ago
I do agree that we should not deny our feelings.
To hold negative feelings inside is a very BAD thing to do.
We gotta let um go. I personally have never released negative energys that have produced posative results. Yea maybe I felt better afterwards but in the end my negative actions only produced negative reactions that built up in the environment around me that eventually came back to me.

I have found that it works best for me to examine my own negative feelings and why I have them than to focus those around me.
reply report
1. 59
  Mark Knowlesposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  I think you misunderstood my meaning. I was suggesting you direct those "negative" energies and direct them appropriately in a healthy fashion - in which case something "positive" can come from those feelings.
  reply report
  61
  Jeramiposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  I agree with your statement that to direct our feelings appropriately does affect positive change.
  But before they can be directed appropriately we have to understand them as completely as is possible before acted upon.
  We never reach a point of total understanding.
  so we just do the best that we can.
  We should never be driven by emotions or our intelect.
  A balance is required.
  We have to understand ourselves to the best of our ability
  reply report
61
Jeramiposted 15 years ago
I do want to say that though I often get irritated at some peoples attitudes on the forums and in life,
I appreciate being exposed to their beliefs.
Equilibrium can never be achieved without being exposed by opposing extreems of thoughts.
It seems that everyone has a truth to tell
The hard part is for each of us to be able to propperly express themselves to their fullest.
All too often people are saying the same things from a diffrent prospective while argueing about it.
reply report
69
earnestshubposted 15 years ago
That would be the "new" teachings from the NT by jesus eh? Not the same as his old man/himself said in the O.T?

"Each day prepare your bread as you would barley cakes. While all the people are watching, bake it over a fire using dried human dung as fuel and then eat the bread. For this is what the LORD says: Israel will eat defiled bread in the Gentile lands, where I will banish them!" Then I said, "O Sovereign LORD, must I be defiled by using human dung? For I have never been defiled before. From the time I was a child until now I have never eaten any animal that died of sickness or that I found dead. And I have never eaten any of the animals that our laws forbid." "All right," the LORD said. "You may bake your bread with cow dung instead of human dung." (Ezekiel 4:12-15 NLT)

The god of eating human excrement!
reply report
1. 75
  aguasilverposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Not exactly Earnest, Gods telling them to cook with it, not eat it, and in Arab countries the nomads still burn the dung, besides which cattle dung is mainly grass and once dried burns quite well and is odourless.
  
  Trouble is you are so burned out with hating God that you frequent the places His believers inhabit like a wailing ghost.
  
  Exorcise yourself, if you don't want to believe in God, just stop coming here to read about what His people say about Him in worship and praise. You are only boring us with your twittering, you will never make one scrap of difference to any believer who has encountered the Holy Spirit.
  
  You are a tinkling bell, hollow of substance and nothing more than a mosquito buzzing in the darkness.
  reply report
  69
  Rod Marsdenposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  aguasilver, I have heard about this practice of burning cattle dung to cook with. Where firewood is not plentiful it isn't such a bad idea.
  
  In some parts of the world animal blood is mixed with milk to provide a nourishing drink.
  
  In France snails are a popular food. In parts of the former Soviet Union eels are considered tasty.
  reply report
69
earnestshubposted 15 years ago
Instead of moving over to cattle poo, why don't you address the issue of what your "good book" says about human poo, and why they are using it to cook with.

Downright dishonest if you ask me!

As for all my "hate" for your crazed beliefs, I don''t do hate.
I could not give a rats, if you stop spouting from this vicious pile, Ill stop telling you it is crud and why ok?

I told you before, I don't do hate, or fire and brimstone.
reply report
1. 69
  Rod Marsdenposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Not keen on the idea of cooking with human shit but then again who would be?
  reply report
69
Rod Marsdenposted 15 years ago
How about priests molesting or in other ways abusing children? (In the 1960s there were Catholic priests actually torturing orphans via the use of water and electricity) This seems to be something to fear. The church, all churches, need to understand our common laws when it comes to the care and protection of children and abide by them.

When Muslims come to countries such as Australia it must be understood by the newcomers that there are already customs of the land in place. Women have the absolute right to wear bikinis on beaches anywhere in Australia. What's more, women have the right to wear mini-skirts if they so wish to do so. If this sort of activity in summer in Australia is offensive to you for religious or reasons of your own customs then I suggest you settle elsewhere. It is only fair. That being said there are Muslims who have settled in Australia and who do respect the customs of the land while still maintaining their own customs. The ones who don't however should live elsewhere.
reply report
1. 69
  earnestshubposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Australia works pretty well because the "fair go for all" idea has stuck through all the cultural changes in my opinion.
  people can dress however they like in all their cultural finery, and providing they live and let live they are accepted by other Australians.
  If a person brings their hate here and display it then nobody wants to know them, and I say that is fair enough.
  reply report
2. 51
  paarsurreyposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Hi friend Rod Marsden
  
  I agree with you.
  
  The Muslims should respect the customs of the land they live in or they have migrated to; like other respect their customs.
  
  Every human is to be respected, loved and not hated.
  
  Thanks
  
  I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim
  reply report
  59
  Mark Knowlesposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  I see - so attacking atheists as being delusional is showing love and respect?
  
  It seems Muslim love is much the same as Christian love.
  
  Force your irrationality beliefs on every one else. For their own good. Because you respect them.
  reply report
69
Rod Marsdenposted 15 years ago
You got it in one. earnestshub!
reply report
51
starg8t1posted 15 years ago
"Hate" is a very strong word. I prefer to refrain from its use until there is a valid reason to use it. Religion is very close to being a valid reason for using the word hate.

Atheists (in general) fall into the trap of anti-religion comparison, much like a doctor saying he/she is a non-carpenter or a non-school bus driver, etc...

It is not specific to being an atheist that I am so disgusted with religion, anymore than I am also disgusted with greed that leaves others financially less well-off as a result of that greed.

It is religion that holds many contradictions within its own boundaries, yet in spite of all of its contradictions, those who chose to believe in religious dogma most certainly choose to ignore and deny the obvious irrationality it takes to believe in it (implying specifically to all supernatural beliefs in all religions that are based on Biblical scriptures), or any other belief in a supernatural deity.

I "hate" religion for all that it stands for, imposes, expresses, teaches, speaks of, suggests, hopes for, encourages, discriminates against, and more. I have absolutely no respect for religion what-so-ever. It does not deserve my respect and religion (religious beliefs) insult my intelligence.

That does not mean that all atheists feel the way I do about religion(s). That is how "I" feel. However, it would surprise me to learn that only a few atheists feel the same as I do about religion. I believe that the reason I feel the way I do is because those who espouse religious beliefs (believe in a supernatural deity and a supernatural after-life) is equally, if not more, intolerant of anyone who does not believe the same way they do.

If despise means the same thing as hate, then I guess I hate religion, then.
reply report
0
philip carey 61posted 15 years ago
Having been an atheist most of my life (I was baptized at the age of 43), I can't say I ever hated religion, but I was intensely irritated at their naivete and head-in-the-sand world view. But then something happened, a very serious crisis, and it suddenly made perfect sense. I have no explanation. I truly don't. And I know how this looks from an atheist perspective--absurd, weak-minded--all the things I used to attribute to Christian believers. And yet, I believe. Not in the literal, line-by-line version of the ultra fundamentalists, but on some essential level. Yes, I know there are absurd passages in the Bible. I know it is replete with passages of hatred and meanness. But yet, something indescribably beautiful emerges--at least to me.

Regarding my views of Christians when I was Atheist, it was as if they had something I didn't, I guess. And they did--a life in the context of something larger, and understood only with the heart. It is curious that, in the Christian beliefs, that God chose to reveal himself not to the wise, but to the forsaken, the weak, and the naive.

Peace
reply report
1. 61
  Jeramiposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Very well put. There is no way to express some things on a two dimential piece of paper, Or in a streight line of thought.
  reply report
  0
  philip carey 61posted 15 years agoin reply to this
  You are right. The Harvard Philosopher and Psychologist, William James, put it thus:
  
  "The handiest of the marks by which I classify a state of mind as mystical is negative. The subject of it immediately says that it defies expression, that no adequate report of its contents can be given in words. It follows from this that its quality must be directly experienced; it cannot be imparted or transferred to others. In this peculiarity mystical states are more like states of feeling than like states of intellect. No one can make clear to another who has never had a certain feeling, in what the quality or worth of it consists. One must have musical ears to know the value of a symphony; one must have been in love one’s self to understand a lover’s state of mind. Lacking the heart or ear, we cannot interpret the musician or the lover justly, and are even likely to consider him weak-minded or absurd. The mystic finds that most of us accord to his experiences an equally incompetent treatment."--William James, Varieties of Religious Experience
  reply report
  51
  starg8t1posted 15 years agoin reply to this
  The Reality of Religion and Supernatural Religious Beliefs:
  The most realistic, rational understanding of irrational religious beliefs is realizing the logical interpretation of being sane by comparison. The source of delusional thought through accepted emotional wisdom that supernatural credence testifies to, but offers no substantial accuracy for except, through the confirmation of enigma as being evidence. Rationality, then, chases the challenge of finding explanation through feelings rather than intellect. Sentiment is far from providing truth or fact for any fetish no matter how advantageous delusional thought through feelings eludes reason to. The inability to make clear to another who has never had a certain feeling is not proof that confusion or uncertainty is the valid understanding of any truth, and that an opinion does not validate the assessment or meaning of truth or fact in any way. When obliging emotion to interpret reality we can not adequately or accurately reason the authenticity of any mirage with dependability, except to mistakenly believe that any delusion is reliable truth or fact when interpreted through our own position of emotional analysis. Those who rely on emotion as the mechanism by way of measuring reality will always find that delusion will supply them adequately with pseudo facts and virtual truth, right up to the hallucinogenic conclusion that some-thing supernatural exists. --- Starg8t1
  reply report
  0
  Twenty One Daysposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  So therefore, the Quality of the need and its action -necessity- must be viewed solely by and of critique. Not by ridicule or sensation -but from a neutral view, looking into the Ism itself. Any simple or elite thinker can understand the duality is incomplete. For one calls critical logic and clangs loudly - implying they lack those necessary elements of their general romantic nature. Still, the ultra sensation charges the classic as being simply ambiguous to its romantic jestures.
  Yet, look at them straight in the eye and ask yourself if the classic is any greater or less than the romantic. Of course not.
  You can easily recognize the mystic and mythology in both, yes?
  What would one be without the other to argue, hold its hand or even lean its head on? Not foolishness, just fool heartiness. Duality, even at its apex of Quality, that seems to divide the rising sun, is a mere spoiled toddler. Even so far as to say a dust mite of a consideration within this vast expanse of Creation. -James [excerpt from Quantus Philo -a critique of quality]
  reply report
2. 60
  Beelzedadposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  That's an amazing thing to say, Philip, straight from the heart. Kudos.
  reply report
3. 61
  Pandoras Boxposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Where's Q? I'll leave this to him, knowing he'll just love your last line there.
  reply report
58
yoshi97posted 15 years ago
Atheists don't hate religion, they disbelieve in God. You can't hate what you refuse to believe in, but you can certainly disagree with it.

To put this into perspective, this is like saying all adults hate the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus, and the Tooth Fairy. Again, refusal to believe in something is not hatred, it's just a matter of not believing.
reply report
61
susanlangposted 15 years ago
Atheism is commonly described as the position that there are no deities.[1] It can also mean the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.[2] A broader meaning is simply the absence of belief that any deities exist.[3]

The term atheism originated from the Greek ἄθεος (atheos), meaning "without gods", which was applied with a negative connotation to those thought to reject the gods worshiped by the larger society. With the spread of freethought, skeptical inquiry, and subsequent increase in criticism of religion, application of the term narrowed in scope. The first individuals to identify themselves as "atheist" appeared in the 18th century. Today, about 2.3% of the world's population describes itself as atheist, while a further 11.9% is described as nontheist.[4] Between 64% and 65% of Japanese describe themselves as atheists, agnostics, or non-believers,[5][6] and to 48% in Russia.[5] The percentage of such persons in European Union member states ranges as low as single digits in Italy and some other countries, and up to 85% in Sweden.[5]

Atheists tend to lean towards skepticism regarding supernatural claims, citing a lack of empirical evidence. Common rationales for not believing in any deity include the problem of evil, the argument from inconsistent revelations, and the argument from nonbelief. Other arguments for atheism range from the philosophical to the social to the historical. Although some atheists tend toward secular philosophies such as humanism,[7] rationalism, and naturalism,[8] there is no one ideology or set of behaviors to which all atheists adhere.[9]

In Western culture, atheists are frequently assumed to be exclusively irreligious or unspiritual.[10] However, religious and spiritual belief systems such as forms of Buddhism that do not advocate belief in gods, have also been described as atheistic

I do not believe they "hate" they just keep away from Christ and his teachings.
reply report
1. 61
  susanlangposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  This morning I ran into an atheist who proclaimed to hate God. Therefore, I now know some, (not all) do hate. Learn something new everyday, I love it!
  reply report
0
philip carey 61posted 15 years ago
Still, I find it impossible to communicate some subjective states without appealing to your own experience of those states. How, for example, would I say I was 'angry', and have you understand , without you having had that subjective experience?

It's quite possible then, that a person can have experiences that another has not. That person has, then, no basis for reference, leaving them to think it absurd, etc.
reply report
0
Will Apseposted 15 years ago
Atheists who hate religion mostly have an unresolved personal issue with religion (a weird religious upbringing perhaps) or they have been exposed to secular propaganda and they have swallowed it. Another possibility is that they live in a country where religious fanatics make life difficult. The latter are the only ones I sympathize with.
reply report
1. 60
  Beelzedadposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  That's very true, with me it was when I realized all the loving, merciful, peaceful gods of the world wanted to send me to a lake of fire to burn in agony for an eternity.
  
  But, I don't think it's just me who has this "unresolved personal issue with religion..."
  reply report
60
Originposted 15 years ago
I believe firmly in the "Freedom of Religion", which also means the people have the right to not believe in any religion at all. I don't see anything wrong with it, it's their choice.

I believe that *some* on both sides of the fence, and I emphasize that word, are guilty of fueling the fire a bit, either by telling religious people that they are wrong to believe or whatever, and at the same time the religious people telling the non-believers that they may experience eternal damnation because they don't believe.

I guess I would call myself a Christian, although part Agnostic (if that makes sense - I have my own religious theories at the same time lol). But, anyhow.. I've been told I was "going to burn in hell" a few times during my life by religious people, and it's not because they thought I didn't believe in a god, but it's because I wasn't aligned to their exact faith and didn't follow their teachings. I mean, what benefit does telling someone their going to burn in hell do? Honestly? Are they trying to push the non-believer to believe through terror? I don't get it. I never did lol.

Anyhow, I'm not sure if I'm going to follow this thread, I just thought I would lend my 2 cents. Religious discussions have always left a bad taste in my mouth because it just goes around, and around, and around, etc, etc, etc.
reply report
1. 69
  ceciliabeltranposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  anything you actively hate, you actually have in you and you are desperately trying to battle it externally, because its roots are corrupting you from within.
  
  Anything could corrupt you from within if it was planted by someone else against your will. example : a career you hate. an arranged marriage. a religion that never did anything for you but asked much from you.
  
  People who are not beholden by religion, do not even talk about it. The most they will do is smirk at it.
  
  People who have positive associations with religion such as religious communities and fun family activities after church actually will hold on to religion.
  
  Religion like anything, is neutral. It is the people who view them that make them either good or bad, just like a million dollars won in the lottery, or cancer.
  
  Some people curse cancer, some survivors call it the best thing that ever happened to them.
  
  It's up to you how you would view religion/ Is it a million dollars or cancer?
  reply report
60
ZackW.Vanposted 15 years ago
I hope no one is offended and it might have already been said but this is my take on why religion is no longer popular.

I do, in fact, believe in god. However, I am also a homosexual. For this, I constantly recieve hate from religious people because I am a demon and im against god and all this non-sence.
Now, I love my life, and I accept my homosexuality. I also, certianly believe that there are many people far more sinful than I. But simply because I am gay, I get to be in the same catagory as murderers when it comes to my final judgement?

I understand that there are many religious people that are excepting of the LGBT comunity, however, many are not. Or, They want to change your lifestyle and "cure" you of your homosexuality. That would be as if i were to tell you that I could cure you from being left-handed. Not only is it not possible, it's not neccisary. We are happy with who and how we are.

I do believe in god, but I do understand how some people can be deterred from being a part of religion. We have separation of church and state so it is not constitutional to have a day of prayer, but it is still ok to ban gay marriage?

Religion is somthing that should be all inclusive. We have people saying become a part of the christian faith and believe and that god loves all his children, but then we have people on the side of the road holding signs that say "god hates fags."

One of the Quotes I have written myself is
"I used to be a God-fearing Christian. Now im a Christian-Fearing Homosexual."
reply report
61
Jeramiposted 15 years ago
ZackW.Van said
But simply because I am gay, I get to be in the same catagory as murderers when it comes to my final judgement?
=================================================

one sin is no greater sin than another... they are all disobedience. This also means that cookie theives and Jay walkers are to be judged as you are.
I am a cookie theif. I know that it is a sin but I just caint stop it.
Until I can stop it; I will be judged as someone that can not controll my desires. I am a sinner as you are.
What I do not want to do is to be guilty of the same sin as the Pharasee that the story in scripture tells about.
He prayed, "thank you Lord for making be a better sinner that that guy over there"
Don't get me wrong now! As soon as I become perfect I will have permision to judg others, When I acheive this level of perfection a lot of people that I am now tolerating had better look out. When I reach that leavel????
I think you are all safe for a couple of more days, maybe a week or two! so you all better start getting yourselves right.
reply report
68
chatpilotposted 15 years ago
First I would like to answer the topic question. I as an atheist do not hate religion. The only problem I have with religion is when it tries to impose itself upon my by trying to influence legislation in politics and government. Or when it tries to judge me for not living according to their fictional gods standards.

Regarding Jerami I don't even consider sin a real concept or a real word in the English language. It is exclusively a religious term and is therefore irrelevant to me. Zack if you are gay and that is what makes you happy then you do what makes you happy. The biblical god is nothing more than a tyrant and a dictator who likes to ruin everyone's life with a good helping of guilt. That is of course if he existed which in my opinion I am pretty sure he doesn't.
reply report
1. 61
  Jeramiposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  What my concept of what sin is has no magical implications..
  
  Sin is anything that is unhealthy or detrimental to the individual or society as a whole; both physically or mentally.
  
  It is a sin to breath some of the air that we are forced to breath.
  It is a sin to eat ten pounds of cookies a day.
  
  In other words .. in today’s environment most everything that we do is a sin to some degree.
  Sin is something that we all do to ourselves first; and then it gets on those around us.
  
  We can't stop it... Would be nice if we could keep it to a minimum though.
  reply report
  60
  Randy Godwinposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  Have you ever wondered what it would be like if everything were perfect? Or without sin, if you prefer. There would be no excitement in life at all.
  
  Nothing new to pique one's interest as time slowly dragged on. No drama on TV or comedy either because much we laugh at is composed of other people's misfortunes and predicaments.
  
  Can you think of any story, movie, or book you enjoyed which would still have been interesting if there was no sin in it? Because without no bad there is no good. No sad, no happy. Everything is the same everywhere. What a boring life we would endure. Think about spending eternity being bored!
  
  Sure, there are worse deeds than others just as there are those better than some. It is simply the facts of life and no ancient novel can decide which particular wrongs or rights each person recognizes as being more important than others.
  
  But there will always be those who try to convince others they know best because they are privileged by their gods to to so. The heck with that!
  reply report
  61
  Jeramiposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  I agree with what you have said in the post above....
  Instead of saying good vs evil
  good for ya vs bad for ya
  Like it vs don't kike it
  That works vs this don't work
  I think the word sin is not a magical word. It just means "NOT GOOD"
  
  And I agree with you; How would we know what a GOOD
  "T bone" steak was if there was not a sinful steak to compare it with.
  reply report
0
Twenty One Daysposted 15 years ago
???

Seriously? wow. people are so hooked on this Babylon perfume.
Without a mentality of sin; without consciously engaging the good-evil conflict, humans would be able to do AWESOME things.
reply report
69
ceciliabeltranposted 15 years ago
sometimes when you overdose on something it flips on itself -campbell.

so balance is key. the collective and the individual should consent to the life choices, otherwise it will rip the soul in two and good and evil will be born. two extremes and the balancing forces of the psyche. just like an over parented child bolts out and never visits home. or a neglected child sees everyone as his mother.
reply report
0
WizardOfOzposted 15 years ago
religion smells.
reply report
0
Chasukposted 15 years ago
"Atheists" don't hate religion. Some do, some don't. Of those who do, there are myriad reasons. Of those myriad reasons, a bad experience is probably the most common.
reply report
1. 68
  chatpilotposted 15 years agoin reply to this
  I agree Chasuk, I having been a former theist have heard many a bad tale stemming from the church or the church community. Hate is wearisome so I don't waste my time hating anything, especially the church. I have better things to do with my life and time. Like I stated earlier as long as the church does not try to impose upon my life and my freedoms then I don't really care what they do.
  reply report
61
Pandoras Boxposted 15 years ago
The good news is that my profits have been going up! The bad news is that I miss all the good forum discussions these days.

Hey 21, people -lowly, sinful people living in an imperfect world- do awesome things everyday.

I don't believe in a sin concept. I know there are crimes against society, unhealthy living habits -both physically and mentally- and twisted, misinformed viewpoints. But I don't consider any of them sins.

We are animals. But because we can think at a higher level than other living beings we are therefore guilty of our passions? Is then, say, a shark guiltier than a guppy? Is a dog to be held more accountable than a fly?

Why do we deem ourselves in need of salvation from an imaginary (male) god who we are guilty before and liable to all because we have supposedly reached the newest higher levels of supposedly intelligent capabilities for land animals on earth?

And why is it that the powerful among our male ancestors so adamantly spurned intelligence and forbade individual thought?
reply report

Post a Reply

jump to first post

Previous 1 23 Next

Necessary
HubPages Device ID	This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
Login	This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google Recaptcha	This is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
Akismet	This is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google Analytics	This is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic Pixel	This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web Services	This is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
Cloudflare	This is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted Libraries	Javascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)

Features
Google Custom Search	This is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google Maps	Some articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google Charts	This is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host API	This service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTube	Some articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Vimeo	Some articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Paypal	This is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Login	You can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Maven	This supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)

Marketing
Google AdSense	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClick	Google provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index Exchange	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Sovrn	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Ads	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad Marketplace	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexus	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Openx	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon Project	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLift	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say Media	We partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing Pixels	We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking Pixels	We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.

Statistics
Author Google Analytics	This is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
Comscore	ComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking Pixel	Some articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
Clicksco	This is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)

What do you think has driven atheists to hate religion?

Arts and Design

Autos

Books, Literature, and Writing

Business and Employment

Education and Science

Entertainment and Media

Family and Parenting

Fashion and Beauty

Food and Cooking

Games, Toys, and Hobbies

Gender and Relationships

Health

Holidays and Celebrations

Home and Garden

HubPages Tutorials and Community

Personal Finance

Pets and Animals

Politics and Social Issues

Religion and Philosophy

Sports and Recreation

Technology

Travel and Places

About Us

This website uses cookies

What do you think has driven atheists to hate religion?

Related Discussions

This website uses cookies