[Closed] I suppose it'll be the atheists next, then...

Unlikely. We don't have a plethora of historic twaddle telling us how evil homosexuality and other sins are.

The op is a bit vague. Will antiests join in the current trend in Gay bashing ? unlikly athiests tend to be nice people who respect others (obviously not Hitler, Pol Pot or Lenin) Will Athiests be next to be targeted by mad and evil religiously/culturaly inspired laws, quite possibly lots of mad religious types preach that athiests should be punished/killed.

Best to speak up for the victims of these laws and not allow their proponents to go unchallenged , even if one only posts on the internet .

Will Athiests be next to be targeted by mad and evil religiously/culturaly inspired laws, quite possibly lots of mad religious types preach that athiests should be punnished killed.

We recently [url= http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/jan/14/afghan-atheist-uk-asylum ]granted asylum to an atheist[/url] who was under threat of death in their own country.

Ah.. I hadn't read it that way. Well, probably yes then.

unlikly athiests tend to be nice people who respect others

How exactly do you arrive at that conclusion?

unlikly athiests tend to be nice people who respect others

Like Wopppit, you mean?

unlikly athiests tend to be nice people who respect others

How exactly do you arrive at that conclusion?

They do not have a higher being telling them that people who don't follow their orders are evil wrong doomed to burn in hell . With no higher autority you have to acknowledge that people are ends in themselves and should be respected as such.

I saw a programme about the anti-gays laws in africa is astounding that things like that are still happening in this century.

I don't believe in a god but don't really like to call myself an atheist... probably use agnostic if am pushed for an answer.

As out of all the people I know the religious ones, (Muslims, Hindus and Christians) I have had many interesting conversations about their beliefs but not one of them has even been offensive about my lack of faith or tried to convince me that their viewpoint is the only correct way.

On the other hand nearly all the people I know who openly describe themselves as atheist continuously try to shove their view down others throats an tell people they are wrong and seems massively ironic to me that not having a religion has practically become a religion in itself which the main belief seems to be to make fun of and attack the beliefs of others.

With no higher autority you have to acknowledge that people are ends in themselves and should be respected as such.

Do you ?

Why ?

ultimately self interest if you do not treat others with respect they will not do the same for you , if their is no large gang to ostrasise minority or vunerable or different groups then each individual tends to treat each other individual as they would wish to be treated.

Yeah but atheism is just forming another large gang...

The human race will never agree on everything so i think we should just focus on stopping the extremist views of any religion/cult/political party from harming us, the problem is not what religion or idealism the extremists base their view on it is the fact their views are extreme to the point of harming/killing people.

People who go to church and mosques and as a result hold moderate beliefs that sex is for after marriage and don't eat pork are not causing the problems.

the problem is not what religion or idealism the extremists base their view on it is the fact their views are extreme to the point of harming/killing people.

Not sure you can really separate the two. My wife works in Nigeria and has to conceal the fact she is an Atheist - even amongst normal 'moderate' people it is deeply frowned upon at best.

Religious belief is used as a justification for torturing and abandoning children who are declared witches. It's ****ed up.

wiggles i agree unless those who hold those personal views believe they have the right to impose them on the rest of us or that holding such views exempts them from the laws of the land . in this country see the churches campaign against marriage for all and the b and b owners who believe equailty legislation should not apply to their business .

I agree with what you are saying but it just feels like atheism is no longer just a passive view of I don't believe in god but getting close to an ideology that its followers seem try to force on others, which is exactly what they abhor organised religion for doing.

Grum-

The point is people like that aren't moderate though are they?
They may be in their country but overall they still hold extreme views.

Crankboy. Didn't wiggles just say that that his experience's are the exact opposite from what your describing.
In this country at least, thats for the most part how it is. Wringing your hands on STW is going to make F all difference to whats going on in Nigeria, and other places. In my day to day life I see more intolerance and bigotry from this new breed of atheists than I've ever experienced from those with a sincere religious belief.

Militant atheist-vegans are the real threat 😉

I am not sure that you can safely define people as a group the absense of a belief system.
Nor can o see a great deal of intolerance or bigotry directed by athiests at the religious do you have examples?

Athiests share an absence of belief which is hardly an ideology. How is it being forced on anyone?

I'm not saying that is what atheism is, as it should be an absence of belief which is essentially passive.

But there are a number of Facebook pages for example, that people post links to on my feed which are just pointing out contradictions and making fun of religions in the name of atheism.

Nor can o see a great deal of intolerance or bigotry directed by athiests at the religious do you have examples?

Every Woppit post EVA!

Whilst it's impossible to condone the content of the genuinely horrendous link in the OP, it's a whole world away from the gentle community of Christians in this country. Not that it's all scones and tea here either - my uncle is an Invernesian minister and he's been run out of more than one parish for his unremitting Presbyterian outlook.

I know a good number of church-goers and on the whole, they're a decent bunch. I don't agree with their beliefs but that doesn't make them wrong and me right, or visa-versa.

All the comments about militant atheists above is more a reflection on the less tolerant approach being shown by the religious as fewer people adhere to their arcane philosophy. The natural reaction when under threat is to fight back, if anything atheists feel more persecuted these days as the remaining religionists become more extreme, vocal and irrelevant. All in my humble, one man on his own, definitely nothing divine about it, personal opinion of course.

I am not sure that you can safely define people as a group the absense of a belief system.
Nor can o see a great deal of intolerance or bigotry directed by athiests at the religious do you have examples?

[i]Every[/i] single religious thread I've seen on here has featured intolerance in spades. So much so, in fact, that it's pretty rare to see religious people chipping in. Seriously, are you trolling?

God told me to be an atheist,I don't think he wanted me in his club 🙁

No I am not trolling and it is hardly intollerence to question someones beliefs. Intollerence is when you punnish people for holding different beliefs impose beliefs on others or deprive someone of rights because of belief.

it is hardly intollerence to question someones beliefs

It's not intolerant to question someone's beliefs, but it is also none of your ****ing business.

It's not intolerant to question someone's beliefs, but it is intolerant to rant about how awful and reprehensible they are and it's very rude to insult everyone who holds them constantly.

And it's monumnetally ignorant and also pretty ridiculous to compare the majority of UK Christians with child-abandoning witch-fearing Nigerians.

Molgrips I am very sorry if you think that is what I have done.

And it's monumnetally ignorant and also pretty ridiculous to compare the majority of UK Christians with child-abandoning witch-fearing Nigerians.

I wasn't. My point is that the religious in this country claiming they suffer intolerance and bigotry is pretty over the top. No-one is persecuting them for their beliefs - at worst they are being mocked, not really the end of the world.

I was pointing out that on a global level Christians and atheists in this country are basically very free to do/say what they like. Not true in an awful lot of places in the world sadly.

Wringing your hands on STW is going to make F all difference to whats going on in Nigeria, and other places.

If you'd like to make a difference in Nigeria - www.steppingstonesnigeria.org

Crankboy and grum, I was using the generic 'you'.

It's up to you if you think any of it applies to you personally 🙂

It's not intolerant to question someone's beliefs, but it is also none of your **** business.

That rather depends on the context of the discussion.

It's not intolerant to question someone's beliefs, but it is intolerant to rant about how awful and reprehensible they are and it's very rude to insult everyone who holds them constantly.

I'm not aware of anyone who "constantly" does this. Oh and most, although not all, criticise the belief rather than the person. But what can I say, some people are just dicks theist or not.

And it's monumnetally ignorant and also pretty ridiculous to compare the majority of UK Christians with child-abandoning witch-fearing Nigerians.

Hmmm but it's all part of the same belief system though isn't it so whilst they aren't the same thing they are part of the same spectrum.

Hmmm but it's all part of the same belief system though isn't it so whilst they aren't the same thing they are part of the same spectrum.

Lots of the churches out there were founded by UK missionaries and maintain links with UK churches. Not sure you can really disassociate them completely.

unlikly athiests tend to be nice people who respect others

Oh mercy!!! Given the bile spouted by woppit and his disciples at anyone who dares express an ounce of faith I'll take it that you are new.

Nor can o see a great deal of intolerance or bigotry directed by athiests at the religious do you have examples?

Examples? so a search on woppit's posts. You will find plenty examples.

That rather depends on the context of the discussion.

The context of the discussion is usually atheists slagging off believers, on here.

Number of threads started by atheists insulting or attacking the religious = loads

Number of threads started by religious people criticising atheists = 0

Number of POSTS in which religious people criticising the beliefs of athiests = 0

I'm not aware of anyone who "constantly" does this. Oh and most, although not all, criticise the belief rather than the person

There's (usually, with a few wonderful exceptions) very little intelligent debate on the subject on here. Most of the antagonists seem to be ridiculing a half-understood belief system, in such a way that a personal attack is implicit if it isn't explicit. Which it sometimes is.

It's almost as if the Christians have been taught to turn the other cheek. What a great lesson that is, I wonder where it came from?

Hmmm but it's all part of the same belief system though isn't it so whilst they aren't the same thing they are part of the same spectrum.

That's just ridiculous.

Number of POSTS in which religious people criticising the beliefs of athiests = 0

Well since in the context of a thesitic debate athiests have no beliefs it would be absurd to come up with any other number.

There does however seem to be an belief put forward by those of relgious disposition that they are somehow a put upon minority whose beliefs are somehow worthy of special treatment which is patently absurd on both counts. Just remember what theists used to do in this country and still do in others to those who challenge their beliefs. Oh and I am far from ignorant (although also far from an expert) on theistic matters.

I doubt that woppit or his disciples speaks for all atheist just as I am sure the vast majority of Christians in this country are appalled by the churches opposition to marriage rights for all and the " African" general attitude to homosexuality.

Well since in the context of a thesitic debate athiests have no beliefs it would be absurd to come up with any other number.

Wrong. Atheists BELEIVE there is no god. And besides you know full well what I meant, splitting semantic hairs doesn't change anything.

I've met some very nice religious people and some very nice atheists.

I've met some pretty awful religious people and some pretty awful atheists.

On STW I have seen a lot of over the top religion bashing, always siting the extremes, suicide bombers, Nigerian witch killing etc. This place treats religion the way the Daily Wail treats immigrants.

Wrong. Atheists BELEIVE there is no god

Well in the same way that I believe that Russells Teapot doesn't exist.

Now what was it you just wrote.

Most of the antagonists seem to be ridiculing a half-understood belief system, in such a way that a personal attack is implicit if it isn't explicit.

The words "hoist" and "petard" spring to my mind, but there being no athiest doctrine for you to reference, I'll thank you not to tell me what I do or do not believe.

Examples? so a search on woppit's posts. You will find plenty examples.

I keep asking for that. Go on, be the first...

In the meantime, here's a brave man: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-25858397

The words "hoist" and "petard" spring to my mind, but there being no athiest doctrine for you to reference, I'll thank you not to tell me what I do or do not believe.

You're side-stepping, but I didn't tell YOU personally what you believe.

I said that atheists BELIEVE that there is no god. Which is true, that's what defines atheism. There's no doctrine obvioulsy but that doens't mean it's not a belief.

its a belief in the same way that not collecting stamps is a hobby

I don't think the word "believe" is appropriate in that context.

I would say that, as an atheist, there being no evidence that a god of any kind exists, I am of the opinion that no god of any kind exists. However, I am quite ready to accept one, if evidence is presented that can be peer-reviewed and turned into a theory of the existence of said unlikely being.

Bit of a paragraph that - just filling in time whilst waiting for some evidence of my hate-filled former posts...

I am of the opinion that no god of any kind exists

What's the difference between that and:

'I believe that no god exists'?

You're getting belief and faith mixed up I think..?

Bit of a paragraph that - just filling in time whilst waiting for some evidence of my hate-filled former posts

The reason no-one is prepared to trawl through your post history is because we know it'll end up in some massive, protracted, and thorougly annoying and pointless personal slanging match driven by semantic hair-splitting. So I decline.

By the way, Junkyard, are you one of my "disciples"? I think I should be told...

No, I think the reason is that "Woppit posts hate against religion" is an urban myth generated in much the same way as "If we descended from monkeys, how come there's still monkeys?" is often mouthed by religious people not because they understand the theory of evolution, but because they've heard someone else of their persuasion say it and they think it's a killer argument...

What is the pay like and what do I have to do?

If i have to defend you from claims of being rude about believers then I think I may be your man as I can relentlessly argue anything to death and never give up 😉

You seem to have mellowed but you did do it - as did i
Its not so much what we say but how we said it

I'm not sure you post hate, I think you think all religious people are stupid and post as much.

You think I think, eh? Show me. Oh, wait - you're too busy...

Yep, I am. And I don't want to get involved with that.

Are you denying that you think religious people are stupid?

Wrong. Atheists BELEIVE there is no god.

Nonsense, you're just projecting onto others.

Everytime I read stuff like that, I breathe a sigh of relief that I live in England. Being told that your responsible for it raining by some dried up old coffin dodger hardly compares to some of the ****ing cruelty that goes on

Wrong. Atheists BELEIVE there is no god.
Nonsense, you're just projecting onto others.

Seriously?

Seriously?

Yep, I did not realise that you either had to believe or not believe?

Everything is a belief. Some things just have more proof than others.

The existence of God is unknowable - impossible to deny with any certainty. So whatever position you take is a belief. I don't believe the evidence is sufficient to convince me of the existence of God, so I believe that He does not exist. That makes me an atheist.

For reference:

be·lieve [bih-leev]
verb (used without object), be·lieved, be·liev·ing.
1.
to have confidence in the truth, the existence, or the reliability of something, although without absolute proof that one is right in doing so: Only if one believes in something can one act purposefully.
verb (used with object), be·lieved, be·liev·ing.
2.
to have confidence or faith in the truth of (a positive assertion, story, etc.); give credence to.
3.
to have confidence in the assertions of (a person).
4.
to have a conviction that (a person or thing) is, has been, or will be engaged in a given action or involved in a given situation: The fugitive is believed to be headed for the Mexican border.
5.
to suppose or assume; understand (usually followed by a noun clause): I believe that he has left town.

molgrips - the absence of belief is not the same as belief.

I really can't believe you're trying to argue this AGAIN.

You're getting belief mixed up with faith. I can't believe you're going on about this AGAIN.

I believe my wife took my kid to school and did not leave her at the park on her own.

Answer these two questions:

1) Do you believe there is a god?

2) Do you believe there is no god?

Fair enough, I tend not to use the term "atheist" as to me that defines me as not being religious.

If I have to fill out a form and there is a question about religion and none of the options are "None" then I leave it blank.

Fair enough, I tend not to use the term "atheist" as to me that defines me as not being religious.

Ok then you are agnostic or areligious. Atheism means a specific belief that there is no god.

Oh.. hehe.. the dictionary cops out:

a·the·ism [ey-thee-iz-uhm]
noun
1.
the doctrine or belief that there is no God.
2.
disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.

the absence of belief is not the same as belief.

That's what I was trying to express.

Ok then you are agnostic or areligious. Atheism means a specific belief that there is no god

FFS, it's "nothing".

No molgrips I'm not. 🙄

I think there is almost certainly no god, based on available evidence.

That is in no way equivalent to believing there is a god however many times you say it.

Wiki too:

Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.[1][2] In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities.

So we're both right.

I'm with molgrips on this one.

As we do not know everything about the Universe, we don't even know what we don't know, then it is impossible to state that there is no God with 100% certainly. Therefore it is a "belief".

1.
to have confidence in the truth, the existence, or the reliability of something, although without absolute proof that one is right in doing so:

Seems quite straightforward.

Answer these two questions:
1) Do you believe there is a god?
2) Do you believe there is no god?

1) I think it's very unlikely
2) I think it's very unlikely

If you really can see how that's different to religious belief then in afraid I can't help you - but it's a failure to grasp basic logic on your part.

I think there is almost certainly no god, based on available evidence.

That is in no way equivalent to believing there is a god however many times you say it.

I'm not sure what you mean there. I don't think you believe in God, I think you believe there is NO God.

1) I think it's very unlikely
2) I think it's very unlikely

Those aren't answering the questions. They are yes or no questions.

If you really can see how that's different to religious belief

FFS. It's different to RELIGIOUS belief, but it's not different to BELIEF.

You are conflating the two.

Those aren't answering the questions. They are yes or no questions.

FFS it's precisely answering the question. I'm sorry that doesn't fit with the spurious point you're trying to make. 🙄

The absence of belief is not belief. This is basic logic I'm afraid.

I suppose it'll be the atheists next, then...

Yup, then anyone else they dislike or can demonise.

For the record, I'm speaking as a Humanist who does not like humans.

FFS it's precisely answering the question. I'm sorry that doesn't fit with the spurious point you're trying to make.

No it's not. I asked if you believe there is no god. I'd answer yes. Why can't you answer it?

The absence of belief is not belief. This is basic logic I'm afraid.

So you don't know if there's a god, then?

No it's not. I asked if you believe there is no god. I'd answer yes. Why can't you answer it?

Ok, if you can't cope with a nuanced view, my answer would have to be no, I don't believe there is no god.

I think it's very unlikely there is a god, unless someone shows me some evidence that suggests otherwise. If you really can't see the distinction between that and 'believing there is no god' (using the word believe to make spurious parallels) then you're either a bit thick or being deliberately obtuse, or pretending that you can't see the distinction to try and win an argument.

So you don't know if there's a god, then?

No I don't, but I think it's extremely unlikely.

mol, ask yourself the difference between belief and thought. I don't believe anything. I tend to think things. Thoughts are usually based on something, and tend towards validity the more evidence underpins them. Though quantity is not the only signifier.

molgrips - Member

I said that atheists BELIEVE that there is no god. Which is true, that's what defines atheism.

Oh not this again. The reason people think "atheists believe there is no god" is because the language for this and the modern definitions are theist, and therefore approach everything from the point of view of faith and belief. As if there's a god shaped hole in the brain that needs to be filled with [i]something[/i]. Atheist actually means "without god".

Atheism isn't belief, it's the lack of belief. In the same way that an empty bucket isn't full of awater. The default state is absence- if you add something to it then you have a belief, if you don't then you still have nothing.

(if you believe the default state is belief, then of course you frame everything in terms of belief)

There are those who do fervently believe there is no god, evangelical disbelievers. Disbeliever's a good word, not the same as unbeliever, that catches the distinction. Atheist and antitheist would do the same.

The only thing that confuses it is that there's even a word for it. We don't need a word for an absence, just a "none of the above" tickbox. We are (mostly) cyclists. Other people aren't acyclists, who own notbikes to fill their bicycle shaped hole. They're just people who don't do that thing you do.

Everyone else needs a word for the thing they do.

Exactly NW - well put.

molgrips try logically rebutting NW's argument - you can't.

Anyway, to drag us back onto the topic of Christianity/religion/governtment/homsexuality -

I don’t believe that Christianity in and of itself can be used to justify homophobia. However, it is clear to me that ignorance of what the Bible actually says, and the context in which it says it, lead to all kinds of phobias and ‘isms’ that were never intended.

The four Gospels and the book of Acts make no mention of homosexuality; given that these five books are the only ones in the Bible that give a ‘first hand’ narrative of Jesus’ and the early church’s teaching and activities, wouldn’t they deal with homosexuality if it was an issue for God? It frustrates the heck out of me that Christians get uptight about an issue that isn’t even mentioned by Jesus, and yet completely fail to get uptight about things he bangs on and on about, such as respect, tolerance, equality, justice, poverty, suffering, death etc etc.

Most of the references to homosexuality in the rest of the Bible are set in the context of religious cults. What the Bible condemns is straight people going to pagan temples and having sex with prostitutes. We’re not even certain of some of the words used in the New Testament that are translated as ‘homosexual’. One of the words literally means ‘man-beds’, which could mean ‘a man who beds other men’, or it could equally mean ‘a promiscuous man’. The other main word literally means ‘soft’, it could refer to effeminate men, or it could refer to a person who is morally weak.

Plucking sentences out of their Biblical context in order to justify cultural and anthropological responses to homosexuality and to oppress people groups is an abuse of scripture.

That being said, we must realise that here in the UK we are at the forefront of Western liberal thinking, more forward looking than most of Europe and the USA even. Remember a few years ago when the French government debated homosexuality? There were riots on the streets. Over here a few people wrote letters or signed petitions, but among the general population changes to British law have been welcomed.

Remember also that homosexuality was only decriminalised in England & Wales in 1967, Scotland in 1980 and N. Ireland in 1982. The ban on homosexuality in the British Forces was only lifted in 2000. The aversion to homosexuality, much like racism, can be explained as an anthropological/evolutionary response. But that doesn’t mean that homophobia is acceptable; we are not animals controlled by our instincts, we have intellect and imagination and can use those to overcome our instinctive responses.

No one could go through a mainstream Bible college in this country today without questioning 19th/20th Century Christian attitudes to sexuality. But whilst the UK is charging headlong into post-modernity (perhaps even post-post-modernity!) much of the rest of the world, especially religious people, is stuck in modernity. In modernity, rules and regulations and oppression of dissent is good, and there can be one single moral ‘right’, with no tolerance or respect for other people’s views and experience. Whereas in post-modernity dissent and individualism is tolerated and respected, and ‘your opinion’ is just as valid and relevant as ‘my opinion’.

I guess what I’m trying to say is that many Christians fall into the trap of reading their cultural expectations into the Bible, rather than allowing it to speak into their culture. An individual’s sexuality really has nothing to do with anyone else, and certainly nothing to do with government. Sadly though it will be a long time before much of the world arrives at the point of tolerance and respect that the UK has. Perhaps I should stick all the above in an email to the Catholic Bishop of Nigeria, do you think he’d listen?

I've not read all of that; once Woppit and Molgrips starts throwing dictionary definitions and arguing about semantics I start to lose focus.

A lot of the discussion of atheism is based on the view of atheists as being Christopher Hitchins and Richard Dawkins. In fact, we've moved on from their, necessary, contributions and there is some really interesting discussion of this on the Humanists' website.

I tend to agree with Alom Shaha on a lot of points and his article [url= http://rationalist.org.uk/articles/4516/defining-yourself-by-what-you-dont-believe-seems-pointless ]Defining yourself by what you don't believe seems pointless[/url] is a good starting point, as are the other articles in the series. I like this quote:

I have joked in more than one of my public talks that I am far more likely to be friends with someone who believes in God than I am with someone who votes Tory. But the joke is grounded in a truth: there are more important things to consider than whether or not someone has religious faith when choosing not just friends but allies in the battles we face to make the world a better place.

I'm [i]married[/i] to someone who believes in God...

Thanks for explaining the lack of something not being the opposite, however of course I fully understand this.

But you miss my point, which is that I don't agree with this statement:

Atheism isn't belief, it's the lack of belief.

I am arguing that Atheism IS in fact the belief in the NON-existence of God. However having looked it up it seems that both of our definitions are acceptable.

So there's no argument.

I guess what I’m trying to say is that many Christians fall into the trap of reading their cultural expectations into the Bible, rather than allowing it to speak into their culture.

Absolutely. An excellent post kja78, thanks. You make a similar point to one that I've made in the past which is that people act as societies, and whatever their religion might be is just a veneer; it gets used as an excuse. Most religions are therefore not actually resposible for many of the bad things that people do.

So there's no argument.

This is STW and this is a religion there. There [i]is[/i] an argument.

I guess what I’m trying to say is that many Christians fall into the trap of reading their cultural expectations into the Bible, rather than allowing it to speak into their culture.

Hence why they allow divorcees to remarry.

...and wear garments made of 2 different materials.

[img] [/img]

But you miss my point, which is that I don't agree with this statement:

No we understand your point, it's just that it's wrong.