Total Posts:11|Showing Posts:1-11
Jump to topic:

Not Done In The Name Of Atheism

RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,371
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2016 6:25:25 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
This in my opinion is one of the worst arguments in defending atheism. And by defending atheism, I don't mean defending it as a right, but rather the suggestion that it's a moral alternative to religion.

The idea is that certain religions in history like Christianity committed atrocities, often in war, carrying a banner, whether literal or symbolic, saying "In The Name Of God". Not in the name of given religion, or in the name of given belief, but in the name of God. And of course the little catch-22 there is that atheism has no god, so couldn't fall into that theoretical category of acting out, being inspired, by God/god/a god.

However, whatever accusation is made against religion, there's it's atheistic counterpart. Yes, this includes communist atrocities, and yes....terrorism. One of the worst terrorist groups are atheists in Sri Lanka.
Athomos
Posts: 401
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2016 6:41:15 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/17/2016 6:25:25 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
This in my opinion is one of the worst arguments in defending atheism. And by defending atheism, I don't mean defending it as a right, but rather the suggestion that it's a moral alternative to religion.

The idea is that certain religions in history like Christianity committed atrocities, often in war, carrying a banner, whether literal or symbolic, saying "In The Name Of God". Not in the name of given religion, or in the name of given belief, but in the name of God. And of course the little catch-22 there is that atheism has no god, so couldn't fall into that theoretical category of acting out, being inspired, by God/god/a god.

However, whatever accusation is made against religion, there's it's atheistic counterpart. Yes, this includes communist atrocities, and yes....terrorism. One of the worst terrorist groups are atheists in Sri Lanka.

I see your point.

The thing, though, is that while, certainly, atrocious crimes can be and have ben committed in the name of atheism, the examples routinely given were not.

Hitler was not an atheist and he did not act with an atheistic agenda in mind. If anything, there are strong reasons to believe he was religious, Christian, in fact.

Stalin had countless murdered, including a significant portion of atheist first-wave Bolsheviks. And while it is true the Bolsheviks greatly limited the movements of the Orthodox Church, closing down temples, killing and sending priests to labour camps - mainly for conjuntural reasons, I might add - it is also true that: (source: https://en.wikipedia.org...)

"
After Nazi Germany's attack on the Soviet Union in 1941, Joseph Stalin revived the Russian Orthodox Church to intensify patriotic support for the war effort
"

and that

"
Between 1945 and 1959 the official organization of the church was greatly expanded, although individual members of the clergy were occasionally arrested and exiled. The number of open churches reached 25,000. By 1957 about 22,000 Russian Orthodox churches had become active
"

This conclusively shows that Stalin's end goal was not so much to annihilate religion per se, but to extinguish all sources of real or potential opposition to his autocratic tyrannical rule.
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,205
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2016 6:42:58 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/17/2016 6:25:25 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
This in my opinion is one of the worst arguments in defending atheism. And by defending atheism, I don't mean defending it as a right, but rather the suggestion that it's a moral alternative to religion.

The idea is that certain religions in history like Christianity committed atrocities, often in war, carrying a banner, whether literal or symbolic, saying "In The Name Of God". Not in the name of given religion, or in the name of given belief, but in the name of God. And of course the little catch-22 there is that atheism has no god, so couldn't fall into that theoretical category of acting out, being inspired, by God/god/a god.

However, whatever accusation is made against religion, there's it's atheistic counterpart. Yes, this includes communist atrocities, and yes....terrorism. One of the worst terrorist groups are atheists in Sri Lanka.

And yet it still stands by brute fact.

"In the name of God we...." has been done.

Can you name an organization that was just as specific?

"Because there is no god we...."
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2016 7:05:18 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/17/2016 6:25:25 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
This in my opinion is one of the worst arguments in defending atheism. And by defending atheism, I don't mean defending it as a right, but rather the suggestion that it's a moral alternative to religion.

The idea is that certain religions in history like Christianity committed atrocities, often in war, carrying a banner, whether literal or symbolic, saying "In The Name Of God". Not in the name of given religion, or in the name of given belief, but in the name of God. And of course the little catch-22 there is that atheism has no god, so couldn't fall into that theoretical category of acting out, being inspired, by God/god/a god.

However, whatever accusation is made against religion, there's it's atheistic counterpart. Yes, this includes communist atrocities, and yes....terrorism. One of the worst terrorist groups are atheists in Sri Lanka.

Atheism is ideological chaos.

1)No unity

2)Militantism in the name of nothing.

3)No specified moral code. In many cases no moral code.

4)No devine reason to love with real love, seekreal truth, give women rights, or do anything that makes you incomfortable in terms of helping others, doing more than the right thing, etc...
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2016 7:39:02 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/17/2016 6:25:25 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
This in my opinion is one of the worst arguments in defending atheism. And by defending atheism, I don't mean defending it as a right, but rather the suggestion that it's a moral alternative to religion.
Atheism does not offer a moral alternative to religion. It's a rejection of theology as having any kind of validity at all.

The idea is that certain religions in history like Christianity committed atrocities, often in war, carrying a banner, whether literal or symbolic, saying "In The Name Of God". Not in the name of given religion, or in the name of given belief, but in the name of God. And of course the little catch-22 there is that atheism has no god, so couldn't fall into that theoretical category of acting out, being inspired, by God/god/a god.
It also has no doctrine, no worship, no ideology, and no clergy.

However, whatever accusation is made against religion, there's it's atheistic counterpart.
I think you mean there are immoral, irreligious ideologies.

That's true, there are.

Yes, this includes communist atrocities, and yes....terrorism. One of the worst terrorist groups are atheists in Sri Lanka.
I imagine you're referring to the Marxist/Leninist socialism adopted by the now-defunct Tamil Eelam. [https://en.wikipedia.org...]

I agree that Tamil Eelam was a terrorist organisation, guilty of appalling atrocities, and I'm glad you mentioned them, since they were under-reported. Technically, I would suggest that their atrocities derived mainly from nationalist separatism, ethnic hatreds and a corrupt leadership rather than socialism itself, but still...

The real issue, Roderick, is that atheism isn't a body of moral thought. It's rejection of religious thought. All religion professes to be leading humanity to becoming better humans, so it's legitimate to judge how well it has been doing that. Yet atheism makes no such profession. It simply dismisses the validity of theistic belief -- mostly on epistemological grounds -- so for the most part, atheism must be assessed epistemologically.

On the other hand, there are nontheistic philosophies professing to produce better humans, which can be compared to theistic religions for moral outcomes on a like for like basis. Buddhism is one such example. We can find Buddhist atrocities if we look, but fewer than Abrahamic atrocities. So on a like for like comparison, one could easily argue that Buddhists make better humans than Christians.

You could also if you wished, make the case that Marxist/Leninist socialism is a moral frame claiming to make better humans. I certainly know people who treat it that way, though I myself consider it more of a socioeconomic frame. But regardless, it has a very poor success rate in human moral development, and you'd be right to point that out.

But Roderick, are you really saying that the only moral frame available to the irreligious is Marxist/Leninist socialism? Is that really as far as your reading has gone?

Are you aware of how few irreligious members in this forum consider themselves socialists? [You should ask. :) In the US, about 25% of religious nones are social conservatives, and I know social conservatism is represented among the irreligious here in DDO.]

Are you aware how irreligious people develop their morality? Again, if you aren't, you should ask rather than plumbing the thoughts of Christian commentators, or making it up.

It generally doesn't come from reading Das Kapital.
Fly
Posts: 2,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2016 9:07:06 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/17/2016 6:25:25 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
This in my opinion is one of the worst arguments in defending atheism. And by defending atheism, I don't mean defending it as a right, but rather the suggestion that it's a moral alternative to religion.

The idea is that certain religions in history like Christianity committed atrocities, often in war, carrying a banner, whether literal or symbolic, saying "In The Name Of God". Not in the name of given religion, or in the name of given belief, but in the name of God. And of course the little catch-22 there is that atheism has no god, so couldn't fall into that theoretical category of acting out, being inspired, by God/god/a god.

However, whatever accusation is made against religion, there's it's atheistic counterpart. Yes, this includes communist atrocities, and yes....terrorism. One of the worst terrorist groups are atheists in Sri Lanka.

I doubt that any atheist posits atheism as a moral alternative to religion. If you have examples showing otherwise, that would be welcome.

Secular humanism, however, IS an example of a moral alternative to religion. If you have examples of atrocities committed by secular humanists-- especially atrocities committed in order to further secular humanism-- that would also be welcome. Of course, with just about any idealistic moral code, its adherents often fall short at times...
"You don't have a right to be a jerk."
--Religion Forum's hypocrite extraordinaire serving up lulz
matt8800
Posts: 2,077
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2016 3:08:33 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/17/2016 6:25:25 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
This in my opinion is one of the worst arguments in defending atheism. And by defending atheism, I don't mean defending it as a right, but rather the suggestion that it's a moral alternative to religion.

The idea is that certain religions in history like Christianity committed atrocities, often in war, carrying a banner, whether literal or symbolic, saying "In The Name Of God". Not in the name of given religion, or in the name of given belief, but in the name of God. And of course the little catch-22 there is that atheism has no god, so couldn't fall into that theoretical category of acting out, being inspired, by God/god/a god.

However, whatever accusation is made against religion, there's it's atheistic counterpart. Yes, this includes communist atrocities, and yes....terrorism. One of the worst terrorist groups are atheists in Sri Lanka.

I agree that atrocities done in the name of religion doesn't prove religious dogma wrong. It just proves that religion provides no benefit to societal morality and in some cases, may be detrimental.

Critical thinking proves religion wrong.
bulproof
Posts: 25,203
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2016 3:14:55 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/17/2016 6:25:25 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
This in my opinion is one of the worst arguments in defending atheism. And by defending atheism, I don't mean defending it as a right, but rather the suggestion that it's a moral alternative to religion.

The idea is that certain religions in history like Christianity committed atrocities, often in war, carrying a banner, whether literal or symbolic, saying "In The Name Of God". Not in the name of given religion, or in the name of given belief, but in the name of God. And of course the little catch-22 there is that atheism has no god, so couldn't fall into that theoretical category of acting out, being inspired, by God/god/a god.

However, whatever accusation is made against religion, there's it's atheistic counterpart. Yes, this includes communist atrocities, and yes....terrorism. One of the worst terrorist groups are atheists in Sri Lanka.
It's estimated that 100billion people have walked this planet and according to your good book your god has killed absolutely everyone of them, you are in no position to point the finger.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
Redfordnutt
Posts: 222
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2016 3:24:05 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/17/2016 6:42:58 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 5/17/2016 6:25:25 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
This in my opinion is one of the worst arguments in defending atheism. And by defending atheism, I don't mean defending it as a right, but rather the suggestion that it's a moral alternative to religion.

The idea is that certain religions in history like Christianity committed atrocities, often in war, carrying a banner, whether literal or symbolic, saying "In The Name Of God". Not in the name of given religion, or in the name of given belief, but in the name of God. And of course the little catch-22 there is that atheism has no god, so couldn't fall into that theoretical category of acting out, being inspired, by God/god/a god.

However, whatever accusation is made against religion, there's it's atheistic counterpart. Yes, this includes communist atrocities, and yes....terrorism. One of the worst terrorist groups are atheists in Sri Lanka.

And yet it still stands by brute fact.

"In the name of God we...." has been done.

Can you name an organization that was just as specific?

"Because there is no god we...."

Great response, could not have put it better myself.
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,205
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2016 3:35:25 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/18/2016 3:24:05 PM, Redfordnutt wrote:
At 5/17/2016 6:42:58 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 5/17/2016 6:25:25 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
This in my opinion is one of the worst arguments in defending atheism. And by defending atheism, I don't mean defending it as a right, but rather the suggestion that it's a moral alternative to religion.

The idea is that certain religions in history like Christianity committed atrocities, often in war, carrying a banner, whether literal or symbolic, saying "In The Name Of God". Not in the name of given religion, or in the name of given belief, but in the name of God. And of course the little catch-22 there is that atheism has no god, so couldn't fall into that theoretical category of acting out, being inspired, by God/god/a god.

However, whatever accusation is made against religion, there's it's atheistic counterpart. Yes, this includes communist atrocities, and yes....terrorism. One of the worst terrorist groups are atheists in Sri Lanka.

And yet it still stands by brute fact.

"In the name of God we...." has been done.

Can you name an organization that was just as specific?

"Because there is no god we...."

Great response, could not have put it better myself.

Thank ya, sir.
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
Jovian
Posts: 1,719
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2016 6:57:35 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/17/2016 6:42:58 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 5/17/2016 6:25:25 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
This in my opinion is one of the worst arguments in defending atheism. And by defending atheism, I don't mean defending it as a right, but rather the suggestion that it's a moral alternative to religion.

The idea is that certain religions in history like Christianity committed atrocities, often in war, carrying a banner, whether literal or symbolic, saying "In The Name Of God". Not in the name of given religion, or in the name of given belief, but in the name of God. And of course the little catch-22 there is that atheism has no god, so couldn't fall into that theoretical category of acting out, being inspired, by God/god/a god.

However, whatever accusation is made against religion, there's it's atheistic counterpart. Yes, this includes communist atrocities, and yes....terrorism. One of the worst terrorist groups are atheists in Sri Lanka.

And yet it still stands by brute fact.

"In the name of God we...." has been done.

Can you name an organization that was just as specific?

"Because there is no god we...."

Good one. I wonder when brontoraptor and company will find eyewitnesses saying Stalin's men said "In the name of a godless universe" before they tortured and killed.