Materialistic people certainly only believe in what is in front of their nose. Since 1) atheists have always existed but 2) they always existed in very small numbers, it makes me wonder is there is a mental function there. Not "mental illness" but like being "gay" something in the brain that doesn't see what mainstream humanity sees.
Semantic gibberish. Just because you make up your own definition for religion, does not make that definition correct. Regardless, even if I accepted your definition of "Religion", there is clearly a difference between a morals that come from "God" and those that come from humans.
Not the least bit true, you know you people jump into the thread without reading anything posted previously, again I already explained that and posted references with full detail previously, please read the thread. Oh and what is the difference, you mean some morals are not really morals?
Whether that's true or not the BOP always rests with the claimant. In my case, as a child I was indoctrinated to believe by CLAIMANTS (my teachers) in the existence of a god, not on the basis of proof but on the basis of faith. As I grew up, that standard wasn't good enough for me, especially since I learned that this all powerful all good god didn't do crap to prevent all sorts of atrocities. I was also taught science and math, both of which require proof. And especially as a math major, proof is a biggie in mathematics (as in absolute). Not to mention that the mythical tales I was taught as a child just morphed into fairy tales as I grew up. And so for me (and I can only speak for myself), the burden of proof rests with the claimant and I am not the claimant. I have no clue what that means. I have no church, never mind a "corrupt" one. And I have made no claims. I can't speak for anyone else so I can only speak for myself.
Sorry, but when you claim atheism is a religion, you are going to be corrected. Atheism is by definition, not a religion.
You are creating a false equivalency by equating moral justification derived from "God says so" to a moral derived from logic and reason. What I am pointing out is that there is a clear distinction between the two. One justification is based solely on "faith" which rejects reason and rational thought, and the other does not.
The history of religions certainly evidences that, and you see it in the history of the RCC. Pure evil is what these religious leaders and other christians indulged in. Yet, today, christiainty is less venomous, and I do not see the immorality today. We no longer have inquisitions with torture, and no longer burn heretics. And our actions as a nation,in foreign policy, is not religiously driven but driven by the acquisition of more wealth for a few elites. I certainly observed no evil in the years I attended church here, quite the contrary. And while I did not accept the doctrine and orthodox beliefs of the church I attended for years, my attendance was based on socializing with decent, moral, and good people. Regardless if I did not accept their orthodox beliefs. I am more of a mystic, and perceive the teachings of christ as mystical in nature, the perennial philosophy as Aldous Huxley called it, and the same as Taoism and Buddhism, and some of Hinduism.
The solo reality would be yours, where you decide to be offended by absolutely any comment that does not agree with you. Once again, not mockery unless you choose to think it to be and then the problem is even more firmly established You appear to be unable to comprehend the truth when it hits you in the face. There has been zero evidence of this god of your or any support of your vile position. Calling others names and ignoring their declarative statements make you look simple minded. Or at the very least unable to admit that you are wrong in your "beliefs".
Of course it has never occurred to your highness that all belief systems are a subset of Atheism, like a child revolts against whatever a parent tells them, right? As for posting in all caps, if that would help you, feel free. Something must be done.
You are projecting your experience at one church to all churches. Second, just because we do not publicly burn witches at the stake anymore does not mean that Christianity is not responsible for indecency and immorality. The religious right has been front and center in the movement to use physical violence (Law) to violate individual rights and freedoms/liberty - the main principle on which this nation was founded. This is both indecent and immoral and further, violates the main principle on which Christ based his teachings - The Golden Rule. Then you have these folks -
It would appear that you constantly practice what you claim to decry. While providing no proof, just your personal vision that you want people to blindly accept. News for you genius, you are failing badly.
Actually, the reverse is true. Religion came into existence because of morals and the need for some to impress what they thought was moral on the lives of others. This is why s many religions have different views of what is moral and not moral.
Not one church, as I have attended scores of churches in my long life. That you claim some are immoral, perhaps evil, outside of a scant few like the Phelps church, sounds to me like you have not attended many churches. I sure would not lie about such things. Of course you may be saying christianity is immoral because they do not accept homsexuality as decent, moral behavior. Yet their book of rules requires them to believe as they do. I do not see them as being immoral for believing differently than you do. While I personally do not see homosexuality as immoral, I can understand why others do. A theocracy would make it illegal. We do not live under theocracy as much of the middle east does. And they are not very accepting of homosexuals, with some sects delighting in tossing them off of high buildings. I think the golden rule voiced by JC, if the world heeded it, including ameircans, it would solve so many of the problems humanity has always had, and would not solve. But ego driven people have no use for such a rule. They would rather screw you, before you can screw them. The attitude of, there are two kinds of people, those who f**k, and those who get f**ked. America, our foreign policy, seems to follow the last one. For we sure do not do unto other nations what we would have them do to us. LOL No profit for our elites in that!
Most atheists self-assert they are smarter than 98% of humanity. What else are they going to do? Admit they could be wrong? If they did that, they'd no longer be atheists, they'd be agnostics. ...which is the only logical position to take, BTW.
Yet if a creative force does exist, it would not be inside the material universe, but outside it. And you cannot hit with what is inside, a hammer, to that which is outside. So all an atheist can say, is god does not exist because I cannot hit IT on the head. They then assume nothing is outside of the material universe. Atheists depend upon assumptions, just as the theist does. Just because the atheists refuse to admit the logically obvious, is a psychological problem.
What I am saying is that it is both immoral and indecent to force one's personal beliefs on others (religious or otherwise) using physical violence (Law). When religious groups band together for political purposes ... be it abortion, homosexuality, Porn, Prostitution, Alcohol, Pot and so on ... to make law (which is using the heavy hand of the State to do one's dirty work) this is using physical violence to force religious beliefs on others .... this is Theocracy. "Many" - not all - Christians do not get this distinction and so they end up doing what is immoral and indecent. I singled out the religious right for a reason. Many many christian churches are not fundamentalist or Pentecostal extremist zealots. Biden hit the nail on the head in his VP debate with Paul Ryan when he said "As a Catholic I am personally against abortion but, I do not believe in forcing my personal religious beliefs on others". Many Christians agree with this statement of separation of Church and State. It is these sensible Christians who keep the "bad ones" at bay (keep them from going out and burning heretics or killing gays as per the previous link) Sure we do not live in Theocracy but, this is exactly what the religious right advocates for.
the funny thing about the way God works is you are just switching from one God to another god. Faith does not reject reason, reason is a construct that is far from infallible as the french found out, so no its not a false equivalency, you need to examine the limitations and using it as a blanket response proves you have not. Thats applying a single the element to the whole the composition fallacy.
No you are going to be corrected. http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/atheist-churches-for-real.515762/
I quite often am corrected. but, the claim that atheism is a religion is demonstrably false. On that, I will continue correcting you, when I see you make that false claim.
Yes, I agree, agnosticism is the only logical, but also intellectually honest position to take. And there is humility in that, something you will never find in an atheist of certainty. Certainty in regards to this subject is just the movement of the ego. Who always requires itself to be right. Perhaps the atheist is just a person with a stronger ego? Egoism. And egos probably have to ignore the fact that their certainty is delusional. Believing in delusion is common among our species, IMO. I once believed a woman loved me, when all of the facts said to the contrary. I was delusional, which was created by what I wanted to be true. LOL This deal happens with people all of the time and in different areas. We here, have either known of this on a personal level, or at least observed it in others.
