Misconceptions about the athiest., page 2

A generalisation needs to be based on some sort of fact. Generally.. the morals of athiests isn't up for discussion.. only condemnation.. and they may usually argue with logic so the subject doesn't come up. The stereo type of an atheist is someone who takes scientific fact above all.. his/her morals are not usually mentioned.. it is an assumption to decide they haven't got any.

Well, it is based in fact. I am not going debate the obvious with you. Not only have I recounted a fact to you. I have also explained the psychology.

And no, an atheist is not someone who takes scientific fact above all - that's a scientist. An atheist is someone who does not believe in God. At least know what you're talking about.

It was off the top of my head.
I'll use another one.. and athiest would not wait for judgement day and Jesus coming back so he can fix the human race. An athiest would try to prevent it self distructing. [not that atheists make up much of the population.. I guess that means we're doomed

Well, this goes to show you don't actually think about what you say. You just say it. Which is ignotant.

Yet, it's much more damaging to say say one stupid thing, admit it, and then say another stupid thing. The opposite of an atheist is a theist. A theist can subscribe to many modalities of religion.

You're single minded approach, which is now in infamy after two threads, of seeing religion as synonymous with Christianity is not only wrong but shows how childish your thoughts are. In Sikhism for instance, the adharants are expected to contribute to society through work and charity.

It does not seem like you know but some of the greatest scientists and inventors were not atheists. You are making it sound as if Atheists are the pragmatists, benefactors and saviours of this world. How stupid is that. You need to get yourself an education.

You never refuted it.. and you triggered the same argument last time. And as I recall.. we ended up talking about athiests and morals last time as well.. so why did you reply if I've already discussed this with you and knew the same stuff would get repeated?

I've devoted several paragraphs to refuting your prejudiced and ignorant argument that religion is the cause of all that is wrong and evil in our society.

Were the crusades and witch trials wrong? Was slavery wrong? Was the pope announcing "it is a scientific fact that condoms don't prevent the aids virus" wrong? [that is genocide to me]. The bible and the like have always been biased toward those with power.. Christianity is an organisation run by biased human being.. for it to be misinterprited so badly it MUST have flaws so looking to it for moral guidance won't work unless the person is actually moral themselves.

Did you actually read what I said. I don't remember ever questioning if any of the aforementioned were right or wrong. What I illustrated to you that subjective judgement is biased.

I try not to hide from it.. if I did that I wouldn't grow as a person.

I don't see you growing as a person. It's been a few months apart that we had this same debate and all your points were refuted. You are still regurgitating the same. We saw in your past post alone, how you just made a blanket statement that religious people would wait for divine intervention to revive the unconscious, then admitted it, and rationalized "It was of the top of my head"

In other words you illustrate pefectly what I said. That we commit mistakes, and then rationalize them later, to make them seem less wrong. You have not addressed that part of your personality that made that statement. This is why your judgement is biased and inherently inaccurate.

No matter how much we think we know. We know nothing.

This is why a higher intelligence or god that knows us to the core of our being, threatens us.

1. I have answered this already. Hate begets hate. Love begets love.. every action has a reaction. Why is this so difficult to understand?
2.You can be a moral person without threat of accountability. Some people just are naturally 'good'.

1: I have no idea what you just said.
2: We are naturally "good" it is beliefs, expectations and attitudes that form our personality that make us less good.

And you consider the bible a failsafe against immorality?

No, I don't. However, a devout Christian will have greater sense of morals than an Atheist, simply because they believe they will be held accountable. However, the truth is, the bible does this by fear and that can be counter-productive.

I guess you missed where I said some of it is instinctive.

Do you consider murdering your parents, moral? In a certain culture, murdering your parents is considered "moral" and "divine" because it is believed the they are sent to heaven and it the childrens duty to send them there.

No.. and really there would probably be alot less athiests and unbelievers if there weren't priests getting done for child molestation. Were they believers? Were they moral?

How many priests molest childs? I can assure you much less than atheists do.

A machine with self awareness. Big difference.

An ant could be self-aware, but what is their purpose of existence, to work or be treaded upon? There is no difference in the grande scheme of things. As I said you are nothing more but a fluctuation in space-time. It makes no difference whether you existed or not.

If it makes no difference whether you existed or not, then again; you get the freedom to do whatever you want. Who cares about morals and who cares about the value of life? We are still talking about morals here.

Look.. I really can't be bothered discussion every factor that contributes to wayward youths.. but I do know it's not due to athiesm. It is the enviroments in which they are raised.. children need to be nurtured not given a gameboy to shut them up. Violent ones probably come from a violent home.. their believing in god isn't going to stop them copping a thrashing every night or prevent them going to beat someone up because that thrashing made them angry.

Well, Einstein(please, it's sarcasm) the environment is influenced by the beliefs, expectations and attitudes of the society. And violence, is not because of a violent home, but a violence that is prevalent in our society. To illustrate further, the generations of today, do not even respect their own parents and viz versa is true too. Again, we are absolving all accountability as we have done by absolving the universe, the world, or even our immediate community. This is because our society today is too self-absorbed and too ego-centric.

Again, how quickly their worlds would evaporate before their eyes, if definite proof of a god was produced. This is what atheism does to our society. If there was a genuine belief in a positive god, it would not be so bad.

[edit on 5-1-2005 by Indigo_Child]