Total Posts:39|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Antitheism against the religion not people?

Leaning
Posts: 2,554
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/15/2018 4:44:27 AM
Posted: 12 months ago
I haven't really thought about this too much in depth really, But isn't it a bit hard to separate the people from their religion? Same way it
s hard to separate people from a country or a system of morality?

If a country declares war on another country, Perhaps it is trying to only go about destroying that system of government and organization. But the people are rather connected to that government, And it would seem rare that the people of a country are unaffected by a war.

It wouldn't matter much if someone jeered about a favorite sports team of mine. It's not as though I'm a participating member of that team. But if I were, It might matter more to me. Something along the lines of if I was a golfer and somebody was trying to exterminate golf as a sport. I would be connected to golf in a fashion. Seems kind of hard to disconnect an anti-theist attack on religion from the people who practice it. Or something along those lines, Still haven't thought it out much.
omar2345
Posts: 145
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/15/2018 12:38:55 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
"I haven't really thought about this too much in depth really, But isn't it a bit hard to separate the people from their religion?
To this I would say the problem is not that it is difficult to separate and individual from a Religion is that Religion is about the collective not the individual. It doesn't matter who you are or what you do since the primary importance to a religious person is following the Religion.

"Same way it is hard to separate people from a country or a system of morality? "
To this I would say that is more clear in some countries like the United States. If A Republican takes office then Democrats would be unhappy vice versa. If you mean Republican supporters are difficult to separate from their leader. To this I think you would be right. Generally people do not look for answers instead they like confirmation bias. They rather listen to Fox news all day then see CNN or see the mistakes Trump has.

"If a country declares war on another country, Perhaps it is trying to only go about destroying that system of government and organization. But the people are rather connected to that government, And it would seem rare that the people of a country are unaffected by a war. "
I guess you can apply this to the United States with their war in the Middle East. To that I say since freedom of speech is a thing in the United States people can protest against war and they do. The people who are connected to the government who can see no wrong would not disagree with war. The people who are not connected to the government would be against war. Most people don't even try to think for themselves. So they go with what their leaders are saying.

"It wouldn't matter much if someone jeered about a favorite sports team of mine. It's not as though I'm a participating member of that team. But if I were, It might matter more to me. Something along the lines of if I was a golfer and somebody was trying to exterminate golf as a sport. I would be connected to golf in a fashion. "
Supporters of sports feel a connection to their teams which is why they show emotion towards there team. It is mainly for fun until they start fighting in stadiums.

To the topic antitheism against religion not people?
To that I say yes because the religion is the problem and no since the people are advocating for it. The Religion cannot speak for itself.

"Seems kind of hard to disconnect an anti-theist attack on religion from the people who practice it. Or something along those lines, Still haven't thought it out much. "
Yes I can say there motives can seem the same but the difference is generally one side is being intellectually dishonest and the other can say some offensive words that hurt Theist's feelings.

Weren't too specific so I assumed what you were trying to say.
Leaning
Posts: 2,554
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2018 3:02:43 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
Oh I'm not quite sure either. While it may be true that anti theists are attacking religion and not the people practicing religion. What are people but the summation of their values? Their concepts? Their morality and history? Kind of vague.

Native Americans let's say for example. For the purpose of it being a bit of a thought experiment, Let's ignore the religious aspect and the genocidal aspect. A person might claim they are only attacking their improper way of life, That the modern science, Medicine, And the lack of truth in their folktales.
Still, Even if one tried to look at it through tinted glasses and obscure what was. It seems difficult to separate an attack on someone's values from the person themself.

In a fashion.

Not trying to preach this. Because of course, It doesn't quite seem right. If I put the milk in first for my cereal and someone tells me I'm doing it wrong, That it is better to put in the cereal first. They are hardly attacking me by arguing against some fashion by which I live my life.

Then again, That's not really an example having to do with morality. And it's not as though anyone forced me to make my cereal a certain way.

For children. They are forced to behave in some manner, Whether it is religion, Atheism, Or social contract. Eh, Rambling and losing train of thought.
Leaning
Posts: 2,554
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2018 3:09:19 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
Hmm, Maybe that's the trick. If an antitheist made laws that physically forced the cooperation of theists, That would be an attack on the person.

Conversation, Even at an extreme of connecting a person to their values, Seems hard to call it an attack on a person.
omar2345
Posts: 145
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2018 3:06:32 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
@Leaning
"What are people but the summation of their values? Their concepts? Their morality and history? Kind of vague. "
It is still part of the person so in a sense you are still attacking the person. My collective point should help understand that most Religious people believe that their Religion is more important than them so it might seem that the anti-theist is attacking the person instead it would be attacking the Religion since you can"t really separate between a Christian follower and the Religion Christianity. I think I made it too general since there are so many sects but I would say Catholics and fundamentals are Christians and the rest are not since every single other sect would have insufficient grounds for their beliefs from the Bible and it can be seen that they are picking and choosing to choose their agenda instead of what it actually says in the Bible.

"It seems difficult to separate an attack on someone's values from the person themself. "
Yes, Because it is a part of them not separate. Every human as values.

"If I put the milk in first for my cereal and someone tells me I'm doing it wrong, That it is better to put in the cereal first. They are hardly attacking me by arguing against some fashion by which I live my life. "
The difference is you do not hold the cereal at some kind of pedestal. Religious people do with their God. You attack their God you are attacking the core values of a fundamental Christian since they have revolved their life around worshipping their God. Basically it depends on how much someone hold something of value. Cereal not that much but God would be the highest for a theist.

"Then again, That's not really an example having to do with morality. And it's not as though anyone forced me to make my cereal a certain way. "
It can be if someone derives morality from cereal but I haven"t found someone who has. Morality is something that determines right or wrong behaviour. This can be pushed to saying you are eating your cereal immorally. Most likely it would be a theist since they would say eat with your right hand as if it makes a difference in the physical world. Non-physically remains to be seen and since there is no evidence that the devil is the left hand it is not immoral to use your left hand.

"For children. They are forced to behave in some manner, Whether it is religion, Atheism, Or social contract. Eh, Rambling and losing train of thought. "
To this I say there is no other choice. Children are still developing in their life and do not have the capacity to make an informed decision which is why they rely on their parents. Some develop it earlier than others but still at some point in their life they depend on their parents. This does not mean we allow bad parenting only that there is no other way. Forcing good or forcing bad are the only two options. Depends on how you define good and bad.

"If an antitheist made laws that physically forced the cooperation of theists, That would be an attack on the person. "
By that logic you are attacking the person if you make murder illegal. Religion is a set of ideas that has a God. A murderer has a set of ideas maybe it is trying to feed himself but he still committed a murder. By making murder illegal you are stopping the person feeding himself which results in an attack on the person. This analogy only works if murder is legal and is currently in the process of being changed so it is a hypothetical.

"Even at an extreme of connecting a person to their values, Seems hard to call it an attack on a person. "
When you dedicate your entire life to God then there is no difference.
Harikrish
Posts: 28,366
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2018 4:33:56 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
omar2345 wrote:
@Leaning
"What are people but the summation of their values? Their concepts? Their morality and history? Kind of vague. "
It is still part of the person so in a sense you are still attacking the person. My collective point should help understand that most Religious people believe that their Religion is more important than them so it might seem that the anti-theist is attacking the person instead it would be attacking the Religion since you can"t really separate between a Christian follower and the Religion Christianity. I think I made it too general since there are so many sects but I would say Catholics and fundamentals are Christians and the rest are not since every single other sect would have insufficient grounds for their beliefs from the Bible and it can be seen that they are picking and choosing to choose their agenda instead of what it actually says in the Bible.

"It seems difficult to separate an attack on someone's values from the person themself. "
Yes, Because it is a part of them not separate. Every human as values.

"If I put the milk in first for my cereal and someone tells me I'm doing it wrong, That it is better to put in the cereal first. They are hardly attacking me by arguing against some fashion by which I live my life. "
The difference is you do not hold the cereal at some kind of pedestal. Religious people do with their God. You attack their God you are attacking the core values of a fundamental Christian since they have revolved their life around worshipping their God. Basically it depends on how much someone hold something of value. Cereal not that much but God would be the highest for a theist.

"Then again, That's not really an example having to do with morality. And it's not as though anyone forced me to make my cereal a certain way. "
It can be if someone derives morality from cereal but I haven"t found someone who has. Morality is something that determines right or wrong behaviour. This can be pushed to saying you are eating your cereal immorally. Most likely it would be a theist since they would say eat with your right hand as if it makes a difference in the physical world. Non-physically remains to be seen and since there is no evidence that the devil is the left hand it is not immoral to use your left hand.

"For children. They are forced to behave in some manner, Whether it is religion, Atheism, Or social contract. Eh, Rambling and losing train of thought. "
To this I say there is no other choice. Children are still developing in their life and do not have the capacity to make an informed decision which is why they rely on their parents. Some develop it earlier than others but still at some point in their life they depend on their parents. This does not mean we allow bad parenting only that there is no other way. Forcing good or forcing bad are the only two options. Depends on how you define good and bad.

"If an antitheist made laws that physically forced the cooperation of theists, That would be an attack on the person. "
By that logic you are attacking the person if you make murder illegal. Religion is a set of ideas that has a God. A murderer has a set of ideas maybe it is trying to feed himself but he still committed a murder. By making murder illegal you are stopping the person feeding himself which results in an attack on the person. This analogy only works if murder is legal and is currently in the process of being changed so it is a hypothetical.

"Even at an extreme of connecting a person to their values, Seems hard to call it an attack on a person. "
When you dedicate your entire life to God then there is no difference.

This is why it is so hard to separate God from his genocidal acts (giant flood, Plagues, Slaughter of innocent lives etc. )
omar2345
Posts: 145
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2018 4:37:33 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
Harikrish said:
"This is why it is so hard to separate God from his genocidal acts (giant flood, Plagues, Slaughter of innocent lives etc. )"

If you equate everything to God you should also equate the bad aswell. Saying God is all good and is the reason for anything existing is a contradiction since God also created bad.
Harikrish
Posts: 28,366
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2018 4:46:50 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
omar2345 wrote:
Harikrish said:
"This is why it is so hard to separate God from his genocidal acts (giant flood, Plagues, Slaughter of innocent lives etc. )"

If you equate everything to God you should also equate the bad aswell. Saying God is all good and is the reason for anything existing is a contradiction since God also created bad.

Learn to read you ignorant mutt.
This is why it is so hard to separate God from his genocidal acts (giant flood, Plagues, Slaughter of innocent lives etc. )
omar2345
Posts: 145
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2018 4:49:37 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
Harikrish said:
"Learn to read you ignorant mutt.
This is why it is so hard to separate God from his genocidal acts (giant flood, Plagues, Slaughter of innocent lives etc. )"

Only applies to people who equate everything to God. That would be all theists if they are not being intellectually dishonest.

What is with the bad conduct?
Thoht
Posts: 10
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2018 4:59:15 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
Howdy.

Anti-theism is the idea that religions do more harm than good. It isn't an attack on the individuals themselves. We don't blame any single person for being conned into religions. This is largely because you get conned by your parents, And all the important people in your life. Religious parents shelter their children from being exposed to contrary ideas. The people they surround their children with are those who accept those ideas and reinforce them in their children.

Have you seen the documentary Jesus Camp?

Children are prone to suggestion. They create invisible friends all the time. If I FEEL like I have a friend watching over me, Then I have fooled myself, Correct? If you attribute that invisible friend with the term "God" and everyone seems to recognize him, It becomes a more permanent fixture in your life.

It is entirely possible, If not probable, To feel love and guidance where none exist in this manner.

So for anti-theists, We don't deny that you feel God exists. We don't deny personal experiences you say you've had. That being said, We can't factor your personal experiences and feelings into whether or not God exists. We can look from outside and see the evils that people commit in the names of their Gods. Not necessarily speaking about any religion in specific here, But we have human sacrifice, Wars, Rape, Genocide, Witch burnings, So many evils that are nearly all religious in nature.

So I'll leave this with a challenge from the late Hitchens:

Can you name one evil that a atheist would do that a theist would not?

You cannot.

Can you name one evil that a theist would do that an atheist would not?

You've thought of one already. And another, And another.

Can you name one good a theist can do that an atheist cannot?

You can think of none.

It seems like there would be fewer evils and more goods that a theist should do because of belief in religion compared to atheists. From all we can see, It is the other way around.

It is for this reason that religions do more harm than good in the world. And you don't likely disagree with this. To you, Is an atheist better by comparison than someone who follows a religion that isn't your own? I can think of several commandments that an atheist doesn't break that nearly everyone else does. Do you think all religions are good for society?

I submit that even if you are a theist, You should recognize the evils in other religions and be anti-theist towards them. At that point, My goal would be to show you that your religion is no different.

I don't blame victims for the crimes forced upon them. Particularly children. Child soldiers in Africa wouldn't get blame from me. Suicide bomber children would not get blame from me. The parents were indoctrinated themselves. Those who commit the crime are long dead. The religion, Then, Is the remainder of the crime that has been left unpunished, That should be eradicated. I don't blame the victims for the crime.
Harikrish
Posts: 28,366
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2018 4:59:23 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
omar2345 wrote:
Harikrish said:
"Learn to read you ignorant mutt.
This is why it is so hard to separate God from his genocidal acts (giant flood, Plagues, Slaughter of innocent lives etc. )"

Only applies to people who equate everything to God. That would be all theists if they are not being intellectually dishonest.

What is with the bad conduct?

You were suggesting all good and bad acts should be equated to God. Read your own reply you ignorant infidel.

You said:" If you equate everything to God you should also equate the bad aswell. Saying God is all good and is the reason for anything existing is a contradiction since God also created bad.
omar2345
Posts: 145
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2018 5:02:11 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
Harikrish said:
"You were suggesting all good and bad acts should be equated to God. Read your own reply you ignorant infidel. "

God created man. Man is sinful. Therefore God created sin. Simple.
Harikrish
Posts: 28,366
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2018 5:27:24 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
omar2345 wrote:
Harikrish said:
"You were suggesting all good and bad acts should be equated to God. Read your own reply you ignorant infidel. "

God created man. Man is sinful. Therefore God created sin. Simple.

Again you are proving you are an ignorant infidel.

My post says we cannot separate God from his genocidal acts (giant flood, Plagues, Slaughter of innocent lives etc. )"

Harikrish said:
"This is why it is so hard to separate God from his genocidal acts (giant flood, Plagues, Slaughter of innocent lives etc. )"

You argued: If you equate everything to God you should also equate the bad aswell. Saying God is all good and is the reason for anything existing is a contradiction since God also created bad.

My advice to you: Learn to read you ignorant mutt. My post already points to his genocidal acts (giant flood, Plagues, Slaughter of innocent lives etc. )

Harikrish wrote: This is why it is so hard to separate God from his genocidal acts (giant flood, Plagues, Slaughter of innocent lives etc. )
omar2345
Posts: 145
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2018 5:38:17 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
"Again you are proving you are an ignorant infidel. "
God must really love you.

"This is why it is so hard to separate God from his genocidal acts (giant flood, Plagues, Slaughter of innocent lives etc. )"
God created man. Man is sinful. Therefore God created sin. Simple
That argument still stands.
If I wanted to go further with this. God is not all good if God created in perfection. God is all-knowing so God knew humanity would be sinful and still created them. God also to blame for the genocidal acts since as far as I know God created the heavens and the Earth. Natural disasters were created by God. Therefore God is to blame for them.

Do you agree with me?
I still do not get your point.
Try and not say it like a preacher.
Harikrish
Posts: 28,366
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2018 5:45:16 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
omar2345 wrote:
"Again you are proving you are an ignorant infidel. "
God must really love you.

"This is why it is so hard to separate God from his genocidal acts (giant flood, Plagues, Slaughter of innocent lives etc. )"
God created man. Man is sinful. Therefore God created sin. Simple
That argument still stands.
If I wanted to go further with this. God is not all good if God created in perfection. God is all-knowing so God knew humanity would be sinful and still created them. God also to blame for the genocidal acts since as far as I know God created the heavens and the Earth. Natural disasters were created by God. Therefore God is to blame for them.

Do you agree with me?
I still do not get your point.
Try and not say it like a preacher.

This is why you are an ignorant infidel.

Read and try to understand what was written. "This is why it is so hard to separate God from his genocidal acts (giant flood, Plagues, Slaughter of innocent lives etc. )" Points to the genocidal acts of God which are (giant flood, Plagues, Slaughter of innocent lives etc. )
omar2345
Posts: 145
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2018 5:48:40 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
Harikrish said:

"Read and try to understand what was written. "This is why it is so hard to separate God from his genocidal acts (giant flood, Plagues, Slaughter of innocent lives etc. )" Points to the genocidal acts of God which are (giant flood, Plagues, Slaughter of innocent lives etc. )"

his as in God?

Do you agree that God commits genocidal acts?

By the way I am not going to understand you until you clear that up.
Harikrish
Posts: 28,366
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2018 5:52:24 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
omar2345 wrote:
Harikrish said:

"Read and try to understand what was written. "This is why it is so hard to separate God from his genocidal acts (giant flood, Plagues, Slaughter of innocent lives etc. )" Points to the genocidal acts of God which are (giant flood, Plagues, Slaughter of innocent lives etc. )"

his as in God?

Do you agree that God commits genocidal acts?

By the way I am not going to understand you until you clear that up.

This why you are an ignorant infidel.

Read and try to understand what was written. "This is why it is so hard to separate God from his genocidal acts (giant flood, Plagues, Slaughter of innocent lives etc. )" Points to the genocidal acts of God which are (giant flood, Plagues, Slaughter of innocent lives etc. )
omar2345
Posts: 145
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2018 5:56:35 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
@Harikrish said:

"This why you are an ignorant infidel.

Read and try to understand what was written. "This is why it is so hard to separate God from his genocidal acts (giant flood, Plagues, Slaughter of innocent lives etc. )" Points to the genocidal acts of God which are (giant flood, Plagues, Slaughter of innocent lives etc. )"

Yes I would blame genocidal acts on God.
Harikrish
Posts: 28,366
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2018 6:03:54 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
omar2345 wrote:
@Harikrish said:

"This why you are an ignorant infidel.

Read and try to understand what was written. "This is why it is so hard to separate God from his genocidal acts (giant flood, Plagues, Slaughter of innocent lives etc. )" Points to the genocidal acts of God which are (giant flood, Plagues, Slaughter of innocent lives etc. )"

Yes I would blame genocidal acts on God.

You were given more chances to get it right than a Muslim infidel about to get his head separated from his body. Now you understand why they drive out ignorant Muslim infidels from their homeland.
omar2345
Posts: 145
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2018 6:06:54 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
@Harikrish said:

"You were given more chances to get it right than a Muslim infidel about to get his head separated from his body. Now you understand why they drive out ignorant Muslim infidels from their homeland. "

Who said I was?

Assumptions without proof therefore it is a belief.
Just like your belief in God.
Leaning
Posts: 2,554
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2018 7:25:04 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
"If an antitheist made laws that physically forced the cooperation of theists, That would be an attack on the person. "
By that logic you are attacking the person if you make murder illegal. Religion is a set of ideas that has a God. A murderer has a set of ideas maybe it is trying to feed himself but he still committed a murder. By making murder illegal you are stopping the person feeding himself which results in an attack on the person. This analogy only works if murder is legal and is currently in the process of being changed so it is a hypothetical.

Fair enough for the most part. Though I don't quite understand what you mean here.
omar2345
Posts: 145
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2018 7:39:00 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
@Leaning
"If an antitheist made laws that physically forced the cooperation of theists, That would be an attack on the person. "
By that logic you are attacking the person if you make murder illegal. Religion is a set of ideas that has a God. A murderer has a set of ideas maybe it is trying to feed himself but he still committed a murder. By making murder illegal you are stopping the person feeding himself which results in an attack on the person. This analogy only works if murder is legal and is currently in the process of being changed so it is a hypothetical. "

Fair enough for the most part. Though I don't quite understand what you mean here.

I completely forgot what I was trying to say here. Did know when I wrote it but can't clarify now.

Below is me trying to understand what I said in a different way.

I guess what I was trying to say an anti theist is forcing theists. Theists are going to follow a Religion. Religion has a set of ideas with God as the person stating them. A murderer can have a set of ideas and say he is God. By anti theist telling the murderer you cannot go along with your set of morals you are attacking the person.

I think that was what I was trying to say.
Leaning
Posts: 2,554
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2018 7:52:04 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
Hmm, Interesting thought. I know of quite a few Americans here who get rather personally offended at laws that they are forced to follow. Whether it is tax, Property, Behavior, And so on. Often going on about something about the government pretty much stealing from them or forcing their behavior in unnatural ways. Complaints against the social contract and so on. My eldest brother is like that. Kind of like a Libertarian, Though I'm not sure he identifies that way.
omar2345
Posts: 145
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2018 8:06:32 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
To that I say. We require laws to live in a civilised society. Anarchy does not work. It might work in the short term but not in the long term.
Harikrish
Posts: 28,366
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2018 8:37:00 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
omar2345 wrote:
To that I say. We require laws to live in a civilised society. Anarchy does not work. It might work in the short term but not in the long term.

Will Muslims respect a travel ban imposed on them by western countries?
omar2345
Posts: 145
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2018 8:38:04 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
@Harikrish said
"Will Muslims respect a travel ban imposed on them by western countries? "

How am I supposed to know?

Would trolls accept a bad troll?
Thoht
Posts: 10
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2018 10:07:56 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
Did you see my post earlier Learning?

Less interested in these two bickering and more interested on your take on what I said.
Harikrish
Posts: 28,366
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2018 10:08:03 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
omar2345 wrote:
@Harikrish said
"Will Muslims respect a travel ban imposed on them by western countries? "

How am I supposed to know?

Would trolls accept a bad troll?
Don't you read the news or watch the news on TV?
Leaning
Posts: 2,554
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2018 10:31:47 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
Hmm, I think I go rather off the topic, But I'll leave it as is. I don't mean to include the numerous Google this parts as trying to tell you to learn something new. The Google this parts are for my own benefit. Though admittedly I 'think I might be researching to my biases rather than to unbiased research. Still, Hard not to have bias in life.

I have not seen the documentary Jesus Camp. Probably will Google it at some point in the immediate future out of curiosity I suppose.

I read some article in the past, Ah, On Wikipedia I think. Talking about the connections of science and theism in the past. I'm not trying to say that people made theism a truth because of science. But rather that it sparks the thought in me that people have done more than feel a deity/religion/afterlife.

They have reasoned it, Looked for proofs, Logic in it. Some people. Though, I'd still have to look into the history of science and religion myself. I don't recall that I have ever bothered to. Perhaps it would be more akin to Numerology, Which I also have pretty much no experience with, But cannot take a person seriously if they make some type of argument about say, 9/11 and talk about how they use the numbers to prove their absurd conspiracy theory.
Google wikipedia. Org/wiki/Criticism_of_atheism#Atheism_and_science

Name one evil that a atheist would do that a theist would not?

I would say the murder or oppression of someone due to the fact that the atheist possesses the belief that theism is immoral/wrong. I think there's some parts in the French Revolution, The Chinese Cultural Revolution, Also this German guy I have not bothered to research in depth (Not Hitler). Though I admit I would suspect the below German guy to be mentally unhinged/insane than worry about him being an atheist.

Google German "Anti-Theist" Given Life Sentence for Murdering His Christian Roommate

Sure theists in history have murdered/oppressed people in the name of their religion in the past due to the belief that people not possessing their religion were morally wrong. But they did not murder/oppress with the train of thought that theism is itself wrong. I 'think that may make it something only an atheist would do. It's more crazy people that worry me maybe atheist or theist. Or even just blue and orange morality people who are crazy in a different fashion.

Google Tv Tropes BlueAndOrangeMorality

Name one evil that a theist would do that an atheist would not? Stone someone for saying Jehovah?
YouTube Life of Brian
Well. . . . That's not especially a modern day American theist I think. . . Then again the previous atheist example wasn't really- nah, China and German count maybe.

You'll have to give me some time to think on that one. . . Unsure why I find it difficult. Eh, Persecute some people in some fashion because their religion tells them that it's wrong. Feels vague though, Though maybe atheist and theist are vague terms themselves. Westboro Baptist Church actions good example maybe. Though they are hardly an example of what I consider exemplary Christians.

Name one good a theist can do that an atheist cannot?

Charity in the name of religion, Love, And a deity.
The golden rule as assigned by a deity.
Yes, Atheists can also do these actions, But they cannot do them by the same motivation of religion. Still can do love I suppose or do it by government and culture telling them to.

Problem offhand. . . . Maybe. . . . . Sounds more like a$$holes, Rather than religion. Organization/Country/Morality is a function of higher civilization and will exist. The difference of religion and it's horror is power more than what it is maybe. And atheists can access power as easy as theists.

To you, Is an atheist better by comparison than someone who follows a religion that isn't your own?

Eh, Neutral on that I think for the moment.

I can think of several commandments that an atheist doesn't break that nearly everyone else does.

Eh, It's not as though Christians are told they are perfect angels I think. Told everyone sins or something. Why else would there be so many theists in prison? Mainly because most people in America are theist? (Complete guess). If a theist or an atheist is told that their spouse is cheating on them, Usually I'd expect both to be angry. Different time period/location theist might stone their wife, Different time period/location atheist might kill the guy in a duel or rage. Either way modern America makes it illegal to kill your spouse for cheating.

Do you think all religions are good for society?

No, Probably not.

I submit that even if you are a theist, You should recognize the evils in other religions and be anti-theist towards them. At that point, My goal would be to show you that your religion is no different.

Yes. I have thought about that. I'm an atheist though, And many other things. I suppose I maybe should change my profile a bit.

Child soldier/IED kid still get's shot by the soldier regardless of blame. Same as in war, It is not as though we personally know each and every enemy soldier and have some murderous gripe against them.
"Comrade, I did not want to kill you. . . . But you were only an idea to me before, An abstraction that lived in my mind and called forth its appropriate response. . . . I thought of your hand-grenades, Of your bayonet, Of your rifle; now I see your wife and your face and our fellowship. Forgive me, Comrade. We always see it too late. Why do they never tell us that you are poor devils like us, That your mothers are just as anxious as ours, And that we have the same fear of death, And the same dying and the same agony"Forgive me, Comrade; how could you be my enemy? " All Quiet on the Western Front

I seem to vaguely recall a line The Brothers Karamazov, In Fyodor and Ivan discuss religion. Fyodor mentions something along the lines of killing whoever first came up with religion I think. Still religion would appear again I am sure.

Positive atheist or theism, Problem is truth rather than function.
Negative atheism or theism problem is function rather than truth.
Though it would be nice to find the truth and function in either case.

Hmm, You consider religion smoking comparison?

Reason it's harder to find reasons for atheists maybe. Is the name reduces them down to a non person. In a fashion Christianity does this as well. But basic beliefs of a Christian might be tentatively guessed at, But an atheist?

perhaps to me anti theism feels like too many stairs at once
Google viruscomix. Com/page519

I also find it hard to take antitheism seriously when/if they engage in ridicule, Strawman argument, Ignore positives and truths of religion, Falsify documentation, Engage in bullying propaganda of their belief.

Timothy Dwight speech on atheism
Google wnd. Com/2016/01/how-atheism-led-to-horrors-of-french-revolution
Google blog/astagnaro/atheist-myth-no-one-has-ever-killed-in-the-name-of-atheism

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.