Defending outspoken atheism

by serotonin_wraith 36 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • serotonin_wraith
    serotonin_wraith

    Well Vinny and probably some others have come to wonder about the purpose of outspoken atheism, especially when it is presented in a rude manner. Here's my thoughts on the matter.

    Many of us here will have relatives who are Jehovah's Witnesses. We want them to escape from that cult. Sometimes being tactful is the best approach, and we carefully plant seeds of doubt, hoping they they won't run away from our 'apostate' thoughts. But other times, just being blunt is better.

    We don't say 'Oh, um well see the thing is, I completely respect your beliefs, but there's this thing with the two witness rule. I think it's a bit unfair to get a victim to find two witnesses before anything is done about the accused. It's doubtful they will be doing anything when even one witness is around to see. But um, yes, I don't want to take you away from your religion and I expect if the GB are being guided by Jehovah then it will all be okay in the end. I'm sorry I brought it up.'

    No. We make it known in an outspoken way that this rule has led to many people going unpunished, and many victims not getting justice. We don't dance around the issue and sweeten it up. The JWs need to know about this rule if they don't already, and we shouldn't pretend it is a good rule. It is a barbaric, disgusting rule and hiding behind 'Well it's my religion' doesn't cut it with us. We do not respect their beliefs when things like this happen. Why should we?

    You can probably see where I'm going with this. We all know what it's like to be in the position where we know a belief system is wrong, and we need to say something about it. The outspoken atheists just apply this exact same criteria (which is never frowned upon in these forums) to all religions. Being tactful sometimes works, being blunt can work too. A person who is told 'you are deluded and you need help' may be offended, but they take in the message, even if they don't agree with it. A person who is told 'I don't agree with you, but please, continue believing and converting others' will forget it was even said five minutes later.

    In the last few years, the debate between atheists and believers has gained much popularity. Why? Because atheists are breaking taboo and being rude. More people are stopping and thinking about why they actually believe.

    What also comes into play is blatant hypocrisy. Hiding behind a wall of religious respect has let parents frighten their children with hell fire, hold back science, kill people and keep people ignorant of the facts of life. Now THAT is rude. I don't want to have to defend reality, but I find I must. The religious people are the ones who cannot keep their beliefs to themselves, they have cast the first stone, as it were. Outspoken atheists are responding. We did not start the 'fight'.

    It's also worth noting that we've limited things to words, not beheadings, burning, bombing and indoctrination. So I make no apologies for being rude about these issues in a public forum. It's got people talking about this for the first time in many years, so it obviously works. I and others are also open to any reasons to believe in a god. We don't just say 'you're deluded' and put our fingers in our ears singing la la la la la. I have tried my best to answer every question put to me about why I should believe in a god. A believer hardly ever asks about evolution or cosmology, etc and remain open themselves to being proved wrong.

    Who is being more rude?

  • Paralipomenon
    Paralipomenon

    It comes down to open mindedness. The assertion that God exists is no different than an assertion that one doesn't. Neither side can prove conclusively their side to the other. People defect from one camp to the other and each side seems to think it's a numbers game. If all the atheists are converted, will that make God exist? Or if all the theists are converted to atheism, would that make God cease to exist?

    Essentially, if both camps were willing to just keep their beliefs personal, there would be less conflict. In fairness, many theists are usually taught that to have faith involves in preaching or converting others and most of the time atheists are reactionary rather than offensively preaching their views. This site seems to have a more vocal atheist leaning, but outside of it, the reverse seems to be true.

    Just my thoughts.

  • serotonin_wraith
    serotonin_wraith
    The assertion that God exists is no different than an assertion that one doesn't

    Yeah I agree there. I'm a weak atheist, as I'm sure most atheists are.

    As for the numbers game, I don't think that matters too much when it comes to whether god exists. We all used to think the Earth was flat. If 99% of people around me believed in a god, I still wouldn't. I'd still need reasons.

    For keeping beliefs personal, what about in schools? Should evolution aswell as creationism be dropped from the classroom incase it offends some people? How about the big bang theory?

  • Gopher
    Gopher

    I think that an open discussion is healthy and necessary. I just recently admitted to myself and the world that I am atheist, which simply stated is a non-believer. Not all atheists assert that the idea of God is impossible, but merely unprovable.

    Further, atheists see the religious fundamentalism (more so in countries like the USA than in Europe) as being an unhealthy force in public life, be it politics, science, or wherever. Such fundamentalism injects and pushes belief in the unknown and unprovable into lots of areas where it does not belong.

    Atheists are often labelled or viewed as immoral and unprincipled. The ones I've seen are moral and principled, and I'm tired ot aspersions being cast on atheists. It is also a bit upsetting to me that whenever an atheist asserts his belief (even repeatedly) it's an attack!! C'mon people, it's just ideas, don't be afraid.

    Some believers just don't get the value of a good discussion and trying to understand BOTH sides of an issue, they seem to just want to stick to a belief because it must be true. The atheists I've seen can elucidate both sides of the issue, but they've picked their views for good reason.

  • nvrgnbk
    nvrgnbk

    I don't think you're rude, sero.

    I'm sure many atheists here think I'm a pantywaist.

    I'm ok with that.

    When I say I respect the faith or conviction of a believer, I am sincere.

    I am giving validation to their feelings, recognizing that their self-identity is wrapped up in their belief( as some would charge that our self-identity is wrapped up in our disbelief).

    I do not, however, agree with them.

    And I do not think that attempting to make an individual "peace" with them weakens the arguments presented.

    I agree that "tolerance" of ridiculous beliefs has been detrimental to human progress.

    Please keep chipping away, sero.

    May reality bless you.

  • Paralipomenon
    Paralipomenon

    Theories should be taught as theories in their respective courses. Given the sheer magnitude of different beliefs, it would be impossible to equally cover all of them. My personal thoughts is that the origin of our universe and species is unknown and therefore shouldn't be taught in schools at all. After all, what's to teach? School should be for facts, as soon as our origin is proven, then teach that.

  • Gopher
    Gopher
    For keeping beliefs personal, what about in schools? Should evolution aswell as creationism be dropped from the classroom incase it offends some people? How about the big bang theory?

    It's apples and oranges here. A "belief" is different than evolution and the big bang theory, which are actual scientific conclusions based on known facts.

    The idea that people should be held back from discussing beliefs in schools is frightening to me. Schools should be fertile testing grounds for ideas and beliefs, and schools are a good place to learn how to sharpen ones thinking ability and to learn how to discuss things rationally (hopefully) when confronted with differing views and with people from diverse backgrounds (be they religious or national/ethnic backgrounds).

  • Gopher
    Gopher
    My personal thoughts is that the origin of our universe and species is unknown and therefore shouldn't be taught in schools at all. After all, what's to teach? School should be for facts, as soon as our origin is proven, then teach that

    I doubt we'll ever be able to prove the origin. If there is a God, He hasn't made himself manifest (the Bible account is not provable, and if Jesus was a real man we still cannot prove he was God). If there isn't a God, then the God idea will forever remain unprovable.

    But how species developed AFTER the origin is provable, and that's what evolution is about. Evolution does not equal origins, again they are two different things.

  • Gopher
    Gopher

    A THEORY is not an unproven idea that scientists are hanging out there. That's a misunderstanding of the word theory.

    Here is what WIkipedia says in its "Theory" entry:

    In science, a theory is a mathematical or logical explanation, or a testable model of the manner of interaction of a set of naturalphenomena, capable of predicting future occurrences or observations of the same kind, and capable of being tested through experiment or otherwise falsified through empirical observation. It follows from this that for scientists "theory" and "fact" do not necessarily stand in opposition. For example, it is a fact that an apple dropped on earth has been observed to fall towards the center of the planet, and the theories commonly used to describe and explain this behaviour are Newton's theory of universal gravitation (see also gravitation), and general relativity.

    Who would argue with Newton's theory of universal graviation, or with the theory of general relativity?

  • serotonin_wraith
    serotonin_wraith

    If we're talking about what came before the Big Bang, no one knows. Therefore, nothing is taught about that in school. But we do know what happened less than a second after the big bang, how stars and planets formed and how life started on Earth (abiogenesis). I'll provide proof if anyone has trouble looking for that stuff. These things aren't a mystery.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit