Thread: Atheist and religious people.

I am a 100% atheist. And I was told, in America, there are like 69% religious beliefs. So many parents tend to be against that their kids hanging around with those atheist. I believe in science only, and I am clearly sure that the world is composed of chemical, organic and inorganic molecules. But even a person helps me, I won't dislike that person if being religious. Jsut that I will never change my mind on science over religion--a faked belief. But if you are a religious person, would you mind making friends with those who are the extreme and real atheist?

As a devout agnostic I am equally offended by atheists and true believers. To me the only sensible position for a scientist to adopt is agnosticism. Therefore I automatically look down on those who are not also agnostic. Can't help myself. I know I'm not really superior to them, but its so hard to be humble when you are almost perfect. [Apart from the poor eyesight, and the low IQ, and lack of any advanced degrees, and a less than Brad Pitt animal magnetism, and, oh well its quite a long list.]

To ps2huang: You can have as much enthusiam for science as you like, what does that have to do with religion?

To Ophiolite: I agree that agnosticism is really the only position one can be sure of, but what is "offensive" about believers or atheists? A lot of atheists in particular probably have beliefs pretty close to yours. They "lack" belief in a God, but they don't necessarily disbelieve in one. I probably fall into that group, and I think I'd have to call myself an agnostic weak atheist.

Neutrino, I have trapped you into a logical fallacy, when my intended victim was ps2. I did not say that atheists offended me. I said that they offended me as much as those who adhere to a religion, which is not at all. My post was a lighthearted jibe at ps2huang's query, which I tried to make clear with my reference to Brad Pitt magnetism.

I believe that God is existence and I believe that our moral responsibility is the the advancement of our species. That obviously isn't christian.

I don't really care what any individual believes. I don't care who's on drugs, I don't care that gangsters kill each other. I think it's somewhat wrong to stop another person from killing themself.

I feel that everyone has the right to do whatever they want whenever they want to just because they are alive, as long as it doesn't victimize other people. Being testified to, being ran over by a drunk driver, being caught in a cross fire, that's when these things offend me.

Most christians don't really understand what they believe or where the version of their bible came from (or generally what it says unless it serves a purpose). After September 11th I found myself explaining to many evangelicals that catholics were christians and not muslims. Think about that. I couldn't believe how much this happened.

Atheists are seen as a threat and horrible people by many christians because they can't generally comprehend what has happened to make this person no longer be a christian, and generally assume that everyone is born a christian. This is caused by a small world and a closed mind. But these people are generally good people (just dominated by fear and impersonal values), just treat the relationship between you and them as only the relationship between you and them and things generally work out just fine.

Originally Posted by Ophiolite

Neutrino, I have trapped you into a logical fallacy, when my intended victim was ps2. I did not say that atheists offended me. I said that they offended me as much as those who adhere to a religion, which is not at all. My post was a lighthearted jibe at ps2huang's query, which I tried to make clear with my reference to Brad Pitt magnetism.

Ah I see. But, I feel like I must defend myself a bit, because I don't think I really committed a logical fallacy! You didn't explicitely claim that they offended you, but it certainly does seem to be implied. If picking up on an implied meaning is a logical fallacy, then I'm certainly guilty! But, given normal usage of the English language, the implication to which I responded to was there.

I don't know what are you talking about.

Neutrino, I was nitpicking. The implication was there, but a strict interpretation of the words would exclude the implication. I was just having a little fun with the language. I didn't intend to drive us so off topic and confuse poor ps2.

Originally Posted by Ophiolite

Neutrino, I was nitpicking. The implication was there, but a strict interpretation of the words would exclude the implication. I was just having a little fun with the language. I didn't intend to drive us so off topic and confuse poor ps2.

The old man icon under oyur name, is that you?

Originally Posted by Ophiolite

As a devout agnostic I am equally offended by atheists and true believers.

Personally, I consider myself an agnostic atheist. To many, that would be considered a contradiction in terms, but it really isn't. Agnostic being the adjective -atheist being the noun, I don't have a religion or a god (hence the term a-theist or without god), but I don't know for sure whether or not god(s) truly exist(s). I only know that there has been no evidence to date that has convinced me of a god, but plenty of evidence to show that anthropogenic god-concepts are the creation of humanity.

If, indeed, there are one or more gods in the universe, there's little doubt in my mind that man has it all wrong. And I don't wish to be a part of their heresy should a god come along!

Tonight, I would sell my immortal soul for a clearly defined religious dogma. Is that right? Is dogma singular, or one of those weird plurals, like anathema?

I despise those who define themselves by a particular codex of religious belief; religion I respect, but I think that most codified religions really are little more than 'opiates of the masses'; and what little more they is not good. They are just a way of justifying violence and stupidity.

I wouldn't discourage my child from associating with the child of those who practiced any particular religion, but I would not be pleased if s/he may friends with the child of an evangelist.

I also have little interest in attacks on religion grounded in science. It's so damned intellectually puerile; "Oh, here's a fallacy!". Spare me. Go get a real crisis, and then condemned those who turn to a defined God for comfort.

Sometimes a hug just isn't enough.

ps2: Would I put up an ugly old fart like that if it wasn't me?

SW: By your definition I suppose I would also be an agnostic atheist. The primary evidence I see for a God is the very existence of the Universe. Always remembering that evidence is quite different from proof.

J:I get as upset by so-called scientists using science to prove God does not exist as I do by evangelists and creationists claiming evolution is science's way of destroying belief in God. A pox on both their houses.

I don't really see the need to be agnostic. After all, the claim that a god exists is funded on nothing. If someone comes along and makes an empty claim, should I say "I'm not convinced, but I can't be sure you are wrong"? No, his claim is false until it's either proven otherwise or at least made reasonable.

Here's my action program:
-If there is proof for the existence for a god I'll be a believer (although I'm convinced such proof can't even exist)
-If there are some reasonable hints that there may be a god but there's no complete proof, I'll be an agnostic.
-If there is no proof or logic behind it, I'm an atheist.

Originally Posted by Ophiolite

ps2: Would I put up an ugly old fart like that if it wasn't me?

SW: By your definition I suppose I would also be an agnostic atheist. The primary evidence I see for a God is the very existence of the Universe. Always remembering that evidence is quite different from proof.

J:I get as upset by so-called scientists using science to prove God does not exist as I do by evangelists and creationists claiming evolution is science's way of destroying belief in God. A pox on both their houses.

so how old r u? 28?

Moderator comment:
Keep it on-topic please, we're discussing idea's not persons

-Pendragon

I run on batteries. There is no point in trying to wind me up.