Spreading Atheism

[Worsle]

The point is, they could have put up anything and still wouldn't have been pointing their accusing fingers at one specific religion and it's denominations. If they said, "There is probably no Allah" we would still have the same problem. Same with any other religion they could pick on, though it seems Christianity is the hometown favorite of the atheist scoff.

The sign says there is no god, Allah is a god so the sign is saying there is no Allah. It does not say there is no Jehovah, witch would be a lot more specific and give you a point. Also christians are really passive aggressive really, oh know atheists in predominantly christian countries are more likely to say things about christianity? Well boho.

Also why is it always Allah people go for? Why not Vishnu? Is it because christian's see muslims as scary despite them being mostly the same thing?

The problem is that painting 'there is probably no God' is almost the same as printing 'Atheists are going to Hell'. It's a direct attack on Theists, rather than an expression of a belief or lack of belief. It's not so much promoting Atheism as it is deriding Theism.

Yep. And this is the reason that it really is basically just a case of bigoted idiocy. There is no way that anyone is going to change their minds because they have been insulted by someone, especially someone who knows so little about the subject they are insulting that they make Bill O'Reilly look like Stephen Hawking. The purpose behind it is to evangelise and make themselves appear better in their own little clique, to insult and to feel superior.

Again there probably is no god is bigotry? Seriously there probably is no god is bigotry now? Are you guys reading what you ar saying?

 

[cuddly_tomato]

The problem is that painting 'there is probably no God' is almost the same as printing 'Atheists are going to Hell'. It's a direct attack on Theists, rather than an expression of a belief or lack of belief. It's not so much promoting Atheism as it is deriding Theism.

Yep. And this is the reason that it really is basically just a case of bigoted idiocy. There is no way that anyone is going to change their minds because they have been insulted by someone, especially someone who knows so little about the subject they are insulting that they make Bill O'Reilly look like Stephen Hawking. The purpose behind it is to evangelise and make themselves appear better in their own little clique, to insult and to feel superior.

Again there probably is no god is bigotry? Seriously there probably is no god is bigotry now? Are you guys reading what you ar saying?

Nope. "There probably is no god" is simply wrong. The common accusation wheeled out by a lot of these kinds of atheists is an extension of that:- "There probably is no god so you all need to stop believing what you believe and start believing what I believe", which is.

 

[Legion]

Personally, I don't believe atheism is a religion in any sense. It's more of a philosophy, a way to look at life, a scientific reasoning. And I don't mind atheists making information about their thought process available, but I don't really see a reason to "spread the word".

Atheists who have made an intelligent, informed decision in their life choices are fantastic in my book. Atheists who feel it is their goal in life to look down on others who use religion as a comfort in life, or atheists who feel high and mighty for their views are JUST as bad (IMO) as any "Christian" who sings tales of fire and brimstone and children going to hell for liking things like Harry Potter. Neither get their point across and only seem to exist to spark hatred from the other side.

And yes, I do consider myself a non denominational Christian...although I fully understand why many people have a problem with people claiming to be Christians today.

Agreed on all points, as for the last one, it's only really in the USA. Christianity is not anywhere near as large in the UK as it is in the USA but the non-Christians here still don't dislike Christianity anywhere near as much as the non-Christians of the US, they are tolerated, just like pretty much everything else.

The difference is likely under the "purpose of offering guidance and comfort in life." There is nothing to link one Atheist to another besides their lack of belief in a God. Religious people have rules, philosophies and the like that are common between people. Beyond "There is no God" anything Atheists have in common with each other is all just a coincidence.

There are no rules, no leader, no real organisation the same way you get the Church. Also no central text or doctrine the same way people have the Bible or the Koran.

"Atheism is a religion the same way bald is a hair colour." - Some guy on the internet.

I agree with you in theory. However a lot of the Atheists on the Escapist have almost turned it into one with the way they push their beliefs. It's practically a cult on here where if you believe in any form of God then you are "clearly incapable of any form of logic" and if you don't defend Atheism to the death then you are "A Bible loving nut".

I have never been a Christian or truly followed any religion and yet I am constantly accused/replied to as though I am/do purely because I disagree with a lot of what the Atheists on here have said.

 

[Worsle]

The problem is that painting 'there is probably no God' is almost the same as printing 'Atheists are going to Hell'. It's a direct attack on Theists, rather than an expression of a belief or lack of belief. It's not so much promoting Atheism as it is deriding Theism.

Yep. And this is the reason that it really is basically just a case of bigoted idiocy. There is no way that anyone is going to change their minds because they have been insulted by someone, especially someone who knows so little about the subject they are insulting that they make Bill O'Reilly look like Stephen Hawking. The purpose behind it is to evangelise and make themselves appear better in their own little clique, to insult and to feel superior.

Again there probably is no god is bigotry? Seriously there probably is no god is bigotry now? Are you guys reading what you ar saying?

Nope. "There probably is no god" is simply wrong. The common accusation wheeled out by a lot of these kinds of atheists is an extension of that:- "There probably is no god so you all need to stop believing what you believe and start believing what I believe", which is.

No there probably is no god is atheism, the reason atheist bring it up because it is all atheism is. Seriously if being told there probably is no god seems like bigotry to you grow a back bone. Also telling people Christ is your lord and savour is also by default telling them what ever you believe is false and unless you believe what I do you wont get saved (edit for what ever deity you prefer). If you can't handle simple statements like that then you would be better off getting off the internet and back into your little buble as I don't think you are cut out for here.

 

[Ziadaine_v1legacy]

Has anyone actually stopped and noticed lately, alot of newcomers (1-10 posts) first post about religion and causes 5 pages worth of bible-bashing of which he's/she's gotten his/her answer already? Seems to me like an easy way to harvest badges. :|

 

[cuddly_tomato]

No there probably is no god is atheism, the reason atheist bring it up because it is all atheism is.

No. "I believe that there is no god" is atheism. "There is no god" is fundamentalism.

Seriously if being told there probably is no god seems like bigotry to you grow a back bone. Also telling people Christ is your lord and savour is also by default telling them what ever you believe is false and unless you believe what I do you wont get saved.

Yes... saying "Christ is your lord and if you don't follow him you will go to hell" is also fundamentalism. It is exactly the same as the atheist above in this case. It is stating ones beliefs as fact, not as beliefs. It is being completely unquestioning of ones own beliefs yet expecting everyone else to question theirs and reach the same conclusions you do.

If you can't handle simple statements like that then you would be better off getting off the internet and back into your little buble as I don't think you are cut out for here.

Erm... I am explaining to you the differences between being a fundamentalist and simply being religious or atheist. If you think that, or making posts on an internet forum, has anything to do with courage your life has really gone awry somewhere.

 

[Legion]

No there probably is no god is atheism, the reason atheist bring it up because it is all atheism is. Seriously if being told there probably is no god seems like bigotry to you grow a back bone. Also telling people Christ is your lord and savour is also by default telling them what ever you believe is false and unless you believe what I do you wont get saved (edit for what ever deity you prefer). If you can't handle simple statements like that then you would be better off getting off the internet and back into your little buble as I don't think you are cut out for here.

No. "There is no God" is Atheism. That's all Atheism is, the belief that no God exists.

Agnosticism is the belief that God may or may not exist, but there is no proof either way. So saying there probably isn't would be an Agnostics way of saying that although there might be a God, there probably isn't.

Bigotry it bigotry. Cuddly_Tomato didn't say he was deeply offended by it so I don't get where the 'backbone' comment came from, perhaps you are just a jerk.

Your comment about the Jesus thing is true, but if you actually read Cuddly's post you would have seen that he said it is just as bad.

Your last comment has already been answered by my jerk statement.

Has anyone actually stopped and noticed lately, alot of newcomers (1-10 posts) first post about religion and causes 5 pages worth of bible-bashing of which he's/she's gotten his/her answer already? Seems to me like an easy way to harvest badges. :|

Indeed they do, that's one of the major problems with this site, that badges are awarded for creating threads with lot's of views and replies rather than good quality. I think the badges should require the thread to survive 24 hours without being locked or something.

 

[Venatio]

Congress offically made Atheism a religion, and it is a double standard that the school would force the Atheist Group to paint over such a moderate message. They have no right.

My college teacher told me, although I think it had to do more with bureacratic filings than actual recognition by the part of the Congressman. I'll talk to her about it and get her source.

 

[Dott]

That's outright blasphemy and discrimination.
We have rights to believe in what we want to believe in. Atheism is no different.

Allowing christians to put up posters, but removing the atheistic ones is much similar to what happened to the christians in age's past.
It's not as extreme or violent, but equally symbolic.
''We do not want your non-religious crap.''

I'm offended, too.
I'm somewhat an atheist.

 

[Urgh76]

Im glad atheism is spreading because now that we're in this setback financially, people are thinking more logically and seeing that we're wasting a lot of money on churches

The government was able to take us as stupid asses who'd believe the story of jesus if we told them but that's starting to fade away

EDIT: if that person with a huge face in black in white for an avatar quotes me, i'll kick ur ass

EDIT EDIT: huge black and white anime face

 

[Amnestic]

I agree with you in theory. However a lot of the Atheists on the Escapist have almost turned it into one with the way they push their beliefs. It's practically a cult on here where if you believe in any form of God then you are "clearly incapable of any form of logic" and if you don't defend Atheism to the death then you are "A Bible loving nut".

I have never been a Christian or truly followed any religion and yet I am constantly accused/replied to as though I am/do purely because I disagree with a lot of what the Atheists on here have said.

Welcome to the Internet, where everyone except you is wrong unless they agree with you at which point they're your best friend.

I don't really have much more to say. 'Militant' atheists are just as annoying as 'militant' religious people. I'd be far happier if they could all go into a corner and bicker at each other quietly so I can go back to having pleasant conversations with people who don't insist on pushing their philosophical beliefs on to me, and in return I won't push mine on to them.

Im glad atheism is spreading because now that we're in this setback financially, people are thinking more logically and seeing that we're wasting a lot of money on churches

The government was able to take us as stupid asses who'd believe the story of jesus if we told them but that's starting to fade away

EDIT: if that person with a huge face in black in white for an avatar quotes me, i'll kick ur ass

EDIT EDIT: huge black and white anime face

I assume you mean me.

In which case, OLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.

Enjoy your being quoted, I'll be here all day - wait shit no I've got a lecture in half an hour. I'll be back after that though.

 

[cuddly_tomato]

You are putting the cart before the horse there. You don't believe in a god there for you are an atheist, atheism does not tell you any thing because there is nothing to tell. Now you can have philosophies and even religions witch are atheist (types buddhism would qualify here) but the fact they are atheist is not what makes them such.

This would be me.

I am an atheist in that I don't believe in god, but I have quite strong spiritual beliefs, even though I can't prove them. If the premise of all atheism is that there is no logical reason to believe something, what does that make me?

Religion encompasses possibly the most influental and complex part of humanity and human culture and extends all the way back to when the first humans were drawing on cave walls. When the entire thing is condensed into "There is probably no god, full stop", it isn't just religious people who think "urgh".

Enjoy your being quoted, I'll be here all day - wait shit no I've got a lecture in half an hour. I'll be back after that though.

I hope you know what you are doing. Internet tough guys are really dangerous and scary.

 

[guttergal]

OT:There will always be a battle of belief as long as two types of beliefs exsist, wich there always will, no matter what facts come out. Figthing about it is stupid and is fultile, because faith is believeing in something when there is no proof, so you can't prove anything.
It's like fighting over a flower, I think it's beautiful and smells good, you think it's ugly and smells bad. Neither can prove it because there's a feeling or a reaction in me that says one thing and vise versa.

Sorry but that statement is completely void when comparing religious belief and atheism.
Atheism is not built on "feelings" or "belief" it's based on science, reason and most importantly a lot evidence in it's favour.

If I've to use your anology its like religion saying there is a belief that this plant produces healing leaves and atheism saying that while science can't disprove this outright, there is overwhelming evidence to show the plants leaves have no positive effect at all.

 

[Worsle]

No. "I believe that there is no god" is atheism. "There is no god" is fundamentalism.

No. "There is no God" is Atheism. That's all Atheism is, the belief that no God exists.

Agnosticism is the belief that God may or may not exist, but there is no proof either way. So saying there probably isn't would be an Agnostics way of saying that although there might be a God, there probably isn't.

Now lets start with these two, put it simply you are wrong. All there is to atheism is a lack of belief nothing else. Where in individual atheist sits after that does not really matter for the definition, nope all you need to do is not believe. No atheist will rule would every possible type of god as there are too many, they might find specific ones ludicrous but given how many religions and variations there are out there I don't think any one will spend there time to decided on each one individually.

Yes... saying "Christ is your lord and if you don't follow him you will go to hell" is also fundamentalism. It is exactly the same as the atheist above in this case. It is stating ones beliefs as fact, not as beliefs. It is being completely unquestioning of ones own beliefs yet expecting everyone else to question theirs and reach the same conclusions you do.

You and the point have missed each other quite dramatically. If we go with your idea of bigotry then just saying you believe in Jesus is bigotry. Why because is you say you believe in Jesus you also must be saying people who believe in other things are wrong, and if saying you believe in Jesus is fundamentalism then I have no idea what is going on any more.

]Bigotry it bigotry. Cuddly_Tomato didn't say he was deeply offended by it so I don't get where the 'backbone' comment came from, perhaps you are just a jerk.

I might be a jerk but that does not effect wither or not my point is correct. If you believe a mild statement of belief or in this case your lack of belief is bigotry then you need to toughen up. How can you really expect to function in the real world (let alone the internet) if you can't handled people who think different things to you? You can't, so I might be a jerk but the world is filled with jerks and things much worse than that.

 

[cuddly_tomato]

OT:There will always be a battle of belief as long as two types of beliefs exsist, wich there always will, no matter what facts come out. Figthing about it is stupid and is fultile, because faith is believeing in something when there is no proof, so you can't prove anything.
It's like fighting over a flower, I think it's beautiful and smells good, you think it's ugly and smells bad. Neither can prove it because there's a feeling or a reaction in me that says one thing and vise versa.

Sorry but that statement is completely void when comparing religious belief and atheism.
Atheism is not built on "feelings" or "belief" it's based on science, reason and most importantly a lot evidence in it's favour.

If I've to use your anology its like religion saying there is a belief that this plant produces healing leaves and atheism saying that while science can't disprove this outright, there is overwhelming evidence to show the plants leaves have no positive effect at all.

No it isn't. Science and religion are completely unconnected. Trying to favour one over the other is like trying to favour ice cream over youtube.

Science deals with observable phenomena and repeatable experimentation. If you want to understand how something works and make useful predictions then science is a method that humans have developed in order to do that. However, if you are looking for spiritual, moral, ethical, or philosophical direction, science has nothing at all to say about that.

Yes... saying "Christ is your lord and if you don't follow him you will go to hell" is also fundamentalism. It is exactly the same as the atheist above in this case. It is stating ones beliefs as fact, not as beliefs. It is being completely unquestioning of ones own beliefs yet expecting everyone else to question theirs and reach the same conclusions you do.

You and the point have missed each other quite dramatically. If we go with your idea of bigotry then just saying you believe in Jesus is bigotry. Why because is you say you believe in Jesus you also must be saying people who believe in other things are wrong, and if saying you believe in Jesus is fundamentalism then I have no idea what is going on any more.

Actually it is you who missed the point, even though I used bold. Let me try this again using a combination of bold, underline, and italics.

Lets see if you can tell the difference between these two statements.

1. I believe there is no god.

2. There is no god.

To help you I sort of emphasised the difference. When people discuss each others beliefs as beliefs, then they can approach the subject with respect and maturity, as a belief because belief gives room for doubt. It isn't claimed as fact. That in itself isn't bigotry, it is just fundamentalism. It crosses into bigotry once one side sets about trying to convert the other.

]Bigotry it bigotry. Cuddly_Tomato didn't say he was deeply offended by it so I don't get where the 'backbone' comment came from, perhaps you are just a jerk.

I might be a jerk but that does not effect wither or not my point is correct. If you believe a mild statement of belief or in this case your lack of belief is bigotry then you need to toughen up. How can you really expect to function in the real world (let alone the internet) if you can't handled people who think different things to you? You can't, so I might be a jerk but the world is filled with jerks and things much worse than that.

Hear that machines? You have to toughen up because people on the internet don't like civilized discourse, rational debate, and well reasoned arguments. All that takes effort and intelligence. Sheesh, don't you know anything? If you really want to participate in a discussion and learn things, you need to be as ignorant, insulting, and obstinate as possible. That is the best way to garner the respect and admiration of intelligent people, you should know this after being here so long Machines. Shame on you!

 

[Worsle]

Actually it is you who missed the point, even though I used bold. Let me try this again using a combination of bold, underline, and italics.

Lets see if you can tell the difference between these two statements.

1. I believe there is no god.

2. There is no god.

To help you I sort of emphasised the difference. When people discuss each others beliefs as beliefs, then they can approach the subject with respect and maturity, as a belief because belief gives room for doubt. It isn't claimed as fact. That in itself isn't bigotry, it is just fundamentalism. It crosses into bigotry once one side sets about trying to convert the other.

Ok if this is the direction your argument is going lets look at the statement again.

"There is probably no god"

Note the word in bold there, that is an important word and makes it a different sentence from "there is no god".

That and if you are against people trying to convert peoples beliefs then what are you doing here in this thread? That and why are you not saying you believe it crosses the line into bigotry rather than just stating it as fact?

Edit. You know what I just thought how funny it would be if churches where required to say they are probably the house of the lord. It is PC gone mad I tells you.

 

[cuddly_tomato]

Actually it is you who missed the point, even though I used bold. Let me try this again using a combination of bold, underline, and italics.

Lets see if you can tell the difference between these two statements.

1. I believe there is no god.

2. There is no god.

To help you I sort of emphasised the difference. When people discuss each others beliefs as beliefs, then they can approach the subject with respect and maturity, as a belief because belief gives room for doubt. It isn't claimed as fact. That in itself isn't bigotry, it is just fundamentalism. It crosses into bigotry once one side sets about trying to convert the other.

Ok if this is the direction your argument is going lets look at the statement again.

"There is probably no god"

Note the word in bold there, that is an important word and makes it a different sentence from "there is no god".

It is not the important word. "Belief" is the word. "Belief" is the same as "I think, but I am not absolutely certain". It is an extremely important word when dealing with theology.

That and if you are against people trying to convert peoples beliefs then what are you doing here in this thread? That and why are you not saying you believe it crosses the line into bigotry rather than just stating it as fact?

Again, you completely failed to comprehend my posts. Tell me once where I have told anyone what to believe. Just once. Not just in this thread, but in my thousands of posts at this site. Just once.

 

[Worsle]

It is not the important word. "Belief" is the word. "Belief" is the same as "I think, but I am not absolutely certain". It is an extremely important word when dealing with theology.

Are you familiar with the word probably?

Again, you completely failed to comprehend my posts. Tell me once where I have told anyone what to believe. Just once. Not just in this thread, but in my thousands of posts at this site. Just once.

You have directly posted that it is bigotry, if being told there probably is no god is telling me what to believe then so are you. You are telling me to conform to your ideals of what should and should not be said, the very fact action of arguing your point goes against your point.

Edit. Obama probably the best candidate for president.

 

[AcacianLeaves]

Look the bottom line is that Atheists are still a small, fringe group in the world. Promoting Atheism by attacking people's beliefs is not the right way towards tolerance and acceptance of Atheism as a mainstream belief system. Should they be allowed to paint "There is probably no God" on the cannon? Sure, but it's only going to get them negative attention and not mainstream acceptance. Also, adding the modifier 'probably' is more of an agnostic philosophy anyway...

I disagree with you here. There are a lot of atheists in the world, the vast majority of whom are content to just be atheists without being a bother. The people you are talking about are people on the lunatic fringe (you will see many such people on this forum). You know how moderate reasonable Christians hate to be associated with the likes of Phelps and Falwell? Be careful you don't fall into the trap of associating reasonable and tolerant atheists with the likes of Harris and certain Escapist posters.

This is absolutely true, but in the end people that are not a part of that system of belief are going to associate that belief with the fringe. How many Christians think most Muslims are terrorists or somehow hate America? How many Atheists think most Christians are fanatics? Denouncing the fringe has to come from within the belief system or community itself.

On a different note, Atheism is no more based on science and reason than Theism is. They are both based on a conceptual and metaphysical idea that, by its nature, does not directly interact with reality in any way that we can test or measure.

For instance, can you prove indisputably to a colorblind man that colors exist as we see them and not as he does? As far as he knows, people are lying to him and his perception is the true way to see things.

Or for a better example in the context of this argument, try to conceptualize what human beings are to a single-celled organism. Such an organism has no means to possibly determine our existence. It can't 'see' us, it can't even really directly feel the effects we may have on the world in which it exists. A single celled organism, even if they were as intelligent as human beings, have zero chance of ever proving (or for that matter disproving) our existence. Does this then mean that we don't exist?