3 of 4
3
Atheism is Stupid!
Posted: 31 October 2015 09:00 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 31 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7748
Joined  2009-02-26
grand pa ray - 31 October 2015 08:08 AM

Lausten,  Sagan was a scientist and O’Hair was a lawyer, one seeks truth the other by training just wants to win an argument.  I said that I agreed with the assessment that that atheism is stupid.  My reason is that for almost 2000 years the religious leaders of the time gave the word atheist it’s meaning.  Using the word just solidifies in the brain of believers something evil.

It can be proven that the very exclusivity of the various religions prevents any compromise, except through gradualism, hopefully through the internet.
Proof of this can be found that if you want to sign up for religious forum, you must expressly state that you believe in God.or you are denied membership.

Do you ever see an atheist proclaiming his atheist views on a religious site? It is always the theist prostletizing on secular sites.

All the discussions on theist sites are just discussions of nuances of scripture without even allowing opposing views.  Fundamental Religions are by their very nature immune from critcism, or violent retaliation will result, they are Immutable Words of (their) God.

Do you honestly believe that introducing a new name for what you described as s loosely organized collection of artheists will deter the (thankfully) relative few fundamentalists to turn a kind ear? You’d just be another threat to be dealt with. In Islam, apostasy is punishable by death.

I recognize the humanistic intent, but any outside intereference only complicates the issue. As long as there are people willing to die for an abstract idea, the fault lies in the limits of cooperation of the rest of the world as well as the ecosphere of the earth itself..

Man has no natural enemy other than Man and this may well be the way Natural Selection will play itself out at the Human scale. The ever increasing of violence and the power of modern military weapons should be clear indication that the next 30-50 years is not going to end well for many humans.

Natural selection is in principle a natural war of attrition and seems to be the natural way to control overpopulation.

[ Edited: 31 October 2015 06:57 PM by Write4U ]
 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 October 2015 02:23 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 32 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4065
Joined  2009-10-21
grand pa ray - 31 October 2015 08:08 AM

Lausten,  Sagan was a scientist and O’Hair was a lawyer, one seeks truth the other by training just wants to win an argument.  I said that I agreed with the assessment that that atheism is stupid.  My reason is that for almost 2000 years the religious leaders of the time gave the word atheist it’s meaning.  Using the word just solidifies in the brain of believers something evil.

Yes, I understood everything you just repeated here. You added nothing to the conversation with this statement and didn’t respond to my comment. I was commenting on the culture that Sagan was speaking into, not comparing how Sagan and O’Hair were similar.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 October 2015 08:17 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 33 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7748
Joined  2009-02-26
Lausten - 31 October 2015 02:23 PM
grand pa ray - 31 October 2015 08:08 AM

Lausten,  Sagan was a scientist and O’Hair was a lawyer, one seeks truth the other by training just wants to win an argument.  I said that I agreed with the assessment that that atheism is stupid.  My reason is that for almost 2000 years the religious leaders of the time gave the word atheist it’s meaning.  Using the word just solidifies in the brain of believers something evil.

So, you propose that Public opinion decides what is true?

Lausten posted,
Yes, I understood everything you just repeated here. You added nothing to the conversation with this statement and didn’t respond to my comment. I was commenting on the culture that Sagan was speaking into, not comparing how Sagan and O’Hair were similar.

I understand your argument and agree.

 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 November 2015 02:26 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 34 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3594
Joined  2011-08-15


Thevilageaatheist,  I prefer Dan Dennett,  especially when everyone I know is catholic.

 

Everyone you know is Catholic? No Fundamentalists, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, non believers, Muslims??? And I thought I lived in a homogenous neighborhood!


Cap’t Jack

 Signature 

One good schoolmaster is of more use than a hundred priests.

Thomas Paine

Profile
 
 
Posted: 02 November 2015 08:56 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 35 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1307
Joined  2005-01-14
grand pa ray - 31 October 2015 08:08 AM

I said that I agreed with the assessment that that atheism is stupid.  My reason is that for almost 2000 years the religious leaders of the time gave the word atheist it’s meaning.  Using the word just solidifies in the brain of believers something evil.

I’m not sure that you even know what an “atheist” actually is!  The closest you come to a definition is “evil, bad, possessed”.  Christians seem to have a false belief that “God” is the same as “morality”—so to them an “atheist” rejects the very idea of God AND morality at the same time.  That’s simply not true.  An atheist merely does not have a belief in God (in fact the Romans called the early Christians atheists, because they didn’t believe in the Roman gods).  Our endeavors should be not to simply make up a new name, but to teach them what is wrong with their false conception.  Because history has shown us time and time again that making up a new name just doesn’t work.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 November 2015 12:01 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 36 ]
Jr. Member
Avatar
RankRank
Total Posts:  29
Joined  2015-07-21
grand pa ray - 26 October 2015 09:51 AM

Atheism is stupid, according to Carl Sagan.  I agree with his view and here is the reason why.  The word atheism started to gain attention in the 15th century when christian era ruled.  The christian leaders at that time gave the word a negative meaning ex. evil, bad, possessed and reinforced the belief and fear by actual torture.  When this word is used by the common christian, their preconditioned brain automatically shuts down their ability to reason.  I use a new positive word to help in a discussion about religion and that word is “catheist”.  This way i get a chance to discuss and explain how my own beliefs in a god have changed without them prejudging me.  It keeps the discussion going.  Definition: Catheist is a person who does not know if there is a god.

Cool if it works for you. 

As for me, I don’t give a damn what people think about me.  Nor, am I interesting in discussing with those who would prejudge me.  Screw them.
I’m an atheist.  Have been since 5th grade.  *smiles*

 Signature 

“All right, then, I’ll GO to hell.” - Huck Finn

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 November 2015 01:55 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 37 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7748
Joined  2009-02-26

Advocatus,
Christians seem to have a false belief that “God” is the same as “morality”—so to them an “atheist” rejects the very idea of God AND morality at the same time.

And for a true believer the moral thing to do is to kill all the atheists and infidels.

You want a lesson in religious morality? Watch this;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_tr_k59O6s

 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 November 2015 05:44 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 38 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  502
Joined  2011-09-13

Saying atheism is stupid does not make it so any more than saying theism is “smart” makes it so.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 November 2015 08:56 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 39 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2124
Joined  2013-06-01
deros - 05 November 2015 05:44 AM

Saying atheism is stupid does not make it so any more than saying theism is “smart” makes it so.

Maybe not. But it brings the subject into the light of discussion. No different than what Trump did with immigration, in saying our immigration policies are stupid. Trump has not changed immigration, but now that people see that taboo subjects can be talked about, changes of mind and policies are possible.
 
The Atheists are not fighting Christians. The Christians are using the Atheist’s thinking to help their cause.  The Christians are not looking at Atheists as one of their major problems, because the Atheist’s platform is not as much of a threat.
 
Pa ray is right. Atheism is stupid. The Atheist’s need to change their platform to their own thinking or stay a pawn of the Christian thinking.
 
Trump on the other hand not only did lip service, but he took the subject one step further than the Atheists by telling us his solution. The Atheists have no solution. A solution is required because this subject is proven by history to be a worldwide human psychological problem that has been around long before the Christians. The last man to try and fix the problem was Jesus and they stole and changed his works. Maybe not on purpose, because after the crucifixion there was nobody with Jesus’s insight that lived long enough to keep the Gnostic thinking alive.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 November 2015 01:10 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 40 ]
Jr. Member
Avatar
RankRank
Total Posts:  29
Joined  2015-07-21
MikeYohe - 05 November 2015 08:56 AM
deros - 05 November 2015 05:44 AM

Saying atheism is stupid does not make it so any more than saying theism is “smart” makes it so.

Maybe not. But it brings the subject into the light of discussion. No different than what Trump did with immigration, in saying our immigration policies are stupid. Trump has not changed immigration, but now that people see that taboo subjects can be talked about, changes of mind and policies are possible.
 
The Atheists are not fighting Christians. The Christians are using the Atheist’s thinking to help their cause.  The Christians are not looking at Atheists as one of their major problems, because the Atheist’s platform is not as much of a threat.
 
Pa ray is right. Atheism is stupid. The Atheist’s need to change their platform to their own thinking or stay a pawn of the Christian thinking.
 
Trump on the other hand not only did lip service, but he took the subject one step further than the Atheists by telling us his solution. The Atheists have no solution. A solution is required because this subject is proven by history to be a worldwide human psychological problem that has been around long before the Christians. The last man to try and fix the problem was Jesus and they stole and changed his works. Maybe not on purpose, because after the crucifixion there was nobody with Jesus’s insight that lived long enough to keep the Gnostic thinking alive.

Atheism isn’t a platform.  There is no “cause”.  Nor, is there a problem.

 Signature 

“All right, then, I’ll GO to hell.” - Huck Finn

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 November 2015 04:26 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 41 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2124
Joined  2013-06-01
Stellar - 05 November 2015 01:10 PM
MikeYohe - 05 November 2015 08:56 AM
deros - 05 November 2015 05:44 AM

Saying atheism is stupid does not make it so any more than saying theism is “smart” makes it so.

Maybe not. But it brings the subject ........ thinking alive.

Atheism isn’t a platform.  There is no “cause”.  Nor, is there a problem.


And you could be totally correct for some people. Other people might feel and think differently. I am open to looking at different views. I would like to pass down our knowledge and understandings to the next generation. I see atheism as a platform for other views of thought about religion as a whole. The figure of 2% of the people are atheists has been used. An example, people who are in favor of the separation of church and state, are thought of as atheist. They may be and may not be. It seems to be a catch all slot.
 
Another example. Our country was built by Christians and the Christian values. Many people think that is true. Yet, the First Amendment to the United States Constitution has the separation of church and state. Did we have a higher percentage of Atheists back then?
 
History has a way of changing. I would like to see the real history being passed on.

 
Welcome aboard, looking forward to your view points.

[ Edited: 05 November 2015 04:34 PM by MikeYohe ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 November 2015 05:25 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 42 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7748
Joined  2009-02-26
MikeYohe - 05 November 2015 04:26 PM
Stellar - 05 November 2015 01:10 PM
MikeYohe - 05 November 2015 08:56 AM
deros - 05 November 2015 05:44 AM

Saying atheism is stupid does not make it so any more than saying theism is “smart” makes it so.

Maybe not. But it brings the subject ........ thinking alive.

Atheism isn’t a platform.  There is no “cause”.  Nor, is there a problem.


And you could be totally correct for some people. Other people might feel and think differently. I am open to looking at different views. I would like to pass down our knowledge and understandings to the next generation. I see atheism as a platform for other views of thought about religion as a whole. The figure of 2% of the people are atheists has been used. An example, people who are in favor of the separation of church and state, are thought of as atheist. They may be and may not be. It seems to be a catch all slot.

Apparently you do not understand the intent of the “Establishment Clause” 

Another example. Our country was built by Christians and the Christian values. Many people think that is true. Yet, the First Amendment to the United States Constitution has the separation of church and state. Did we have a higher percentage of Atheists back then?

The founders recognized the inherent danger of a theocracy. Is that not what the earliest settlers were escaping from, religious persecution? 

History has a way of changing. I would like to see the real history being passed on.

What an odd thing to say.
History never changes, its already fixed. However, kowledge can change the way we have always done it in history.
One thing is historically clear. Theism has caused some of the bloodiest wars IN HISTORY.  I think THAT history needs to be changed in the future.

[ Edited: 05 November 2015 05:29 PM by Write4U ]
 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 May 2017 06:33 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 43 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  61
Joined  2013-08-29
LoisL - 26 October 2015 10:40 AM
grand pa ray - 26 October 2015 09:51 AM

Atheism is stupid, according to Carl Sagan.  I agree with his view and here is the reason why.  The word atheism started to gain attention in the 15th century when christian era ruled.  The christian leaders at that time gave the word a negative meaning ex. evil, bad, possessed and reinforced the belief and fear by actual torture.  When this word is used by the common christian, their preconditioned brain automatically shuts down their ability to reason.  I use a new positive word to help in a discussion about religion and that word is “catheist”.  This way i get a chance to discuss and explain how my own beliefs in a god have changed without them prejudging me.  It keeps the discussion going.  Definition: Catheist is a person who does not know if there is a god.

How does that differ from agnostic?

In fact, no one on earth knows if there is a god, theists and atheists alike.

Lois[/
quote]t

Lois, My objective was to get people to go back in history.  All Abrahamic religions started at a time when god’s seemed to be the only answer.  The smartest people of the time had to explain to others what was happening in order to control the less learned.  My selection of the term Catheist was my attempt to let others know me and where my thinking was coming from.  The Greek’s at that time in history simply put the letter A in front of the word they wanted to show the opposit view of.  It would be clearer if i just put an A in front of the word catholic ex. ACATHOLIC

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 June 2017 12:04 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 44 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  6
Joined  2017-06-10

Anyone who makes the claim “there is no God” would be subject to the requirement of evidence to support such a claim.

If your position is “I do not believe there is enough evidence to support the existence of a God” than you do NOT have to support your position with evidence, as you are not making a claim. This is the atheist position

If your position is “I do not know if there is a God” then you ALSO do not have to support your position with evidence, as you are ALSO not making a claim. This is the agnostic position

(I personally believe there is little distinction between the two, but that is an entirely different discussion)

Therefore it should be considered impossible to make a judgment on the stupidity of the atheist position as it is not making a claim or coming to a conclusion of any kind.

If you are concluding that the people who make the claim “There is no God” are atheists and stupid then you would be misrepresenting the atheist position in order to make it easier to attack. That is known as a “straw man” fallacy.

[ Edited: 10 June 2017 12:07 PM by Atheist_Twin ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 June 2017 04:54 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 45 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7748
Joined  2009-02-26
Atheist_Twin - 10 June 2017 12:04 PM

Anyone who makes the claim “there is no God” would be subject to the requirement of evidence to support such a claim. .

No, Because it is not a claim.  It’s a disclaimer, because the default position is that is no sentient creator.

You are making that claim and it is up to you to provide the proof .

[ Edited: 10 June 2017 05:06 PM by Write4U ]
 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
   
3 of 4
3