Are religionists and atheists on the same team? (page 10)

Fernando

Hey thetrueone!

What are your thoughts on defining religion as "man's search for God" on man's terms?

And what are your thoughts on defining the unabridged gospel message as "God's search for man" on God's terms?

Could it be that they are exact opposites?

tec

I never said organized atheist group. People who think the same are considered a group... but that doesn't make them organized. Nor does it change the definition of a militant atheist.

Secular humanists who do not allow or tolerate religion into their group are... well, a group.

Peace,

tammy

SweetBabyCheezits

TEC: ...the belief that religion "should not simply be tolerated but should be countered, criticized and exposed by rational argumentwherever its influence arises."

I'll wear that badge, precisely because of the last four words.

Try living in the Bible belt for 30+ years, Southern Baptist territory. Try working in state where the deluded fundamentalist governor Issues a Proclamation for Days of Prayer for Rain instead of doing something to actually help his state survive the drought. (There was also this one that he issued so he could get his name added to the list of great American Christian leaders.)

Even closer to home, I've got a Jesus-freak across the hall who won't shut up about how eager he is to go home to his "dear father". I consider this guy a threat to society. I asked if he had real faith. "Would you kill someone if you perceived that God told you to do it?" At first he said God would never ask that of him, but I reminded him of Abraham, to which he said, "Yeah, I'd have no other choice." The conversation reached this point only after he told me he'd go stand in the middle of the street if God told him to do it. (Part of me wants to tell him his father called while he was out of the office to say heaven's waiting, hurry it up.)

This same guy owns a huge tract of land in MX, on which intends to set up shop and raise a bunch of god-fearing missionary children. Orphanage, he calls it. What he really means is "compound". I've said that to his face but I acted like it was a joke in hopes that God wouldn't direct him to bury a steak knife in my spine on his lunch break.

So, yeah, I don't think delusions shared by the masses should go uncriticized in a democratic and mostly scientifically illiterate nation. It's the influence I have a problem with.

tec

And why make the assumption that Atheists think less of anyone else? From what I can see most if not all atheists value human life, and peoples rights.

I never made that assumption. I did not say that atheists think this... I said those atheist who do think that others are less than (as in less intelligent, less rational, less logical, less free, lacking in critical thinking, whatever the opposite of Dawkin's term "Brights" for atheists might happen to be for theists. Dulls?)...

I don't make generalizations that lump everyone of a particular faith/non-faith system as one.

Peace,

tammy

Vanderhoven7

One team embraces the first commandment as its' prime directive; the other team does not.

God knows who is on which team. ;o)

tec

But you see, SBC... your perspective concerns a limited amount of believers, such as the fundamentalists around you. If you treat all believers with the same disdain (?)or lack of respect simply because they are believers (never mind what they actually believe), then how are you different from the fundamental christians who lump you in 'whatever' category just because you're an atheist?

See those last four words don't say 'wherever its harmful influence arises'. Simply wherever its influence arises. It leaves out the good that people of faith do. It ignores that completely because it is hostile toward religion and faith of all kind. No distinction. Same as a fundamentalist toward everyone outside of their group.

Peace,

tammy

tec

Also, speaking up against harmful or intolerant religious practices does not make a person a militant atheist. Just so we're clear. Speaking up against all who happen to be of faith or religion, simply because they are believers... that is biased, e x tremist, intolerant and fundamental... militant.

Peace,

tammy

NewChapter

And why make the assumption that Atheists think less of anyone else? From what I can see most if not all atheists value human life, and peoples rights.

I don't hold all ideas as having equal footing. I don't respect all beliefs. I don't have a problem simply respecting life and people though. When someone demands respect for their point-of-view, and I simply don't have it to give, it probably feels like a personal attack. I simply won't discuss religion (in RL and outside of debate) with people whose views I cannot pretend to respect. I can respect their right to hold those views, and protect their freedom to think as they like, but I don't have to validate those views. It's a thin line.

In my personal life, I do prefer the company of like-minded people. It's just easier. I will not date a religious person---but for the most part, I never bring it up. I can't say that for others bringing it up to me. They start the conversation (never me) I will simply state that I don't believe, but it is never left there. They feel the need to tell me why they believe, what they get from it, and overall, are under the impression that I don't understand what it means to believe. I stay patient. I mention that I do understand where they are, as I used to believe. But they don't really believe that either, and it is another round of the wonderful things their faith does for them.

Now that's fine, except I don't like to talk about it. I'd rather we didn't. I don't initiate such conversations, and I don't get into a debate fest, but I still can't make it stop. I even had an agnostic last week initiate the conversation and firmly tell me that I had dismissed things too quickly. Which was surreal.

I have no desire to hinder someone practicing their faith. Unless it causes pain. But if they try to influence policy, education or my right not to beleive, then the gloves come off.

Seriously, in everyday life, being an atheist ranks rather low on my list of what I think about. Maybe it should rank higher, since I think that protecting secularism is a good thing for all----religious and non-believers. Leaving each person to determine for themselves. I admire the Dawkins of the world, because I think they are working for that protection. But I don't want to bomb churches. I don't want to shoot pro-life doctors. I don't want the schools to teach there is no god---but I DO want them to teach science and not treat Intelligent Design as having any equal footing scientifically as evolution. The kid can believe there is a god, with my approval---as long as he can answer the science questions.

So we are not on a team. What a silly thought. We just are not all that good at organizing, or even following directions when it comes to our nonbelief. I posted on another thread that I am highly tolerant and enjoy the company of Pagans. Another atheist would cringe at this. We don't agree and we don't care.

NC

NewChapter

TEC: ...the belief that religion "should not simply be tolerated but should be countered, criticized and exposed by rational argumentwherever its influence arises."

I'll wear that badge, precisely because of the last four words.

I'll join that team too. Because while I would not try to prevent someone from attending their church, I most certainly will feel free to counter, criticize and expose---especially to push back influence in the public sector.

NC

Are religionists and atheists on the same team?

Share this