Atheist Bible

[Legion]

Yes yes, that was just SO HATEFUL. Apparently I'm actually afraid of religious people because I think their ideas are as silly as fairies at the bottom of the garden.

Puhleaze.

Calling your religion silly, in so many words, is hardly HATE. I suggest you visit some white supremacy sites or Fred Phelp's if you want to see what hate is. You have a huge double standard when it comes to whether or not its okay to reject an idea. Apparently South Park's expose on Scientology was anti-theistic hate.

Perhaps you should read my earlier post. You are proving my point exactly.

I do not recall saying I was religious and yet you presume that I am purely because I don't agree with your rantings.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/18.95495.1486988

You claim that believing in a god is illogical and yet you can't seem to use rationality in your own arguments, the fact you claim that you were insulting MY religion despite being given no indication of what I believe, is just one of many examples.

Just because you don't swear and use aggressive language does not mean you are being any less hateful.

 

[caross73]

Just because you don't swear and use aggressive language does not mean you are being any less hateful.

You have decidedly strange standards for what constitutes hate.

you claim that you were insulting MY religion despite being given no indication of what I believe is just one of many examples.

Then I'm not sure why you are so upset.

 

[Baby Tea]

So, why do their beliefs deserve protection from ridicule? Because they are popular? Because they are heart felt?

Oh yeah, sorry.
My mistake that people would actually want to be respectful of others rather then subject people to ridicule because you don't agree with them, or find their worldview 'silly'.

You can critique someone's worldview, and have a healthy discussion and even debate about it with them and still be respectful.

 

[caross73]

So, why do their beliefs deserve protection from ridicule? Because they are popular? Because they are heart felt?

Oh yeah, sorry.
My mistake that people would actually want to be respectful of others rather then subject people to ridicule because you don't agree with them, or find their worldview 'silly'.

You can critique someone's worldview, and have a healthy discussion and even debate about it with them and still be respectful.

I think I just did. When someone's worldview is ridiculous, I'd be doing them a huge disservice to hold back. Does religion need a handicap before it can be debated? Attacking an idea is quite different than attacking the person that holds it.

 

[Lord George]

All of you should just convert to Georgism then you'd know the truth and answer to all life's questions and wonders. But yeh an atheist bible seems like one of the most pointless things you could create . Its like making an island under the sea.

 

[cuddly_tomato]

So, why do their beliefs deserve protection from ridicule? Because they are popular? Because they are heart felt?

Oh yeah, sorry.
My mistake that people would actually want to be respectful of others rather then subject people to ridicule because you don't agree with them, or find their worldview 'silly'.

You can critique someone's worldview, and have a healthy discussion and even debate about it with them and still be respectful.

I think I just did. When someone's worldview is ridiculous, I'd be doing them a huge disservice to hold back. Does religion need a handicap before it can be debated? Attacking an idea is quite different than attacking the person that holds it.

You know what you sound like there? You know those people who insist that others need to be taught about Christ because if they don't they will go to Hell? Them. It is the exact same thing. You are not someone with a simple belief system, you are The Bringer of Truth and are The Saviour of the people who need to be converted into realising the Right Way.

 

[Legion]

Just because you don't swear and use aggressive language does not mean you are being any less hateful.

You have decidedly strange standards for what constitutes hate.

Not really, the fact that you can't express your belief in No God without belittling others views shows the contempt you feel. Like I said, you do not need to be aggressive to show hatred.

you claim that you were insulting MY religion despite being given no indication of what I believe is just one of many examples.

Then I'm not sure why you are so upset.

I never said I was upset. I simply dislike the way many atheists so frequently feel the need to express their contempt for religion when such things should not mean anything to them.

You are simply a reminder of everything I dislike about atheism.

 

[GothmogII]

All of you should just convert to Georgism then you'd know the truth and answer to all life's questions and wonders. But yeh an atheist bible seems like one of the most pointless things you could create . Its like making an island under the sea.

Wouldn't it turn out the same though? I mean...all the stuff about not killing and stealing would still be there. All that would be different is the genesis portion and possibly more liberal stances on things such as homosexuality and such.

Here's the atheist (Christian at least) bible would be like: [ul]Take the regular bible and remove every single supernatural element from it. BOOM! What's changed? Nothing.[/ul] The ideas put forth are still there, all that's gone is the idea that something 'had' to have influenced those ideas in the first place. And that thing was humanity.

(And I do realise all I've described is Christian Atheism, again.) The point is, if all that is good enough on it's own. Why do you need 'word of god' to validate it?

 

[Baby Tea]

You can critique someone's worldview, and have a healthy discussion and even debate about it with them and still be respectful.

I think I just did. When someone's worldview is ridiculous, I'd be doing them a huge disservice to hold back. Does religion need a handicap before it can be debated? Attacking an idea is quite different than attacking the person that holds it.

Hold back what? You didn't approach this thread with anything resembling tact or respect.
And guess what? It's not your place or position to teach anyone anything about their own worldview. If some guy believed that God was a box of french fries, then no matter how silly anyone thought it might be: It's totally his choice. I don't agree with him, you don't agree with him, but who cares? If the guy isn't hurting anyone, what does it matter?

And no, attacking in idea isn't different then attacking the one who holds it. Unlike atheism, most theist worldviews are completely life encompassing. My faith in Christianity effects every part of my life. A Muslim and Jew would say the same, as would many others. So to insult their faith is to insult them as well.
As someone who claims to be so educated, I find it odd that I'd even have to explain that to you.

 

[GothmogII]

So, why do their beliefs deserve protection from ridicule? Because they are popular? Because they are heart felt?

Oh yeah, sorry.
My mistake that people would actually want to be respectful of others rather then subject people to ridicule because you don't agree with them, or find their worldview 'silly'.

You can critique someone's worldview, and have a healthy discussion and even debate about it with them and still be respectful.

I think I just did. When someone's worldview is ridiculous, I'd be doing them a huge disservice to hold back. Does religion need a handicap before it can be debated? Attacking an idea is quite different than attacking the person that holds it.

You know what you sound like there? You know those people who insist that others need to be taught about Christ because if they don't they will go to Hell? Them. It is the exact same thing. You are not someone with a simple belief system, you are The Bringer of Truth and are The Saviour of the people who need to be converted into realising the Right Way.

True, but at least you won't go anywhere for not believing in atheism? (Unless there's an atheist hell I'm not aware of.)

 

[caross73]

I think I just did. When someone's worldview is ridiculous, I'd be doing them a huge disservice to hold back. Does religion need a handicap before it can be debated? Attacking an idea is quite different than attacking the person that holds it.

You know what you sound like there? You know those people who insist that others need to be taught about Christ because if they don't they will go to Hell? Them. It is the exact same thing. You are not someone with a simple belief system, you are The Bringer of Truth and are The Saviour of the people who need to be converted into realising the Right Way.

Hey, I'm not threatening them with damnation. I'm not trying to save them. All I did was say they have no epistemological basis for their belief. That its on par with believing in fairies. And honestly, I *know* people who believe in fairies, good people, a little wierd. I never even really spoke up until somewhere, somebody couldn't stand to not tell everyone how atheists don't have a rational basis for their morality. I found that mildly insulting and wrong.

Who is it who knows everything there is about morality? Who is it that was proselytizing? Not I. I was responding to a misconception about atheism. And you guys couldn't wait to dismantle that.

 

[Noone From Nowhere]

So long as the pre-requisite irony is in place, an Atheist Bible could have a dash of Darwin (Histirical element),a heaping helping of PZ Meyer's Pharyngula blog, James Randi's writings and videos and Richard Dawkins books (contemporary element) and just a dash of The Island of Doctor Moreau and/or David Brin's Uplift series (prophetic promise of paradise/cautionary tale element).
By the by, that article from Cracked.com (10 Things Christians and Atheists Can (and must) Agree Upon)is marred by cracks in it's facade of logic, particularly the part about why atheists mocked the Superbowl 38 incident. It's not because of sex being meaningless but because women's breasts are not sex organs. If one has even a working knowledge of human biology, one should know that.Still, David Wong keeps level headed.

 

[cuddly_tomato]

So, why do their beliefs deserve protection from ridicule? Because they are popular? Because they are heart felt?

Oh yeah, sorry.
My mistake that people would actually want to be respectful of others rather then subject people to ridicule because you don't agree with them, or find their worldview 'silly'.

You can critique someone's worldview, and have a healthy discussion and even debate about it with them and still be respectful.

I think I just did. When someone's worldview is ridiculous, I'd be doing them a huge disservice to hold back. Does religion need a handicap before it can be debated? Attacking an idea is quite different than attacking the person that holds it.

You know what you sound like there? You know those people who insist that others need to be taught about Christ because if they don't they will go to Hell? Them. It is the exact same thing. You are not someone with a simple belief system, you are The Bringer of Truth and are The Saviour of the people who need to be converted into realising the Right Way.

True, but at least you won't go anywhere for not believing in atheism? (Unless there's an atheist hell I'm not aware of.)

There is. Its an eldritch cinema, with a person behind you who won't shut up, someone in front of you with an afro, someone to your left who eats potato chips really loudly, and someone on your right who drinks the last bit of every drink with a straw, making that disgusting "shkskkshsshhhhkkkskskshhkk" noise.

And all it plays is Uwe Boll films all day.

 

[Souplex]

http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=798#comic
All hail Athe!

 

[LewsTherin]

So long as the pre-requisite irony is in place, an Atheist Bible could have a dash of Darwin (Histirical element),a heaping helping of PZ Meyer's Pharyngula blog, James Randi's writings and videos and Richard Dawkins books (contemporary element) and just a dash of The Island of Doctor Moreau and/or David Brin's Uplift series (prophetic promise of paradise/cautionary tale element).
By the by, that article from Cracked.com (http://www.cracked.com/article_15759_10-things-christians-atheists-can-must-agree-on.html)is marred by cracks in it's facade of logic, particularly the part about why atheists mocked the Superbowl 38 incident. It's not because of sex being meaningless but because women's breasts are not sex organs. If one has even a working knowledge of human biology, one should know that.

Ye mighten wanna fix tha link, laddie.

 

[kawligia]

God is not the only source of morality.

Do a search for "natural law" or "natural rights."

No. But belief systems and faith are the only source of morality. There is no logic or scientific basis for morality, ethics, justice etc.

If you do the searches and read up a little, you will find plenty of philosophers that discuss morality in a secular way.

 

[The Black Adder]

The Atheist Bible should be nature.

 

[bitzi61]

My brother's a pretty hardcore Atheist. When I asked him what was the difference between Atheist and Agnostic he pretty much said that Atheists believed in no possibility of a greater power(God/gods.) I didn't really think there would be a "moral tome" for Atheists, just a couple guidelines...

Your brother is wrong though, just to let you know. Atheism answers the belief question, agnosticism answers the what we know question.

Agnosticism doesn't answer "Do you believe in a God?".

It's not so much "do I believe in God", it's more, "there could be, but I am not sure..."