Against God - Interesting online article

serotonin_wraith

Six pages in total. I found it an interesting read, you may too.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/in-depth/against-god/2007/04/14/1175971410059.html?page=1

Gopher

Yes, it was interesting to see things from an Australian viewpoint.

I recently joined this group here: www.mnatheists.org , and I've heard more discussion directed at organized religion than the idea of God (although there's been some of that, too.) Maybe this article should be titled "against religion".

From what I've seen most atheists are against religion, but not strictly "against God". For example, if you don't believe in Santa Claus, does that mean you're "anti-Santa" or "anti-Christmas"? How can you be "against" something in which you do not believe?

Religious evangelical meddling in politics, education and science needs to be neutralized. That's a major interest of atheists (at least here).

darkuncle29

Fundamentalism, by any name, still smells the same.

I agree with Gopher, I'm tired of rabid frothing at the mouth believers mucking up politics--here or anywhere. I don't see fundamentalist athiests as being any better, kinder, gentler, or more rational.

Gopher

Darkuncle,

There are extreme viewpoints spoken on both side of the atheism/fundamentalist religion divide. However, in the past quarter century, religious fundamentalists have held more sway in Western society (particularly the United States) and outnumber the influential atheists at this point. So the atheists must speak more loudly to help draw attention to rationalism and to level the playing field.

Further atheists do not generally try to "convert" you to a viewpoint that you must believe (or else you'll suffer whatever punishment the chosen deity prescribes). However a couple of the major religions (Christianity, Islam) are intent on conversion of outsiders -- it's part of their mantra.

LtCmd.Lore

Evidently I'm missing something.

According to my dictionary:

Fundamentalism: The interpretation of every word in the sacred texts as literal truth.

Is there some other definition of 'fundamentalist' that I'm not aware of?

Lore - W.W.S.D?

neverendingjourney

You're right. Fundamentalism is a word that is taken out of context so much that it has almost taken on an entirely new meaning. I often hear the term "Muslim fundamentalist" and cringe. What they really mean is "militant Muslim" or "Muslim terrorist", but they choose to use the word "fundamentalist" instead. The proper use of the word is limited to those Protestant Christians whose religious beliefs dictate that the Bible is infallible and each and every word of it was directly put there by God.

Gopher

I may need further facts / enlightenment here.

But isn't Fundamental Islam possible? They have their Koran, a sacred text, and so a Moslem could take their Koran quite literally and use parts they wish, in order to justify inhmane deeds. This has also been possible with Christians through the centuries (the Inquisition, for example).

Whereas the only Moslem I have gotten to know (he used to work in the cube next to mine) was very moderate and non-judgmental, but was sure to keep his festivals!

I think the point is that Fundamentalism can apply to religious groups who take their religious books very literally, but Fundamentalism cannot apply to atheists because they have no 'sacred text'.

neverendingjourney

I was taught that "fundamentalism" was a term that was coined within the past 100 years to describe a movement within Christianity that rejected religious schools of thought that viewed the Bible as being allegorical in nature, as opposed to literal. When Islamic terrorism began to really enter the public consciousness, many people simply took the fundamentalist label and applied it to the Muslims who interpreted the Quran in such a way that allowed terrorist attacks against civilians. A more precise term describing ultra conservative Muslims is "Islamism" or "Islamists." Fundamentalist Muslim, as I understand it, is a term that simply adapts a pre-existing Western concept to Islam when there were already precise terms to describe Muslims who view their sacred texts as being the literal word of God.

darkuncle29

Sorry, I used sloppy/casual en-grish. I should have said extremist, not fundamentalist, as you're correct, there are no sacred atheist texts...that I know of anyway. And Gopher, i agree with you that non believers need to speak up so as not to be lost in the din. That author just pushes all my "eewwww" buttons, He thinks "he's right end-of-discussion". I would hope that no such thing ever rears its ugly head-that is extremist atheism. I would venture that its possible to be fundamentalist anything without crossing the extremist line, do you think? Sorry about the lack of formatting, explorer crashed on me again and I'm sick of using it until I reboot. I just wonder, are atheists willing to leave people alone who don't bother anyone else? Again, I hope so, but my blind trust in humans is a bit scorched. Interesting article, thanks for linking it.

Gopher

Neverendingjourney --

Thanks for those clarifying definitions.

Darkuncle --

While there are outstpoken atheists, most (of us) are not militant or seeking to disabuse other people of their faith. I don't foresee any atheist leaders converting people to their views at swordpoint ("believe in scientific reason and logic -- or else !!!"). But when religious institutions and groups start meddling in political or other things (educational, scientific), the atheists or freethinkers will seek to actively counter-balance that through any effective and lawful means.

And to your other point about extremism -- I think that is the nature of insecure and intolerant people of any stripe.

Against God - Interesting online article

Share this