It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


religion vs atheists

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Oct, 11 2005 @ 03:39 PM
Gah, where do I begin?

Religion is just one type of mental support.
It gives us comfort to believe in.
It gives us hope something better is coming.
It attracts everyone it can.
It gives a sense of cummunity.

With all those effects stacked up, regardless of whether is it true or not, no one cares, they will beleive, blindly, and subconciously many of them, that it is true because they cannot deal with the effects of it not being true.

However, ever since the 1600's, there have been people who began disregarding God because it didnt make sense. Thus were those who found a new mental support, knowledge. You could even claim it existed in Greek culture too, because their religion was never as encompassing as Christinanity.

Then we get the socialist movement, which rejects religion as a tool of the upper class and seeks to give the people their community and mental support in believing in a better life after the revolution, rather than after death.

Finally, we get the technological revolution, which I would say has given the most people a new mental support to trust in. Science and technology seems to have all the answers and thus comforts us. "Technology works wonders."

As time goes on, the world becomes more diffused and more exposed to all types of cultures, vastly increasing the variance in everything. This includes variance in mental supports.

People for the most part are now encouraged to understand concepts and better themselves through it. This points out many faults in all the religions basic concepts.

The abandoment of older social customs speeds this. Religion is not taught as strictly as it use to, it has huge variety, and pressure from socialist and technological areas means less people will pick religion as their mental support.

Im sure I did not organize my thoughts as well as I could of and Yes I know you will all pick out certain points and disagree with them, but as a whole, I believe that is the reason why, and if you disagree with it on the whole, please describe why, and be objective about it, not subjective. Its the only way to look at it without bias.

posted on Oct, 12 2005 @ 12:09 AM

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
Strange that you say the world is becoming more secular when it thinks it is becoming more spiritual. Fact of the matter is, we are engineered to be spiritual, to seek out God. there are very few people out there who are truly "athiestic", which is the toughest religion to follow as it goes aginst how we as humans were programmed to behave.

Does this mean buddhists are not spiritual?
I don't feel like I'm going against my own nature and it hasn't compromised my spirituality.. in fact it's only enhanced it. You are right.. spirituality is fairly innate in many people but that does not mean seeking 'god' is.
BTW. Atheism itself is not a religion.. though there are some religions [more belief systems] that happen to be atheist.

If you mean that it seems there is a falling away from the God of Abraham, why is this surprising? All one has to do is read how it will be to understand as we are now living in those days.

No matter how subtle.. It gets pretty annoying when people who are ignorant of what goes through the mind of an atheist allign them with their own concept of 'evil'/immoral. Religions continue to prove themselves to be the most immoral thing ever to have existed, most holy wars waged in it's name are usually against people who won't convert and who are labelled the 'enemy' for this very reason. Seems righteousness is only really defined by what religion can claim they've got the highest moral ground while violently thowing rocks to knock the others of theirs.

[edit on 12-10-2005 by riley]

posted on Oct, 13 2005 @ 06:58 AM
You have said that some people just say they believe in god. This is true, but I do not see this really as religion in a normal sense. Religion, as I see it, is praying, going to church/mosque/synagogue/temple etc. just saying you believe in god is not really religion, is it?

It is just a way of saying,yes,maybe there is something higher, but why go beyond that. Just saying "I believe in god" will not save you on judgement day.
Somewhere in the bible it says "belief without actions are nothing, action without belief is also nothing, but both together is good."

posted on Oct, 13 2005 @ 07:55 AM

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne

Originally posted by RANT
Freedom on the march. America led the way. Thank you founding father's for freedom from tyranny.

Any more questions?

As usual, Rant, you are wrong. One of these days you will listen to me when I tell you the facts, the truth. When that day comes, we will allow you to take the bag off your head!

I'm never going to buy your pro-tyranny, authoritarian, anti-civil liberties spin TC. I don't care what was passed on to you by some circa-1980 right wing pastor graduates from Jerry Falwell's Moonie funded Constitutional revisionism and anti-democratic Tyranny 101 seminars about what the Founding Father's supposedly meant; I'll stick with with what they said.

And there's no Evangelical Christian requirement to run this country, serve the people or be on the Supreme Court no matter what load of crap neocons try and sell each other.

From Article. VI. Clause 3:

"no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."

All that anti-Commie capitalist Jesus stuff you believe started in the 1950's. That's pretty darn NEO.

I'm an old school, classical liberal, civil libertarian, American purist. Every bit as radical and liberal as the founding fathers that obviously knew your kind would be back and made provisions specifically to deal with you when that time came.

We hate the same people it's true. But I hate the neocon fundies for what they are. Anti-american, revisionist extremists against the grain. You hate them for not being against the grain enough.

I know you call the "Constitution" Party home now, but when this is your platform preamble:


The Constitution Party gratefully acknowledges the blessing of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ as Creator, Preserver and Ruler of the Universe and of these United States.

Everything that follows is going to have a really hard time resolving itself with the Constitution I've been reading. Granted mine doesn't come with footnotes by the Reverend Moon, but there's no reason it should.

Speaking on behalf of mainstream America, WE'RE NOT THE CRAZY ONES! And we're not changin' to please ya.

posted on Oct, 13 2005 @ 09:21 AM

there are very few people out there who are truly "athiestic", which is the toughest religion to follow as it goes aginst how we as humans were programmed to behave.

Its not hard. You just have to accept your life is meaningless. The rest makes sense.

And for those of you who read and go *Gasp*, its more true than you would like to believe. People try so hard to find the meaning of life, for it to be something profound and insightful and perfect. Why cant it be nothing?

You are here for no reason.

top topics
<< 1   >>

log in