Social programming + the collapse of religion and values.

reply to post by DeadSeraph


Apparently it is a fact according to a recent poll.

The atheist alliance have launched a campaign to get some numbers on the sorts of people worldwide who describe themselves as atheist. So far the sample group size is 69,798 and counting, with 64% describing themselves as atheist, with the second largest group preferring the term ‘Humanist’.

A whopping 34% are former Catholics, with a further 36% from other Christian denominations. The numbers also reveal that almost 60% have a University or College level education.

Source

And it seems as though the majority of atheists (70%) were once Christians.

@ unb3k44n7,...;It's really an easy answer.
Technology.
Technology has mostly caused the declination of religion.

Technology simply facilitates the communication required to program the masses. It can be used for anything, even spreading conservative values. In this case, it is being used to program people to accept something that was not accepted earlier. Joe Biden let the proverbial cat out of the bag when he stated that mass media has been instrumental in influencing/manipulating people into becoming more accepting of homosexuality. Thats all it is, a manipulation of the masses by outside forces, into re-writing social norms.

reply to post by DeadSeraph


So in your opinion. In a nation that is clearly a majority Christian demographic, the majority of atheists wouldn't come from a religious upbringing?

reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1


That is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever read, and is a clearly biased source. You yourself don't identify as an atheist, yet you have chosen this thread to continue to mark Christians specifically as being the largest source of atheism.

A few reasons why your source can't be considered "fact":

-Facts are quantifiable and verifiable, your source is not.

-Your source fails to consider individuals who grew up in Christian (or otherwise theistic/deistic) homes, while never professing a faith of their own and professing atheism as a belief which they had always possessed

-Your source does not account for the multitude of idiots that consider themselves atheists in protest of Christianity while believing in things like reincarnation, an afterlife, etc (a recent thread you authored comes to mind). These are not beliefs compatible with atheism and skew the results due to people who aren't actually familiar with the differences between atheism and agnosticism

-Your source is clearly biased

Stating "The majority of Atheists are former theists" as a fact is an obvious misnomer, since it is impossible to quantify it.

reply to post by sk0rpi0n


Meh

Lucid Lunacy
reply to post by DeadSeraph

 

So in your opinion. In a nation that is clearly a majority Christian demographic, the majority of atheists wouldn't come from a religious upbringing?

I would say it is more accurate to state that they may have come from a religious upbringing, which is not the same as saying the majority of atheists are former believers.

ETA: I would even say it is likely that they come from a religious upbringing, which still does not quantify the original statement as fact.

"All apples have seeds. All apple seeds come from apples. Therefore all apple seeds are apples."

Basic logic fail.

@ Lucid Lunacy....So in other words we shouldn't have any thoughts on the matter? No judgement. No opinion at all.

Certain lifestyles or ideas became accepted as normal in rather recent times as a result of media manipulation and programming. To hold that it is of positive value is by itself an injected idea, somebody elses thought that has been spread through mass communication ''X must be a good thing because all those movies and all the cool celebrities say so in interviews'' or ''Y must be a stupid and bad thing because all those intelligent sounding people say so''. Its peer pressure x 1000 at work.

reply to post by DeadSeraph


So essentially they didn't 'really believe' to begin with. O_o

I imagine you say the same to the once evangelical preachers of Christianity that are now firm atheists. They didn't really have faith to begin with.

Mental gymnastics. If you do that then of course you can attempt to reason it. That reasoning is unfounded. It's willful ignorance.

Religious people do in fact change their minds. It happens often. If you want me to cite polls/stats I will. Do you want me to? DId you see the one 3NL1GHT3N3D1 posted? I'd like to think if you'd paid attention over the years to ATS members you'd have seen many atheists confess a prior religious upbringing. Really we only need some to exemplify the point. Which is to say, religious minds have been changed. Changed through open discussion and intellectual discourse.

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy


How is it mental gymnastics?

I used this fairly simple example:

"All apples have seeds. All apple seeds come from apples. Therefore all apple seeds are apples."

You are obviously intelligent enough to see the logical fallacy in that statement, so be humble enough to admit that you may have been misguided in your attempt to pass off your opinion as fact.

Edit to add:

Just so we are clear on this exercise in logic, you stated this:

How do you reconcile that with the fact the majority of atheists were once religious?

reply to post by sk0rpi0n


I agree with the previous poster who said "technology". People can know more now than before. They can learn history. They can learn (for instance) that the guy who invented computers, and helped win WWII by cracking Nazi codes, was in fact gay. They can learn about how he was suppressed by weird people in his military for it, and driven to suicide.

When confronted with this kind of clear information, rational thinkers like the US military decided that the guy who invented computers and cracked Nazi codes was in fact MORE VALUABLE to the war effort than the people who suppressed him, to keep the military gay free. So now there are gays in the military. Rational people all over society are coming to similar conclusions, about what consenting adults do in their homes, and how the people who want to spend resources obsessing on them, based on some words in an ancient book, are really distracting us from serious issues.

A technical point only, atheism is not a belief, but rather, an absence of belief.

As typified in the quote: "When you understand why you don't believe in all the other possible gods, you will understand why I don't believe in yours."

Or the variation: "I maintain we are both atheists, I just believe in one less god than you do."

Carry on.

reply to post by sk0rpi0n

Certain lifestyles or ideas became accepted as normal in rather recent times as a result of media manipulation and programming.

Also known as deliberation!

Or are you arguing there is no such thing? That doesn't exist? It's all manipulation?..

Sorry but I don't see that.

To qualify. I do see that. To an extent. But to discount that genuine intellectual discourse is happening is ridiculous. and is taking that conspiracy angle to an unhealthy level. These moral issues are indeed discussed by people not 'corrupted' in this manner. To the point. Would you include yourself among the ranks of those so manipulated they cannot see above it!? It seems to me you're distinguishing yourself from it. Surely others do as well..

reply to post by DeadSeraph


Oh come on, the source isn't biased, what makes you think it is? Did the atheists who were conducting the poll somehow force the participants to lie about their former beliefs? Unless you can prove they did, innocent until proven guilty.

Just admit it, it doesn't matter how reliable the source would be, you'd still claim it as being biased and out to get you and other Christians.

I see you used the "No True Scotsman" fallacy. Those who converted to atheism "never believed in the first place". Admit you were wrong, it doesn't change the fact that YOU yourself still believe.

I suppose that we can't see the original installation of those "values" at the head of the Christian spear or from centuries of the Christian pulpit as any kind of social manipulation then? Ha!

Why? Because they were telling "the truth" according to the OP's lights?

I think the inherent bias of the question becomes more and more clear. OP is right, everyone else is merely parroting.

*Wrrock* < ---- Parroting noise.

Lucid Lunacy
reply to post by sk0rpi0n

 

Certain lifestyles or ideas became accepted as normal in rather recent times as a result of media manipulation and programming.

Also known as deliberation!

Or are you arguing there is no such thing? That doesn't exist? It's all manipulation?..

Sorry but I don't see that.

To qualify. I do see that. To an extent. But to discount that genuine intellectual discourse is happening is ridiculous. and is taking that conspiracy angle to an unhealthy level. These moral issues are indeed discussed by people not 'corrupted' in this manner. To the point. Would you include yourself among the ranks of those so manipulated they cannot see above it!? It seems to me you're distinguishing yourself from it. Surely others do as well..

Now that is an interesting question!

But who cares? Is morality relative or absolute? If it is relative, then it is ok to rape a woman depending on your situation. If it is absolute, then rape is either right, or wrong.

So which is it? Is morality relativistic or absolute? Before we can further this discussion it would seem we need to define morality.

reply to post by DeadSeraph


Or, we could just dump a big barrel of red herring on the conversation all call it a day, eh?

I don't think that's going to work.

reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1


After attempting discourse with you in multiple threads I have learned that no matter what I or anyone else says, you will never actually read my (or anyone elses) posts or even give them any thought if they rub you the wrong way. If anything I say contradicts what you believe, you will write me off, plug your ears, and post as loud as you can with no effort to meet halfway. In the event you are proven wrong (which you have been), you will ignore the facts, shift the goal posts, and continue on as if your opponents are witless. Because of this, I won't be responding to you any further in this thread, and if there were an ignore function here at ATS, you would be on my list.

I am trying to have a discussion based on the OP, not argue with you on the merits of Christianity.

Gryphon66
reply to post by DeadSeraph

 

Or, we could just dump a big barrel of red herring on the conversation all call it a day, eh?

I don't think that's going to work.

How is that a red herring? The OP specifically addresses the issue of "morality". Straw man much?

(two can play that game)

Gryphon66
I suppose that we can't see the original installation of those "values" at the head of the Christian spear or from centuries of the Christian pulpit as any kind of social manipulation then? Ha!

Why? Because they were telling "the truth" according to the OP's lights?

I think the inherent bias of the question becomes more and more clear. OP is right, everyone else is merely parroting.

*Wrrock* < ---- Parroting noise.

edit on 2Wed, 12 Feb 2014 02:45:17 -060014p022014266 by Gryphon66 because: Arrr, matey.

Parroting nonsense indeed. OP is muslim, btw.

Religious people dont need anything to help them slowly disapear like dinosaurs, but yea lets blame everybody else. Now thats the american way.