Excellent rant on Craigslist

[articulett]

You got to have life-- that's cool... but not something you'd want to last forever.

Robroy says I rant against religion. I am against faith as a means of knowledge. I find religion another form of superstition... I feel like believers are victims. But every time I ask one of the apologists to point out where I or some other "radical atheist" ranted about religion, they never post anything... or if they do, it's totally not a rant. If I was saying the same think about Scientology or rain dances or witch doctors, they'd be fine. I think the apologists just hear stuff that isn't there because they believe that faith is good and worth protecting and should be respected. I think critical thinking is far more valuable. I think it harms society when we go along with this "faith in faith" meme.

Why would anyone think they know what an invisible entity wanted? Why would they expect others to respect that? Why wouldn't they just keep it to themselves? If it was good or true, why would what I say matter? Why would anyone think such a being would care about this speck of the universe and them in particular?

It just seems so egotistical to me. And yet, they are the one calling atheists arrogant? I'm not the one claiming to have divine truths... nor to do I declare my opinion as fact. Moreover, I'm more than willing to back up my statements with evidence and change my mind when the evidence warrants. What theist or apologist does that? No amount of evidence can shake faith when people believe that faith is the key to salvation.

Why would any atheist think it was okay to inflict this stupefying lie onto people... and then cover for it and silence all those who dared to say the Emperor is not wearing any clothes? Do they want others to be stupid? Manipulable? Self aggrandizing? Holier than thou? Irrational? Superstitious? To me, religion gets protection that no one would think to give to psychics or homeopaths or other woo. Even on a forum where most people are probably atheists, we are chastized for joking amongst ourselves. Look, if religion is good or true-- our joking should not matter at all. Do I care what creationists say on their woo forum... maybe for a laugh. But I don't jump in and start lecturing them... like the woos and apologists do here.

If a smart person points out exactly where I crossed the line or why something I said was wrong or what was better, then I would listen... but why is it always the blowhards who seem to find imaginary faults in people always the ones tsk tsking atheists here on a SKEPTICS forum? Why is it never the people anyone else wants to be like? We have a slew of fantastic posters, so if any of the majority actually takes issue with what I say, I hope they can point it out and tell me the harm they perceive. Because I think lots of people imagine stuff that isn't there so they don't have to look at the gaps in their own flawed arguments or beliefs.

I am going to put rob roy on ignore, because he makes accusations without evidence, and I just haven't seen him say anything of value yet. I'm sure someone smart will quote him if he says anything of substance.

 

[articulett]

BTW, I was never a proselytizer... when I was a woo... I just though you were supposed to feel the truth... no one ever challenged me... I wish they had.

Religion doesn't come up much in my regular life. To me, it's just another superstition. But here, I think that all ideas are open for scrutiny. The truth doesn't need to fear me.

 

[gypsey]

godofpie

Originally Posted by gypsey
my dad was an old pro at this, he was in and out of prison my whole life the last few times because of me and he would get really pious and christian while inside and then laugh about it when he was out
he knew more about the bible than anyone i have ever met and wasn't afraid to use it to his advantage, in or out of prison

Thats very interesting.I hired a guy a couple of years ago that had just got out of prison. I had met him in rehab about 4 years before that. He did not stay sober after rehab and got locked up. When he first got out he was staying on the straight and narrow, going to church, involved with his family and church, not a bible thumper but involved, but after about 60 days he dropped that facade and was back to his old self. Selling drugs and partying. We were placing bets on how long it would take for him to get locked back up. Within 30 he had participated in a drive by and killed a guy and is now going to spend the rest of his life in prison. It seems to me cons come in all shapes and sizes and will use whatever is at their disposal to further their gains.

that sounds so familiar and you are so right about all shapes and sizes and they do seem to use whatever works to run their cons,
my dad never actually went to prison for anything as serious as muder but there were a lot of assaults and other things on his record,

during the the more than 40 years of watching my father con his way through life i observed that it was easier for him to pull his scams and cons on religous people especially when he was using his "born again i'm a changed man" schtick, i have seen him pay his rent and utilities doing this even at one point getting a new car from some one and i know that he always managed early release from prison because of it

i don't have any idea how many prisoners over all use religion this way but dad always said he learned it the first time he got locked up in about 1956 so it was something that obviously someone knew would work

we(the people close to dad) always laughed about how long it would be before he started acting "Normal" (for him) again and it was usually within about 2 months, he got teased a lot by his friends during the "good christian" phase of his releases, he would be out of jail or prison for long stretchs but he always managed to screw up again and go back

 

[ImaginalDisc]

Does atheism have a goal? It appears to me that when arguments occur the atheist standpoint is "atheism is a lack of belief in a god. Nothing more." and "Prove it. Provide poof and then we can talk." It would seem to me that as an atheist (and I'm not sure that is what I am but for the sake of argument) I would like to convince others that my way of thinking is right. That critical thinking and the atheist viewpoint is a better way to live life than one found through religion. Is secular humanism religion for atheists?

In answer to the question you put at the end, no. Atheists are people who lack belief in god(s). Some atheists are simply naive to the claims of god(s), some reject the idea for specious reasons, and some reject the idea for clear and logical reasons. There are good atheists, wicked atheists, reflective and philisophical atheists, and atheists who get by on a day to day basis without thinking about their non-belief at all. There is no "religion for atheists", or a unifying philisophy.

I can't speak for any other atheists, but for me my atheism is an important conclusion arrived at through critical inquiry because I care about whether or not things are true. It matters very much to me whether what I am told is, as a matter of fact, a fact.

Perhaps it would be nice if there were some rubric of morality we could all adhere to, but there isn't. Everyone, religious or not, measures whether something is moral or not based on their own internal compass. Religious Christians, as a rule, dismiss the injunction to stone and slaughter disobedient children that they read in the Bible because it seems wrong to them. I don't claim that I can prove to everyone that my philosophy is better than theirs, because people assess religious claims based on their own ideas and some of the values we seem to have inhereted from past generations. All I can say is that I personally value reason, evidence based thinking, and mutual respect for the wishes of other people.

IMHO the reason the religious can't or won't let go of their gods is the fear of the unknown. How do you, the atheist, deal with the thought of death? Not just yours but those that are close to you? It is a very comforting thought to believe that you and your loved ones will all be together again (just the ones you liked of course, not the uncle you couldn't stand or the cousin that never payed back that loan). Do you have coping skills that help you to deal with the thought of death or is it just something you don't think about? Mine is if matter is neither created or destroyed then I will be here forever in some form or another.

Maybe it actually is comforting to believe that some people you know will exist forever, praising a deity who made them just so that they could worship it forever. Personally, I can neither understand how anyone can be perfectly eternally happy when they are aware that elsewhere there is suffering, both on Earth and in a pit of endless torment, nor why such a static existence would be pleasant.

In any case, it's not important whether some idea is comforting or not. It might be comforting to think that if I jump off a building while wearing a four leafed clover, leprechauns and faires will catch me and whisk me away to Tir'na'og, but acting on that belief would case me to waste my life on a lie and deny myself the real possibilies for happiness that exist in this world. The unsupported idea of an afterlife robs people of the urgency and joy of what time we actually do have.

 

[RobRoy]

Robroy says I rant against religion. I am against faith as a means of knowledge. I find religion another form of superstition... I feel like believers are victims. But every time I ask one of the apologists to point out where I or some other "radical atheist" ranted about religion, they never post anything...

First, I'm not an apologist. I haven't been called one before, but I can see how my stance might be misconstrued as that. But I will say that I don't use the term as an epithet, which you do seem to do. If I'm wrong on that, I apologize, but it does seem to be a term that you use as a blanket generalization for anyone who offers a defense against you in this particular regard.

To me, questions are asked of a religious faith, apologists provide answers, sometimes reasonable, sometimes not, in order to help understand the deeper levels of that faith. In the question for truth, for understanding, this can help to provide something of a balanced look at each religion and its particular specifics. I find that useful in purposes of discussion, but maybe that's just me. <shrug>

Second, I have pointed out to you where I saw you making a parallel fundamentalist argument, and attempted to discuss it with you, even when you ignored the salient points. So even though I don't fall under the heading of the apologists who "never post anything", I have done in the past what you're claiming has never been done.

. . . or if they do, it's totally not a rant.

On what basis do you make this claim? That you're own posts can never be termed "a rant" because you made them? Don't you think that's awfully convenient? So convenient, in fact, it sounds exactly like what a fundamentalist would say in response to the same criticism?

If I was saying the same think about Scientology or rain dances or witch doctors, they'd be fine.

I've actually answered this particular criticism previously, and stated that I would and have defended such in such cases where I understood the tenets.

Of course, we have to refer to my previous statement where I'm not an apologist, so perhaps this doesn't pertain to me specifically. <shrug>

I think the apologists just hear stuff that isn't there because they believe that faith is good and worth protecting and should be respected.

Well, I don't know about the hearing stuff part. I would say some do, some doing. But I would agree that they believe "faith is good and worth protecting. Otherwise why be an apologist? Just for the kicks of making an argument?

Oh, wait, I can see the fun in that personally.

I think critical thinking is far more valuable. I think it harms society when we go along with this "faith in faith" meme.

I agree that critical thinking is of greater value, but I disagree that faith, in and of itself, is specifically harmful to society. I would caveat that statement by saying that "blind faith" can and often is quite harmful to society, and na unfortunate by-product of almost every religious faith. This was something which I had an excellent discussion on this exact subject with skeptical. We didn't agree, but we saw each other's points of view, and the argument was very worthwhile. To some extent, I've even changed my position in this regard. <shrug>

Why wouldn't they just keep it to themselves? If it was good or true, why would what I say matter?

Let's flip these for a moment: Why don't you keep your views on critical thinking to yourself? If critical thinking is so good and true, why would what a fundamentalist, apologist, member of the faithful, says about faith (or critical thinking) matter?

These are not said with any degree of sarcasm. They are legitimate questions regarding your own personal views on this matter. Unfortunately, I don't think they will ever be answered.

It just seems so egotistical to me. And yet, they are the one calling atheists arrogant?

I haven't done this in regards to atheists. I think I might have called a couple of fundies arrogant, but I can't recall right now.

What theist or apologist does that? No amount of evidence can shake faith when people believe that faith is the key to salvation.

This is false. There are any number of folk who, for any number of intricate reasons, have renounced their faith and religion as evidence was presented to them. There are also atheists who have done the reverse.

Why would any atheist think it was okay to inflict this stupefying lie onto people... and then cover for it and silence all those who dared to say the Emperor is not wearing any clothes?

A fundy would say they were doing the devils work. If there is a devil, this isn't a bad argument.

If I was being asked this, I would offer that there are any number of explanations for this described behavior. From social comfort to a personal sense of power and self-aggrandizement. I wouldn't know if these were actually true, but there it is.

Do they want others to be stupid? Manipulable? Self aggrandizing? Holier than thou? Irrational? Superstitious?

Some do, sure. It's unfortunate, but there it is.

I am going to put rob roy on ignore, because he makes accusations without evidence, and I just haven't seen him say anything of value yet. I'm sure someone smart will quote him if he says anything of substance.

Let's see, that makes two atheists and two fundamentalists I've now managed to put me on ignore on this forum. Apparently, I offend both sides in equal measure. I must admit, however, this is the first time that I've actually felt the intended sting of this kind of a slap. I had thought of you, articulett, as reasonably open-minded forum member and willing to discuss any topic, to examine any arguments, even your own, on their own merit, and capable of admitting fault when found. I've yet to see that in regards to your stance against religion (or faith, if you prefer), and instead found an impressive level of bias that has quite blinded you to reasonable arguments that differ from your own opinion regardless of their source. I'm not certain if anyone "smart" will let you know what I've said, so perhaps I'm just blowing in the wind, but I do wish you the best, and I do hope you come to see the downfall of your particular meme.

 

[andyandy]

snip.

Don't worry rob, you have joined a pretty inexclusive group of people on arti's ignore list.........

I think she's got her particular toys out the pram histrionic flounce of putting someone on ignore on the clipboard for easy deploy

 

[Kopji]

...They accuse atheists of leading selfish, corrupt, and immoral lives without fear of consequences. They accuse atheists of lacking moral codes. This is, of course, irrational, fear-mongering nonsense. Today's atheist is not a self-indulgent modern Caligula or a Stalin. Today's atheist is not a socially maladjusted anarchist who lives their lives without fear of retribution. According to a 1997 statistic, only 0.209% of prisoners incarcerated in the United States identify as atheists. Since atheists currently represent roughly 14% of the overall U.S. population, this is a significant indicator of the "morality" of the modern atheist. Today's atheist tends to be a well-educated, productive member of society who more often than not subscribes to the notions of moral relativism and secular humanism... which essentially means that we realize we're all stuck on this big ball together and we must work to set aside our differences and build a better future, because it's all that there is. That doesn't sound at all like the monstrous picture that's recently been smeared here by certain self-proclaimed loving Christians.

My complaint on this is not really the liberal abuse of statistics (which are usually one step away from voodoo anyway)... but that it misses the more focused attack on atheism - that 'good atheists' are sort of living on the 'fading light' from their religious upbringing. To that thinking, atheists are better atheists if they first have a foundation of religion. This whole tack only distracts us from some important issues that are creating atheists. So, a strawman perhaps, that does not serve atheists well.

...Personally, I'm a firm believer in live-and-let-live. I believe Christ was too.

I'm nitpicking, but "Christ" is a title not Jesus's last name.
If Jesus was a real person, which some atheists might concede and some not.
And this assertion that Jesus was a believer in 'live and let live' has little basis in the Bible. If what we do does not matter to God, this seems like a lot of trouble.

 

[RobRoy]

Don't worry rob, you have joined a pretty inexclusive group of people on arti's ignore list.........

I won't lie, it does hurt. Not like my dog running away or my wife cheating on me, but still, there's a sting. I honestly thought she was one of the more reasonably folk here. But then, I have been known to be wrong . . . from time to time.

I think she's got her particular toys out the pram histrionic flounce of putting someone on ignore on the clipboard for easy deploy

"Pram histrionic flounce". That's funny.

 

[godofpie]

The unsupported idea of an afterlife robs people of the urgency and joy of what time we actually do have.

That is an outstanding statement and an excellent point. To me you have summed up the atheist viewpoint in a sentence and why it makes sense to not believe rather than believe.

 

[godofpie]

The unsupported idea of an afterlife robs people of the urgency and joy of what time we actually do have.

That is an outstanding statement and an excellent point. To me you have summed up the atheist viewpoint in a sentence and why it makes sense to not believe rather than believe.