It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Why do Atheists care about religion?

page: 25
30
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 27 2009 @ 04:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Gawdzilla
 


As I recall it was the Atheists who made the bigger fuss over ID being taught in school. It was brought up that we should teach both and TSHTF.

Atheists for the most part, atleast on here, have zero tolerance for anything that is religion. Just like the religous have zero tolerance for atheists.

That is why saying Merry Christmas is no longer considered PC anymore. You want the holiday, but not the name. Atheists raised a fuss until we changed the name. Reminds me of how the Spainards spread Christianity throughout South America. You impose your will on them until they break and then you complain that they are imposing on you.

If you are not getting what I am implying. I am equating Atheists as a religion. That is why when you went keyboard commando I stated that is how religous wars are started.

Theory of Evolution taught and no word of ID can be uttered- Atheists win

Pledge of Alliegance can't be said in school- Atheists win

Kids can't pray in school- Atheists win

Merry Christmas replaced with Happy Holidays- Atheists win

Ten Commandments taken out of courthouse- Atheists win

Nativity scene had to be taken down in a small town- Atheists win

Kids can't pray before a sporting event- Atheists win



I can list more if need be.

Now you say they are imposing on you, but your Religion is imposing on everybody. If someone knocks on your door and try to impose their view on you then close the door. Don't fight back and impose your view on everyone in the United States.




posted on Apr, 27 2009 @ 05:06 PM
link   
reply to post by jd140
 


"As I recall it was the Atheists who made the bigger fuss over ID being taught in school. It was brought up that we should teach both and TSHTF."

ID is not science. Repeat as needed. Most of the people who oppose teach ID in schools are mainstream Christians who know that it doesn't belong in science classes because it is NOT science. There no "controversy", there is the hard science of evolution and the lies of the ICR and Discovery Institute. They have to lie because they need to claim ID is science. They want to get their foot in the door as a first step toward the BuyBull being the only book used in schools. Sane people of all views should be opposing that.

Really, people. You have a genuine conspiracy right in front of you, but religion has blinkered you to the facts. That's about as upside-down as you can get.



posted on Apr, 27 2009 @ 05:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Gawdzilla
 


Thats all you can respond to from my post?

If that is all you can do is regurgitate the same old thing instead of debating the other 99% of my post then why reply at all? ID was a very small portion of my post, since it was the only thing you replied to does that mean you agree with the rest?



posted on Apr, 27 2009 @ 05:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by jd140
reply to post by Gawdzilla
 


Thats all you can respond to from my post?

If that is all you can do is regurgitate the same old thing instead of debating the other 99% of my post then why reply at all? ID was a very small portion of my post, since it was the only thing you replied to does that mean you agree with the rest?


The rest was "So what" in my book. I hope your feelings weren't hurt.



posted on Apr, 27 2009 @ 05:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Gawdzilla
 


Nope, just cemented what I had already figured about you.

As long as you get your way, you don't care. Sounds just like Christianity during the Middle Ages.



posted on Apr, 27 2009 @ 06:51 PM
link   
reply to post by jd140
 


I see you see the historical paralells too.
Aren't humans grand in our silliness?


[edit on 27-4-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]



posted on Apr, 27 2009 @ 09:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
Seeing as to how you need it, here you go:

claim (klm)
tr.v. claimed, claim·ing, claims
1. To demand, ask for, or take as one's own or one's due: claim a reward; claim one's luggage at the airport carousel.
2. To take in a violent manner as if by right: a hurricane that claimed two lives.
3. To state to be true, especially when open to question; assert or maintain: claimed he had won the race; a candidate claiming many supporters.
4. To deserve or call for; require: problems that claim her attention.
n.
1. A demand for something as rightful or due.
2. A basis for demanding something; a title or right.
3. Something claimed in a formal or legal manner, especially a tract of public land staked out by a miner or homesteader.
4.
a. A demand for payment in accordance with an insurance policy or other formal arrangement.
b. The sum of money demanded.
5. A statement of something as a fact; an assertion of truth: makes no claim to be a cure.

SOURCE:www.thefreedictionary.com...


You seem to be incapable of making a point.
You can use the dictionary all you want, but it won't change what I've said.
Why can't you just be honest with yourself and read what I'm actually saying rather than looking for something to argue against?



Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
You claimed logic and reason backs the assertions of an atheist, in a slippery way of course, this is false and I am using you as an example. Thank you for proving my point.


It does back the assertions of an atheist, that there is no way to know of a God as the evidence is lacking. So it's illogical to claim there is a god and completely logical to claim that such an assertion is illogical based on the rather obvious assumptions.

Why is that so hard to understand?


Claiming to know there is no god: illogical
Claiming to know there is a god: illogical
Labeling the above two as illogical (as I have done): logical
Claiming that the God of the Bible can not exist as written in the Bible: logical

That's all I've said...
Seems pretty damn straightforward to me.

The proof of intellectual dishonesty is the fact that every single person I've seen would agree that it's illogical to have an imaginary friend named Bob with absolutely no evidence.
Change that name to "God", and the intellectual dishonesty (coupled with societal indoctrination) kicks in. It's no longer illogical nor is it logical to point out that it's illogical, though the reason for this is never explained, because there is none.
You need to understand the double standard you have in yourself.
It's obvious to people looking from the outside in...
You have to be honest with yourself before you can see the rather obvious truths that have been concealed.

By the way, you never answered that question about the pink dragon.
You couldn't.
Doing so would prove my point.
Refusing to do so also proves my point, but in a less direct way...



Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
And for the second time now, I am not a Christian and neither does Christianity embody the only possibility as far as the concept of things we would call "god" goes so please leave that drum alone already.


I know Christianity is not the only religion.
But look at what this thread is talking about and how it relates to people like me.
My arguments against religion are directed at Christianity, because it's what I know and what I was indoctrinated with.
My whole argument was that I have arguments that have clear cut logic that can be seen if only you use your head and become intellectually honest with yourself.
Such arguments do transcend opinion.

If there was a description of me that said "I am 20 years old. I am 35 years old", it would not be an opinion that the above is wrong. It's purely logical and any opinion is irrelevant.
Likewise, when the Bible describes God as doing something in one verse, and doing the opposite in another, I can safely say through logic that both can not be true, and thus the God of the Bible can not exist as such.

You foolishly merged what I was saying about God with all other gods.
I never said that no god exists. I can't know that. I personally believe the probability is extremely low, just as with pink dragons, but I can't claim to know.



Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
And you continued misdefining of atheism is funny, despite the fact I posted the definition. Read it all this time please.


Jesus H. Christ...
Do a little research. Just a bit.
I explained it above so simply that anyone (or so I thought) could understand.

The 'a' in atheism means 'without', so atheism in it's purest form literally means "without theism" or without a belief in God.
That is the definition of atheism I always use.
So why the Hell argue? I've described what I am and what atheist means.
It's painfully obvious that you are simply arguing for the sake of arguing, you don't really want to know the truth, or you would have found it already...

But here's some more truth for you to ignore.
www.infidels.org...

You trying to lump all atheists as people who claim to know that no god exists would be akin to me lumping all Christians as protestants...
Just do the research. Please.



posted on Apr, 27 2009 @ 09:30 PM
link   
reply to post by TruthParadox
 


Acuse me of dishonesty then proceed to say one thing then extendedly say another while claiming I am not paying attention. Priceless.
Either way, I was not talking about atheism I was talking about you in particular. Believe in a god or not, matters little to me. But what annoys me when people get self-righteous in judging others beliefs, which you do regardless how many twists and turns you take.
Good day.



posted on Apr, 27 2009 @ 09:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
Acuse me of dishonesty then proceed to say one thing then extendedly say another while claiming I am not paying attention. Priceless.


Not just dishonesty, intellectual dishonesty.
Did I hurt your feelings?
We all have intellectual dishonesty, some more than others.
It takes a Hell of a lot to get rid of it.

Just look back at my example about Bob.
Isn't it completely logical to bring to light the lack of evidence for such a belief, and thus the fact that such a belief is illogical?
Isn't it the same with religion?

How can you argue against that?
And why are you avoiding the points I'm making?

Why?
Because you are being intellectually dishonest.
It's the only way. It can't be stupidity or ignorance (because I don't believe you are stupid in any way), it's the fact that you don't want to see what I'm actually saying...
I don't mean that as an insult.. I'm sure I have many beliefs that are just the same.
But it baffles me how I can make such an obvious point and you deny it...
If it were wrong, I know you would say exactly why it is wrong.
But you can't because it's not wrong...



Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
Either way, I was not talking about atheism I was talking about you in particular. Believe in a god or not, matters little to me.


You were talking about atheism.
You made the false claim that atheism means to believe there is no god, when in reality that is merely a small facet of it.
Once I prove this, you change the subject of course...
Your whole real argument against my words was based on a misunderstanding of what 'atheism' is, which caused you to think I made a contradiction when I didn't.



Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
But what annoys me when people get self-righteous in judging others beliefs, which you do regardless how many twists and turns you take.
Good day.


I am a bit too arrogant for my own good at times.
But that doesn't make my arguments false.
If it helps, imagine me as a furry bunny... but don't ignore my points.
What's the point of arguing in the first place if you just want to win?

[edit on 27-4-2009 by TruthParadox]



posted on Apr, 27 2009 @ 09:47 PM
link   
reply to post by TruthParadox
 


Actually, nope. Be as long winded as you like and continue to acuse me of having meaning I did not have all you wish. I have been talking about you since square one. Feel free to post again. I think we have exhausted your self-righteous rantability though.


[edit on 27-4-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]



posted on Apr, 27 2009 @ 09:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
Actually, nope. Be as long winded as you like and continue to acuse me of having meaning I did not have all you wish. I have been talking about you since square one. Feel free to post again. I think we have exhausted your self-righteous rantability though.


So what in God's name are you arguing against?
I've explained everything to you.
At least you've given up your false understanding of atheism...
At the very least I educated one person about an overly misunderstood word.
And it's definitely not an opinion that you refused to answer my questions or bring to light any real argument that had merit.

If you still have a problem with what I've said, lay it out.
Don't just say "you contradicted yourself, look at the definition of this word", then once the definition is accurately explained walk away...
All of the 'problems' you had with my posts were explained in great detail, so I don't even know what the problem is...



posted on Apr, 27 2009 @ 10:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by jd140
Atheists for the most part, atleast on here, have zero tolerance for anything that is religion. Just like the religous have zero tolerance for atheists.

That is why saying Merry Christmas is no longer considered PC anymore. You want the holiday, but not the name. Atheists raised a fuss until we changed the name. Reminds me of how the Spainards spread Christianity throughout South America. You impose your will on them until they break and then you complain that they are imposing on you.


By 'atheists raised a fuss' you mean "a small amount of atheists raised a fuss", right?
I'm an atheist who still says 'Merry Christmas', and I know others who do likewise.



Originally posted by jd140
If you are not getting what I am implying. I am equating Atheists as a religion. That is why when you went keyboard commando I stated that is how religous wars are started.


Religion, no.
Lack of religion, yes.



Originally posted by jd140
Theory of Evolution taught and no word of ID can be uttered- Atheists win

Pledge of Alliegance can't be said in school- Atheists win

Kids can't pray in school- Atheists win

Merry Christmas replaced with Happy Holidays- Atheists win

Ten Commandments taken out of courthouse- Atheists win

Nativity scene had to be taken down in a small town- Atheists win

Kids can't pray before a sporting event- Atheists win



A lot of these are generalizations, and more...
*Theory of Evolution is not taught in every school, and I know where I live teachers openly talk about God.
*Pledge of allegiance can't be said in school? Not the schools I've seen. They still say it every day here...
*Kids can't pray in schools? Again, what schools are you talking about? The minority? If nothing else you can always pray in private, and that's the way it should be in the first place.
*Merry Christmas replaced with Happy Holidays. Not completely replaced by any stretch of the imagination.. The media uses "happy holidays", but most people I know say "Merry Christmas".
*Kids can't pray before a sporting event. They sure as Hell can... If you're talking about public prayer in *a select few schools*, ok. But this is not a general restriction of any kind.
Anyone can pray in private.



Originally posted by jd140
Now you say they are imposing on you, but your Religion is imposing on everybody. If someone knocks on your door and try to impose their view on you then close the door. Don't fight back and impose your view on everyone in the United States.


Our country should be unbiased. It's that simple. That includes any government run programs, buildings, schools, courts, etc.
If this is a government "for the people", then it should show no biased, as many people are not Christian.



posted on Apr, 28 2009 @ 05:26 AM
link   
evolution is heavenbased.

when mentalism becomes physical weird abruptions can dissapear.



posted on Apr, 28 2009 @ 06:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by jd140
Theory of Evolution taught and no word of ID can be uttered- Atheists win

No. Secularists and science wins.


Pledge of Alliegance can't be said in school- Atheists win

Atheists aren't concerned by the Pledge itself, just one little unconstitutional word.


Kids can't pray in school- Atheists win

Atheists don't care if kids pray in schools FFS! Get it through your heads.


Merry Christmas replaced with Happy Holidays- Atheists win

Most atheists don't care about this either, the rest are just pricks.


Ten Commandments taken out of courthouse- Atheists win

And every religious person who isn't Christian. It's pretty narcissistic to think Christianity is the only religion out there.


Nativity scene had to be taken down in a small town- Atheists win

I think you'll find that most atheists won't defend this move, it's just spiteful representative of a few, not the whole.


Kids can't pray before a sporting event- Atheists win

Again, atheists don't care.


Now you say they are imposing on you, but your Religion is imposing on everybody. If someone knocks on your door and try to impose their view on you then close the door. Don't fight back and impose your view on everyone in the United States.


Well firstly, if you guys have the right to evangelise and not get in trouble for it, then we should be able to aswell, but how many Atheists have knocked on your door and tried to convert you?

Secondly, if you are suggesting that it's a christian country, and throw around your numbers to get your doctrine to be law, it's our duty to shoot you down for your unconstitutional behaviour.



posted on Apr, 28 2009 @ 09:05 AM
link   
atheits, men without God, as reason and logic would show =

god = what is just and righteouss -> no God, complete darkness.



posted on Apr, 28 2009 @ 09:06 AM
link   
the feeling you get when you did a wrong thing is a part of God's masterplan of life.

Forgiveness lies in the sin.



posted on Apr, 28 2009 @ 09:21 AM
link   
reply to post by etherical waterwave
 


Except there is a natural explanation for morals, it's an evolutionary development. Those who develop a system of karma in the group survive better, produce more children etc. A moral and just group is more fit than a completely altruistic or selfish group.

Don't try and pin right and wrong on God, these are social constructs.


the feeling you get when you did a wrong thing is a part of God's masterplan of life.


Some people simply feel no guilt, though. Is that part of the master plan?

[edit on 28-4-2009 by Welfhard]



posted on Apr, 28 2009 @ 12:00 PM
link   
Well i hope all athiests know if they want to remove the word god and references to the creator then they will have to edit the declaration of independence and the The Emancipation Proclamation. I do not get the athiest viewpoint at times. I do not buy the theory of evolution however i just choose not to buy into it, i do not raise hell about how it should be removed from school. It seems athiests try to get everything removed that "offends" them. When i walk down the street and see a star of david in a deli window i do not get the urge to write the city and have it taken down because it's not what I believe. The sight of religious symbols does not make me feel violated in anyway nor does hearing the word god. Why cant people just respect the way people want to show what religion they are? The First Amendment does not say as long as you don't offend athiests at the end of it.

[edit on 28-4-2009 by Anhero]



posted on Apr, 28 2009 @ 12:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Anhero
 


"Well i hope all athiests know if they want to remove the word god and references to the creator then they will have to edit the bill of rights."

"Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

I don't see "God" or "creator" there. Nor in any of the other 9.

Bill of Rights.

Perhaps you should read the document before commenting on it.



posted on Apr, 28 2009 @ 12:24 PM
link   


And who can deny that Stalin and Mao, not to mention Pol Pot and a host of others, all committed atrocities in the name of a Communist ideology that was explicitly atheistic? Who can dispute that they did their bloody deeds by claiming to be establishing a 'new man' and a religion-free utopia? These were mass murders performed with atheism as a central part of their ideological inspiration, they were not mass murders done by people who simply happened to be atheist



new topics

top topics



 
30
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join