[Closed] Why are you atheists so angry?

... and now I realise I'm repeating myself in response to repeated arguments posted many times before and have just spotted a giant snickers bar.

Exit stage left, pursued by a (imaginary) bear...

Bit worried about you there - those imaginary bears can be dangerous. Bop them on the nose, I reckon. Or is that sharks?

Fortunately for us, several of the best universities tend to disagree.

I look forward to its enlightening output. I am sure we will make great strides when we understand if unbaptised children are going to Hell or just Limbo 🙄
Maybe you can enlighten us on any output of note or contributions to critical thinking etc?

You could make a case for saying it's the primary catalyst in the development of theological thought - certainly has been since the Enlightenment.

So how do you explain the treatment of say ....women, Gays and in some religeons non believers?

I'd say that pretty much all the abrahamic religeons are still well behind the times and are being dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century in a vain bid to survive as a viable inclusion on modern life.

Come on ...tell me where I'm wrong! 😀

Elf, just have a read of the Bible.

Lots of nastiness, smiting and eternal damnation for those who don't believe.
I don't want to spoil the story, but it doesn't end well for the hero.
Shame, as he comes across as basically a nice bloke. Bit preachy though.

As to calling people idiots, I'm not trawling back through countless posts just to find an example.

My point is that mockery is an essential part of human nature and by extension the way we interact with each other.

Is it reasonable to express an opinion completely contrary to the sum of human intellectual knowledge and progress and NOT expect a bit of ribbing?

Elf, as a gay bloke I have had a lifetime of religious nutters (including my own family) telling me I was going to boil in hell etc. A quick google about ex-gay ministries and all that sort of stuff will give you loads of examples.

I never said that all religious doctrine was for the good and of benefit to all people everywhere. Quite the opposite in fact. I myself rejected Islam as it was not right for me. But I still feel that certain tenets of faith are important to me, in terms of my own personal rationalisation of my existence on this planet and within Human Society.

HTH - to be fair he does call himself an idiot lots, but there are also other victims...

Especially Binners, it seems! 😆

Is there a bit where I've called Rusty Spanner an idiot then?

As to calling people idiots, I'm not trawling back through countless posts just to find an example.

Ah, so without proof of the existence of such an incident, can we therefore safely claim that it never happened? 😀 😉

[i]So, how would you propose that such moral codes were propagated and spread without the framework of organised religion?[/i]

Are you suggesting that religion predates any kind of morality?

...or is it perhaps more likely that religion reflected and codified the existing moral framework of the societies in which it was produced?

Think about while you blow up your water wings, and search for more religious building pictures with which to muddy those rising waters....

OK Let's just see how the three main beliefs of the Abrahamic religions stack up.

You have a "soul" an eternal part of you that never dies.

When your body dies this soul continues on and either spends eternity in paradise or spends eternity in hell and is subject to no end of pointy hurty things and nashing of the teeth etc.

The deciding factor in this fairly important allocation of next life streaming is based upon how "well" you live your life and that in turn is based upon a number of "rules" laid down in several books which may or may not be accurate and have certainly got a lot of conflicting statements about the "rules".

Oh also there is absolutely no physical evidence of any kind for any of the above.

So where do I sign up, sounds like a great deal. frankly if you believe any of the above I think it's likely you need professional help and quite strong medication.

Think about while you blow up your water wings, and search for more religious building pictures with which to muddy those rising waters....

No, [i]you[/i] think about how such moral codes wooduv bin disseminated without the framework of religion, in the context of Human history.

I'm actually quite a good swimmer. I can happily splash about in the deep end and everything. 😀

Elf, stop prevaricating and answer the question 🙂

Anyone would think that you were trying to divert peoples attention away from the real issues ..... 😀

how would you propose that such moral codes were propagated and spread without the framework of organised religion?

Two thousand years ago, you may have had a point. It's hardly required [i]now [/i]though, is it?

people are invited to argue in defence of a mangled cliche of orthodox Christian belief, a process that would first require considerable investment of time explaining what we do believe, then continuing with the debate. Given the hostile environment in which that would be taking place, it's not really surprising that most folks who could, don't bother.

You're saying you have the means to put us right, to avoid being misrepresented and to settle all the debates. But you can't because we're all 'hostile'?

Ignoring the irony in that claim for a moment, don't you think perhaps that there would be a lot less hostility if you put forward your sensible beliefs instead? If we've all misunderstood, I'd love to be corrected.

My understanding of it or how I'm interpreting it is... that God, any God, IS personal… so unless you find your own one you can’t have proof ???

Years ago, when I was still getting my head around faith, I came up with the idea that "god" is exactly that, it's like part of the psyche. So when people "pray," they're steeling themselves up and providing self-support in the same way that an athlete (say) might give himself a pep talk before a race or whatever. There's no actual 'god' involved, but in talking to god you're actually giving yourself a talking to.

Are you just saying that it is a balance of probabilities rather than a "faith"?

Pretty much, aye.

If so, fair enough. But the point stands: if you accept that, on the balance of probabilities, humans are not likely to be the most advanced lifeform in the universe then can you still truly call yourself atheist?

Can I not? Assuming an advanced life form exists, does that make them gods? Did they make the Earth in six days, including creating light three days before creating a light source, and everything?

No, [i]you[/i] answer the question.

Is there a bit where I've called Rusty Spanner an idiot then?

Come on, Scientific Method and all that.

😉

I win again. This is too easy...

Two thousand years ago, you may have had a point. It's hardly required now though, is it?

We woon't be here [i]now[/i], it it was not for [i]then[/i].

> So, how would you propose that such moral codes were propagated and spread without the framework of organised religion?

Are you suggesting that religion predates any kind of morality

When you say to a child [i]"Don't do that!"[/i] and they say [i]"Why?"[/i] then a simple answer is [i]"Because the bogeyman will get you."[/i]

That is the founding basis of pretty much all religious teaching that I have encountered and seems to be the framework on which humanities "moral code" was established and passed on. So in that respect I... I... [i]*gnashes teeth*[/i] I agree with Elf.

It's for the best, Graham. The sooner everyone else does it, the better a place the World will be. 😐

We woon't be here now, it it was not for then.

And?

Why we (arguably) needed religion != why we currently need it. And "but we've always done that" is the worst reason to do anything. By that logic we'd still be burning witches.

You can't simple discount the role Religion has had to play in Human History, simply cos you don't share the views of others.

i'm not, i'm just suggesting that you have your cause and effects slightly schewed. you're implying that without religion no rules would exist, i'm suggesting that religion is an example of rules, not the dictator of rules.

Why we (arguably) needed religion != why we currently need it. And "but we've always done that" is the worst reason to do anything.

That's not actually what I'm saying though, is it?

Rusty Spanner's going to turn up next with some silliness but no answer to my question asking him to prove his allegation against me, in an attempt to divert attention away from the fact that his allegation may very well be unfounded and unfair....

This is like the Manchester v London music debate all over again.... 😀

He'll stop twitching in a minute and start a thread about bus shelters.

i think it's interesting that all tags have been deleted except for the one about bingo wings and the one about angry birds and the tagageddon one. two out of three of those left are pretty offensive, i'd say. says something about the moderator charged with removing tags 😮

Can I not?

It was a philosophical question, not a statement.

Assuming an advanced life form exists, does that make them gods? Did they make the Earth in six days, including creating light three days before creating a light source, and everything?

Don't confuse the Christian bible story with theism in general.

I don't believe in the "Gods" of any of the world's religions, past or present, that I have encountered.

But the ET question means I accept there are "supreme beings" out there (or at least "more supreme than us") whose form and power I have no real notion of.

They may even choose to "seed" worlds.

Does that make them gods?

And if I accept they might exist am I not an agnostic rather than an atheist?

You're saying you have the means to put us right, to avoid being misrepresented and to settle all the debates. But you can't because we're all 'hostile'?

Well that's your redaction of what I said, but you've kind of made my case for me by taking a moderate observation and ridiculing it by adding a fair amount of hyperbole that was never intended. You then deride the 'irony' implied by your re-interpretation of my statement, and then wonder why folks like myself prefer not to get involved in discussions like this.

I'm going to decline the offer to articulate what I think - I've spent 20 odd years as a Christian, 5 of them at theological college, trying to gradually piece together an understanding of a world I find unimaginably complex. As I said earlier, I still regard my worldview, and myself, as a "work in progress" both of them are exceedingly frail in places, and I'm not prepared to parade either of them on here to have the crap kicked out of them for someone else's amusement.

I'm 5 pages late, but it makes no sense to blame the pope. If as you say there are 135 million Catholics in Africa, the pope is talking to only about 13% of the population and given that many of those don't really do exactly as he says, we might reasonably be down to less that 10% of the population. So a real minority of Africans are influenced by the pope yet you still claim it's the fault of the Catholic Church?

If you want to support that claim, you would need to show that countries with high proportions of Catholics have a higher incidence of HIV / AIDS. Feel free to do so.

The ESP reference was because people who claim to be open-minded about evidence usually aren't.

That's not actually what I'm saying though, is it?

What are you getting at, then?

I never said that all religious doctrine was for the good and of benefit to all people everywhere. Quite the opposite in fact. I myself rejected Islam as it was not right for me. But I still feel that certain tenets of faith are important to me, in terms of my own personal rationalisation of my existence on this planet and within Human Society.

I myself rejected Islam as it was not right for me.

Apostasy!!!

Don't confuse the Christian bible story with theism in general.

I'm not being wholly serious, you know.

They may even choose to "seed" worlds.

Does that make them gods?

You're going to have to elaborate on that, I'm not sure what you mean exactly by 'seeding'. If you mean populating other worlds, that's not the work of gods, it's the work of immigrants.

Don't confuse the Christian bible story with theism in general.

This is the common mistake many atheists make in discussions of this kind; to reduce things down to Christian doctrine and teachings. Which 'agnostics' such as myself don't follow anyway.

And yet again, a discussion on atheists, ie those who believe there is no God, shifts instead to a debate about organised religion, mostly Christianity.

How does that happen then? Do atheists not think there are more schools of thought than provided by just the mainstream religions?

[img] [/img]

CharlieMungus - Member

I myself rejected Islam as it was not right for me.

Apostasy!!!

A pasty?

You're right you know, it's about time for a bite.

Given there are 100-200bn stars in our galaxy, and 100-200bn galaxies in the Universe it's a fair assumption is it not that our little planet isnt the only one on which life has evolved? Thats got nothing to do with the existense or otherwise of god but it does remind us what a tiny focus on little old planet Earth religion has. That reflects the fact that these books were written when mankind struggled to understand the world and the cosmos not to say the sheer unpleasantness of Iron Age life and death.

deciding factor in this fairly important allocation of next life streaming is based upon how "well" you live your life

I'm fairly certain that isn't what Christianity proposes. Other religions may differ. Share prices may go up as well as down etc.

http://www-958.ibm.com/software/data/cognos/manyeyes/visualizations/catholicism-birth-rate-and-hiv-aid

And another thread to prove that the STW Massive can argue about absolutely anything.

I can't quite find a word to describe the majority of you but for the most part, you all need to take a long look at yourselves.

FFS...

ditch_jockey - Member
Theology, on the other had, induces a dogmatic belief that we have knowledge where in fact we have ignorance, and by doing so generates a kind of impertinent insolence towards the universe."
Good illustration of a man who demonstrates he knows sod all about theology.

Not quite sure that I would agree with you there DJ!! Actually what Russell was doing here, in introducing his analysis of Western Philosophy, was to point out the challenge that we all seem to face in our every day lives and which philosophy (in his opinion) was best placed to tackle. He described philosophy as:

Like theology, it consists of speculations on matters as to which definite knowledge has, so far, been unascertainable; but like science, it appeals to human reason rather than to authority....All definite knowledge...belongs to science; all dogma as to what surpasses definite knowledge belongs to theology. But between, theology and science is a no man's land....

...which seems to sum up the position that most people find themselves in. At least IMHO!!

you all need to take a long look at yourselves.

[img] [/img]

teasel - Member
And another thread to prove that the STW Massive can argue about absolutely anything.

I can't quite find a word to describe the majority of you but for the most part, you all need to take a long look at yourselves.

FFS...

Listen to the Milk Monitor. Since when did you get to decide what gets discussed? You certainly dont have a right to be offended. So get lost.

You're going to have to elaborate on that, I'm not sure what you mean exactly by 'seeding'. If you mean populating other worlds, that's not the work of gods, it's the work of immigrants.

I mean "seeding" in the sense that we're not currently entirely clear about the whole origin of life on Earth, primordial soup, creation of DNA thing.

So if life on Earth was kickstarted by an alien then are they "a God"?

I'm not being wholly serious, you know.

Me neither. I'm just putting off work 😀

Do atheists not think there are more schools of thought than provided by just the mainstream religions?

I do like the point, made by someone on here I think, that Christians (and other religions) actively reject thousands of [i]other[/i] Gods and hundreds of thousands of years of religion and spirituality.

Atheists just reject one more than that 😀

INBATS

An alternative perspective/question may be to ask why (some!) religious people are able to find peace. Is there something in their faith/experience/teaching that allows them to avoid the things that cause anger in others?

Not suggesting that peace is exclusive to religion, but perhaps agnostics and atheists could focus on what leads to this peace. Cotton wool or something more profound and real?

If a Dog could run backwards does then there would be a goD.

</End of pointless forum thread>

Tooundred! 😀

Good solid building this, uses proven contruction techniques and maffs and stuff to produce a stable, long-lasting dependable structure.

[img] [/img]

I'm 5 pages late, but it makes no sense to blame the pope. If as you say there are 135 million Catholics in Africa, the pope is talking to only about 13% of the population and given that many of those don't really do exactly as he says, we might reasonably be down to less that 10% of the population. So a real minority of Africans are influenced by the pope yet you still claim it's the fault of the Catholic Church?

You're ignoring the pressure the Catholic church can put on western governments, and the way that alters their funding of educational charities. It's not just the pope telling "his" people how to act, which to my mind is perfectly reasonable.

"Why are aetheists so angry?"
Most anger stems from frustration.
Probably, in this case, because science has been unable to prove there is no God.

And another thread to prove that the STW Massive can argue about absolutely anything.

Yeah! Imagine arguing about religion and the existence of god.

That's stupid. Let's discuss something that matters.. like X Factor. 🙄

Who mentioned being offended, McBoo(****ing hoo); that's just something [b]you believe[/b] you read in my post. I don't care what you argue about, I was pointing out that this is [b]proof[/b] that you lot can argue about stuff that simply can't be proved either way.

And the Milk Monitor bit - you blew that out of the water when you told me to get lost. Do you know what the word[i] irony[/i] means...

And another thread to prove that the STW Massive can argue about absolutely anything.

I can't quite find a word to describe the majority of you but for the most part, you all need to take a long look at yourselves.

FFS...

Some of quite like arguing. I find the long argument threads to be one of the more entertaining parts of STW.

And where is TJ by the way???

Probably, in this case, because science has been unable to prove there is no God.

I'd be very surprised if anyone was frustrated about that!

Well that's your redaction of what I said,

Yes, it is.

but you've kind of made my case for me by taking a moderate observation and ridiculing it by adding a fair amount of hyperbole that was never intended.

I've just read back, and I'm at a loss as to how I'm 'ridiculing' anything. Either my comment was accurate or I've misunderstood what you're trying to say; if the latter, I'm open to clarification.

It sounds like you're saying we've all got the wrong end of the stick, but are then refusing to put the record straight because we're all meanies, or something?

The point I was trying to make was that it might be better for both parties if you did try to dismiss these erroneous clichés; we'd have a better understanding and you wouldn't be misrepresented.

You then deride the 'irony' implied by your re-interpretation of my statement, and then wonder why folks like myself prefer not to get involved in discussions like this.

You don't see an irony in speaking out about being grouped into a stereotype, then stereotyping everyone else in the next sentence?

I'm going to decline the offer to articulate what I think

I thought you might.

- I've spent 20 odd years as a Christian, 5 of them at theological college, trying to gradually piece together an understanding of a world I find unimaginably complex. As I said earlier, I still regard my worldview, and myself, as a "work in progress" both of them are exceedingly frail in places, and I'm not prepared to parade either of them on here to have the crap kicked out of them for someone else's amusement.

... which is fair enough. In your position, I'd probably want to do the same rather than throw myself to the lions on here.

I just find it odd that you'd want to go "you've got us all wrong" in the first place and then when (genuinely, despite my irreverent style of writing) asked to help clarify where we're going wrong, go "I'm not telling you."

And where is TJ by the way???

Organising the hen weekend in Glasgow or buying some warm clothing for manning the picket line?

Milk Monitor? 😯

We've got people in detention for not doing their homework, me getting a gold star and being good at swimming, and now a [i]Milk Monitor[/i]?

Good to see that the importance of good nutrition is not something that's bin ignored.

I'm surprised [i]she[/i] hazzunt bin mentioned, as after all it's probbly all her fault....

No, you think about how such moral codes wooduv bin disseminated without the framework of religion

So at best Religion is like a centuries old version of BT? We all know how crap they are.

Yeah, Graham, I appear on all the X-Sphincter discussion threads don't I.

perhaps agnostics and atheists could focus on what leads to this peace. Cotton wool or something more profound and real?

When you are little and your mum gives you a cuddle it can make everything seem alright.

To me the "peace" I see from religion is people in the belief that they are in a similar embrace with their God.

If that makes them feel better then I'm happy for them, but it is no more "profound and real" to me than thinking Superman will protect me. I can't take comfort from it as they do, because I don't believe in it.

So if life on Earth was kickstarted by an alien then are they "a God"?

No, they're scientists.

If the universe was kickstarted by an alien, on the other hand...

Probably, in this case, because science has been unable to prove there is no God

I think science has much more important issues to address than superstition.

You're ignoring the pressure the Catholic church can put on western governments, and the way that alters their funding of educational charities. It's not just the pope telling "his" people how to act, which to my mind is perfectly reasonable.

http://www-958.ibm.com/software/data/cognos/manyeyes/visualizations/birth-rate-catholicism-and-hiv-aid

pypdjl,
Just an observation.
A belief system worshipping scientific proof, and yet without proof of its key position: "there are no deities" appears to be naturally frustrating.

I have not read all 6 pages -

The influence of the Catholic church goes far beyonds its members and there is no doubt at all that Catholic churchs position on condoms is responsible for many deaths.

😆

If that makes them feel better then I'm happy for them, but it is no more "profound and real" to me than thinking Superman will protect me. I can't take comfort from it as they do, because I don't believe in it.

Fair enough Graham - but what would you do in the hypothetical (I hope) situation of facing a potentially fatal accident (eg ship sinking) or fatal disease affecting you/someone you know. Would you be tempted to say a little prayer?

If the the ignorant masses were influenced by a man in a dress, you might reasonably blame the man in the dress.

But if a government listens to the man in a dress, they are culpable.

(not commenting on the validity or otherwise of the "it's the pope's fault" example)

If the universe was kickstarted by an alien, on the other hand...

Big Bang == Alien Large Hadron Collider ? 😀

I'm not angry, but I get quite annoyed that it is assumed I am a christian (as I am white and english) - its quite offensive really as it assumes I dont have an open mind.

Religion makes no sense to me. Dont understand why anyone would want to be a part of any religion. It stymies the mind. I cant see a reason for it existing apart from to control people, and ultimately as a way of making money.

And I dont believe in a 'god' because there is no evidence for it. But it is not up to me to prove a deity does not exist - you can't prove a negative. There is however, multitudes of information that makes an attempt to explain the universe and our place in it that does not need to include a deity.

I don't have 'believe' in anything, but I do 'trust' the opinions of scientists who follow peer-reviewed scientifical analysis of a wide range of things, but to have 'beliefs' seems to be crazy to me.

What happens if something changes - you should be able to change your mind - your a free person and no priest or other religious leader should tell you otherwise.

For me, belief systems stemmed from a less educated time, when we didnt understand how the earth worked and why there were bright points of light in the sky. In lieu of an explanation humans clutched for something to explain these things. But as we learnt abvout the world, we came to understand the processes for more and more of the way the world works.

This universe is bigger than this earth and the whims of man. There is highly likely to be intelligent life somewhere in the universe because it is just so vast. Would they have a 'god'? Some of them probably would for the same reasons as humans do.

Or maybe they are advanced to the stage were they actually know the answer, and maybe they are all religious or have abandoned the idea of a deity altogether. We dont know, but it would be interesting to find out, but we won't find out with our eyes clamped shut by 'belief'.

[img] [/img]

Mcboo,
If atheists had much more important issues, would so many be posting on this thread?

As an atheist, I am angry that according to fact and good quality evidence, there appears to be no afterlife. I also have a guilty conscience as there is no one who can absolve me of my lifetime of sin.

TandemJeremy - Member
I have not read all 6 pages -

The influence of the Catholic church goes far beyonds its members and there is no doubt at all that Catholic churchs position on condoms is responsible for many deaths

That in itself is a form of population control?

[img] [/img]

Fair enough Graham - but what would you do in the hypothetical (I hope) situation of facing a potentially fatal accident (eg ship sinking) or fatal disease affecting you/someone you know. Would you be tempted to say a little prayer?

Having been in situations like that I can happily report the answer is no. But even if I had, what would that prove? That humans are fearful and look for a comfort blanket in times of stress? That they often hedge their bets, after all what is there to lose by saying a prayer "just in case"?

Seems to prove the point that religion is often driven by fear and ignorance.

If atheists had much more important issues, would so many be posting on this thread?

The lack of worshipping gives us a bit more free time than the theists.

[img] [/img]

If atheists had much more important issues, would so many be posting on this thread?

of course religious people have more issues than atheists, that should go without saying. 🙄

Cougar 🙂

[img] ?w=290[/img]

Fair enough Graham - but what would you do in the hypothetical (I hope) situation of facing a potentially fatal accident (eg ship sinking) or fatal disease affecting you/someone you know. Would you be tempted to say a little prayer?

I don't think so.

When relatives have died there was a part of me that really wished I could believe they were off to a better place, would be reunited with Grandad and still be looking out for me, etc - but I knew I would just be lying to myself.

It is false comfort (to me) - like that mother's hug: the world really isn't alright when she cuddles you, even if it feels like it is just for a moment. Tomorrow will still be Monday and Mr Blakely the gym teacher is still going to touch you funny in the showers after PE.

I think science has much more important issues to address than superstition.

What, like sending crap gadgets to Mars, just to see them break down before they've even got there?

[img] [/img]

Fifty million quid. For bugger all. 🙄

there is no doubt at all that Catholic churchs position on condoms is responsible for many deaths

I'll wager it's more than offset by its responsibility for the number of births.

(Which, of course, is the point of the policy; to create as many ready-made believers as possible.)

That's a a very positive outlook Graham. Sounds a right laugh that. Suddenly religion sounds like a hoot!

[img] [/img]

Show me some evidence. Which governments do you mean? Surely it's the Government to blame. If the the ignorant masses were influenced by a man in a dress, you might reasonably blame the man in the dress. But if a government listens to the man in a dress, they are culpable. If the Pope told them to jump off a bridge would they?

There was a lot of religious lobbying when PEPFAR was being enacted:
http://www.carnegiecouncil.org/resources/journal/21_3/essay/001.html

The act specifically included a get-out clause for religious objection to condoms. I freely admit I have no idea if the pope himself was personally involved in the lobbying.

I'll find out for you Fred

[img] [/img]

I can't imagine the Pope has a lot of use for condoms these days.

there is no doubt at all that Catholic churchs position on condoms is responsible for many deaths
I'll wager it's more than offset by its responsibility for the number of births.

(Which, of course, is the point of the policy; to create as many ready-made believers as possible.)

If the catholic population keeps increasing, think of the amount of cats they'll need to feed their addiction.