| Author | Message |
|---|
questionable content
Always Born a Crime
Age: 28
Gender: Female
Posts: 5604 | July 3rd, 2008 at 10:59pm
^ That's not proof to many people, some believe that humans were "made in the image of god". Also, I don't think "god" is a male because they were valued more, merely because males were traditionally dominant |
Firegarder
Joining The Black Parade
Age: 38
Gender: Female
Posts: 233 | July 4th, 2008 at 03:09pm Diana_a7x:Question that deals with this.
If you never think about a god, but do what your parents tell you, such as say your prayers before you go to sleep, How would you describe this? Consider this your own religion?
My parents would never ask me to say my prayers...
But I don't know if this would count as a similar sort of situation...
I'm an atheist, so obviously you're not normally going to see me in a church, but there are times when I'm going to be there, like at a wedding or most recently at my friend's baby's christening. It might seem wierd that I'm going to something like that, but I'm not going there for religious reasons, I'm going to support my friend in an important step in their life.
Again, obviously part of that wedding or christening is going to involve saying a prayer to yourself or something. At that time, I'm not praying to anyone, it doesn't mean anything to me, so there is no point me saying a prayer for my friend, I don't think it's going to benefit them in anyway.
It's the same when there is a prayer being said out loud, I'll just stand there, I won't be taking part (Which always earns me some dirty looks! Especially on my graduation day! I'll stand for the national anthem, but I'll not bow my head to make it look like I'm praying when I'm not thank you.)
If you are an atheist, you aren't at any point going to be saying any prayers. Even if your parents tell you too, you can't call that any sort of religion. You'd be doing that to make them happy, still wouldn't mean anything to yourself.
Thankfully I never had that problem. My Dad would probably think I was crazy if I started praying! |
malibu.
In the Cannibal Glow
Age: 30
Gender: -
Posts: 54114 | July 8th, 2008 at 12:49am What is the basis of the atheism faith?
The thoughts + beliefs that there is no god and that no higher power exists.
For most of my life I have been atheist. I never believed in what I was taught in Religeous Education. I only recently decided to call myself an atheist because before then I had always thought it was wrong to not believe in god. - People always used to get upset if I tried to tell them that god doesn't exist, so I thought my opinions were bad.
Why are more people "going atheist" now than ever before?
People are realising that there is no factual proof that god exists.
Also the theory of evolution is more believable than the theory that god made the world in seven days. |
Ignore Alien Orders
Salute You in Your Grave
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 2026 | July 8th, 2008 at 04:11am Diana_a7x:Question that deals with this.
If you never think about a god, but do what your parents tell you, such as say your prayers before you go to sleep, How would you describe this? Consider this your own religion?
I wouldn't say so. Religion is supposed to be (but isn't always) about faith, and what you have faith in is a very personal thing. Saying prayers because your parents tell you to isn't really anything more than reciting a bunch of syllables, if it doesn't mean anything to you.
(You as in anyone in general, not you personally.)
|
xxWolvenPrincessxx
Joining The Black Parade
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 200 | August 7th, 2008 at 10:16am The argument, that atheism is nothing more than agnosticism, claims that the lack of scientifically verifiable evidence automatically makes atheism an unwarranted belief. The typical arguments goes something like this: “Since there is (currently) no scientifically verifiable evidence to support either side of the God question, both theism and atheism have to be called beliefs. Just as theism is a belief that there is a God, atheism is the belief that there isn’t. Atheism, therefore, is not immune to the criticisms that other belief systems might draw.” This argument is true in regard to weak atheism, but also in another sense, one that the theist will not be willing to accept: that any and all theistic claims are belief-claims, and therefore all belief-claims fall into the agnostic category. What is good for the gander is good for the goose, as it were. While it can be argued that there is no empirically verifiable evidence to support atheism, the probability that there is a God that created and rules over the universe is for all intent purposes, nullified. The theist must first realize that all of our scientific theories guarantee the premises upon which they are founded, but can never guarantee the absolute truth of scientific conclusions. The nature of science is that it is “based in the use of the Principle of Sufficient Reason and, therefore, always leaves open the possibility of finding the explanation of any event.” The Principle of Sufficient Reason is defined as “the principle that there must be sufficient reason-causal or otherwise-for why whatever exists occurs or does so, and does so in the place, time and manner that it does.” While the agnosticism argument might be true for weak atheism, it does not hold for strong atheism. Strong atheism is defined as “an atheistic position that does not accept the concept of god” The strong atheist claims that the concept of God is flawed, or is based on flawed reasoning, and therefore meaningless. In other words, the strong atheist claims that if there is no sufficient reason to believe a thing exists, then there is no sufficient reason to believe that it does exist. To say otherwise, would be to based conclusions on ignorance. The strong atheist bases his conclusions on sufficient reason, plausibility and probability |
Mindfuck
Always Born a Crime
Age: -
Gender: Female
Posts: 5614 | August 7th, 2008 at 10:46am ^You know, I just googled part of what you'd written, and that whole paragraph was basically written by someone else. Make sure you source it or paraphrase when discussing things... and make sure to put in your own ideas. Just a tip.
And that whole thing is quite confusing. Maybe you'd care to share what the person who wrote it was trying to get at? Is he / she for or against atheism?
|
Emerald Muerte
Bleeding on the Floor
Age: 31
Gender: Female
Posts: 1134 | August 30th, 2008 at 04:33am Just a question, I go to a Catholic school and was raised a Catholic. However I've never been happy with the idea of worshipping any type of deity and finally letting go of it has made me more a lot more sure of myself than I had been for my entire life. Though, since being at a Catholic school I don't want to claim the title Atheist as it's generally discrimanated against.
Does anyone think that the term is becoming more generic, even though it means without/disbelief in theism, it seems to be more like a stereotype for anyone who is Godless. The term also seems to have a lot of negative connotations, and it seems that a lot of people are quick to make assumptions on supposed-Atheists thinking they're entirely faithless [when ironically enough many who have abandoned the idea of God have more faith/assurance in themselves and humanity in general.]
Is there anyone else who thinks that 'Atheist' is sounding more like a label rather than a [factual] term? |
nevergetmealive
Joining The Black Parade
Age: 31
Gender: Female
Posts: 226 | August 30th, 2008 at 06:03am room 101.:
Okay, let's get right to it  !
1. What is the basis of the atheism faith?
not believing in any higher power or god and also in some cases not believing in the supernatural, eg ghosts
room 101.:2. How can it be supported?
By peoples following of it, and it can be proven by their arguments of lack of proof and scientific explainations that say diffeent things to religion and in some cases ive seen people use examples of how the church has blatantly lied years ago for power and i also go to a religious school (im not religous though) and each teacher has different views on how to read the bible or an other religous book.
Athiest's are supported by the fact that there is not enough proof for religion and that even people who support iot have conflicting views about it. i am athiest myself but i dont support those other athiests that openly are rude about religion.
room 101.:3. How can it be UNsupported?
There shouldnt be supporters and usupporters in an argumentatuve way, you either have a religion or you dont. Religion should never openly abused or ruined by those who do not believe it, there should be no debates on religion or fights, if believe have a faith leave them be.
room 101.:4. Why are more people "going atheist" now than ever before?
because more people are being made aware of science and other alternatives ot religion and are not being forced into it like it used to be. People have more rights to believe what they want to think on their own, if they have a religion, in most cases it is by choice. It is just people not being forced into it and being shown other things, whereas not many years ago they weren taught as much about science because that wouls have conflicted with the church.
What i dont like is that people think it is the new cool thing to do to be athiest, i am athiest cause i want to be and i am very cynical about a lot of things, but i also dont fully believe darwinism, i really believ in nothing at all. A lot of people dont think im being true when i say that i dont belive in any god or even darwinsim saying it has to be one or the other, i think that my choice should be respected just as much as those who do chooose a religion.
People should not be forced into OR OUT OF a religion. People need some belief of their own wether that is catholisism or darwinism or something else, we have to respect that. |
Faye Merci
Salute You in Your Grave
Age: -
Gender: -
Posts: 4473 | August 31st, 2008 at 12:08am nevergetmealive:There shouldnt be supporters and usupporters in an argumentatuve way, you either have a religion or you dont. Religion should never openly abused or ruined by those who do not believe it, there should be no debates on religion or fights, if believe have a faith leave them be.
You don't think there should be debate about religion? What if I was part of a religion that believed all people of a certain race or gender should be killed? Shouldn't those ethics then be debated? The problem is, if you have a religion, you want to act out deeds in the name of religion. Those who practice religion will never completely give up their religious views when governing others, so why should those without them have to endure religiously influenced rules or laws?
nevergetmealive:What i dont like is that people think it is the new cool thing to do to be athiest, i am athiest cause i want to be and i am very cynical about a lot of things, but i also dont fully believe darwinism, i really believ in nothing at all.
What exactly do you not believe in the theory of evolution? Was there some place where you disagree with the concept, or something? |
Go fuck yourself
Devil's Got Your Number
Age: 30
Gender: Female
Posts: 37823 | August 31st, 2008 at 12:29am I was raised very strict southern babtist, I'm still forced to go to church twice a week, but I don't consider myself christian. I hate church and I refuse to read the bible. I don't condem religion. I do believe there is a god though, thus makes me agnostic |
nevergetmealive
Joining The Black Parade
Age: 31
Gender: Female
Posts: 226 | August 31st, 2008 at 05:08am Faye Merci:nevergetmealive:There shouldnt be supporters and usupporters in an argumentatuve way, you either have a religion or you dont. Religion should never openly abused or ruined by those who do not believe it, there should be no debates on religion or fights, if believe have a faith leave them be.
You don't think there should be debate about religion? What if I was part of a religion that believed all people of a certain race or gender should be killed? Shouldn't those ethics then be debated? The problem is, if you have a religion, you want to act out deeds in the name of religion. Those who practice religion will never completely give up their religious views when governing others, so why should those without them have to endure religiously influenced rules or laws?
nevergetmealive:What i dont like is that people think it is the new cool thing to do to be athiest, i am athiest cause i want to be and i am very cynical about a lot of things, but i also dont fully believe darwinism, i really believ in nothing at all.
What exactly do you not believe in the theory of evolution? Was there some place where you disagree with the concept, or something?
Im not saying that the ethics of something shouldnt be debated against if it puts others in danger, if there is cause for concern then it definately needs some kind of interception. What im saying is how people openly question each others religions and are rude about it, we can DISCUSS religion, but i dont think we should DEBATE it.
i dont really like thinking about our past, i focus on now and the moment we are in now, i ahve no interest or belief in how we came to be and couldnt care less. I think that darwinism still has alot of loop holes and they are still researching a lot of things, now i know thats normal and we are continually learning more. But they are constantly changing our order of ancestors and which ones relate how and which ones came before another. I think until the people who totally believe it have it sorted, i wont believe it, there is always holes in everyones beliefs and until i find one without any, i choose not to have any. |
Emerald Muerte
Bleeding on the Floor
Age: 31
Gender: Female
Posts: 1134 | September 2nd, 2008 at 04:36am nevergetmealive: Im not saying that the ethics of something shouldnt be debated against if it puts others in danger, if there is cause for concern then it definately needs some kind of interception. What im saying is how people openly question each others religions and are rude about it, we can DISCUSS religion, but i dont think we should DEBATE it.
i dont really like thinking about our past, i focus on now and the moment we are in now, i ahve no interest or belief in how we came to be and couldnt care less. I think that darwinism still has alot of loop holes and they are still researching a lot of things, now i know thats normal and we are continually learning more. But they are constantly changing our order of ancestors and which ones relate how and which ones came before another. I think until the people who totally believe it have it sorted, i wont believe it, there is always holes in everyones beliefs and until i find one without any, i choose not to have any.
I agree with most of what you said. Religion is a topic to be discussed not debated; I guess that way it takes out all the conflict in terms of waging war for example. I'm not too sure in the theory of evolution, I suppose it's correct to as far as the current knowledge can determine, I guess it gives us part of a reason as to our existence in a realistic manner. Although, like 'nevergetmealive' said, the moment we live in now is important, in order to advance I think that sometimes we need to know what to draw from the past [proven scientific knowledge, not biblical theory] in order to understand what to do with the future.
For me living in the now needn't have religion attached, believing in God or following the rules. I think all that's important is that you hold personal moral values which are important to you, whether that be stuff like the Ten Commandments or more modern theories. Make your own personal rules, as long as they don't infringe on others you're okay. Whatever, if you're happy without having to praise God and do have faith in our world's future then that's pretty much all that's necessary. [/endrant] |
Mindfuck
Always Born a Crime
Age: -
Gender: Female
Posts: 5614 | September 2nd, 2008 at 05:59am nevergetmealive:Im not saying that the ethics of something shouldnt be debated against if it puts others in danger, if there is cause for concern then it definately needs some kind of interception. What im saying is how people openly question each others religions and are rude about it, we can DISCUSS religion, but i dont think we should DEBATE it. There's a fine line between discussing and debating. You can have a debate that is part of a discussion, and I don't see why the topic of religion or atheism etc. should be excluded. There are different levels of debating. The debating people do here is not (supposed to be) aggressive or formal. I think as long as there are at least two opposing sides, anything can be debated, not just discussed. |
Faye Merci
Salute You in Your Grave
Age: -
Gender: -
Posts: 4473 | September 2nd, 2008 at 08:07pm nevergetmealive:Im not saying that the ethics of something shouldnt be debated against if it puts others in danger, if there is cause for concern then it definately needs some kind of interception. What im saying is how people openly question each others religions and are rude about it, we can DISCUSS religion, but i dont think we should DEBATE it.
There is a difference between debate and argument.
A debate is defined as "a discussion, as of a public question in an assembly, involving opposing viewpoints" or "a formal contest in which the affirmative and negative sides of a proposition are advocated by opposing speakers."
An argument is "an oral disagreement; verbal opposition; contention; altercation:" or "a heated or angry dispute; noisy argument or controversy."
As you can see, people can debate about religion because what you have described is an argument. A debate is an attempt to present both sides with research and find new ways to think about the topic and possibly reach a compromise. An argument is saying "You're wrong, and I'm right, and here's why." A debate admits that both sides have points of rationality, but that one may prove to be more rational than the other, and therefore, win the debate. A debate is not rude, or at least, shouldn't be. An argument is. If you can't handle debating or need to give it a misnomer, then I wouldn't attempt it.
nevergetmealive: i dont really like thinking about our past, i focus on now and the moment we are in now, i ahve no interest or belief in how we came to be and couldnt care less. I think that darwinism still has alot of loop holes and they are still researching a lot of things, now i know thats normal and we are continually learning more. But they are constantly changing our order of ancestors and which ones relate how and which ones came before another. I think until the people who totally believe it have it sorted, i wont believe it, there is always holes in everyones beliefs and until i find one without any, i choose not to have any.
It is only by learning from our mistakes that we grow. Events of our past and history have shaped who we are. If humans forgot everything we had ever learned, we would have never evolved (or is that a bad choice of words for you?). You really have no interest in how humankind came to exist? You've never wondered the universal question, "where do I come from? Why am I here"? For instance, if we didn't care that our ancestors had found ways to harness fire or domesticate animals, we might have never passed down the skill. It is important to understand history: it helps us understand people and societies, understand change and how our society came to be, it contributes to understanding our morals and gives us an identity. So, in short, you should give a shit about the past. It led to you today.
Darwinism only has loops because we keep finding more evidence to prove it, forcing us to reshuffle the order of evolution. It's progress in the happening, and to make it happen, you have to change things. The Human Genome Project (the project that tests human and human-ancestor dna to see where we came from) was only formed in 1990, and a complete draft of the human dna strand was published in 2003. It's still relatively new but it is proving itself to be right. In five years, you're going to find where you've made gaps and fill them in. No belief will be without holes, because nothing is perfect, but at least Darwinism has cold hard fact backing it rather than some dusty scriptures and make-belief. |
