Page 1 of 8 12345678 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 144

Thread: When atheism is no longer atheism.

  1. #1

    Default When atheism is no longer atheism.

    As an atheist I have a true absence of belief. I do not think of religion, unless someone brings it up. I do not care about what other people believe. I do not push my beliefs on others. I am not a contrarian who has to have opposing views of other people. I also do not replace religion with dogmatic political beliefs.

    http://theoatmeal.com/comics/religion

    This is not atheism. It's a perfect example. In this it's simply contrarian silliness, like Satanism for example is a hilarious contrarian belief to solely Christianity. In this many dogmatic fundamentalist views are preached to the reader. For example saying that people shouldn't be allowed to raise their children how they want, something I am highly against and something many religious people would be really FOR in relation to their faith. This is also a slippery slope with many implications.....

    If I am a Jew it is implied here that I cannot raise my children as Jews. That if I do the state should probably enact some form of punishment, like perhaps throwing me into some kind of a jail and taking my children away to be raised by the state or properly trained atheists. See this was practiced under Stalin in Russia, and his state was far from atheism.... about as far as Matthew Inman of The Oatmeal is from atheism himself. Should I be thrown into a concentration camp? A gulag? Should I become a crypto-jew like in Inquisitional Spain?

    When you are a "atheist" but you have a dogmatic system of beliefs, want to enforce those beliefs on others, want to enact laws to enforce the propagation of your beliefs, and want to make your beliefs a state "religion" it most certainly ceases to be atheism.

    As a REAL atheist myself I don't want any of these things. In fact I think about religion pretty much NEVER. The only reason I am even making this post is because butthurt theists seem to be making a lot of threads implying that me, as an atheist, is somehow religious. Then butthurt atheists are making similar, dogmatic, posts. I am not Matthew Inman, i am completely absent of religious belief. I do not want to proselytise. I do not want to enact any laws. I do not want to take your children away because you want to raise them as Jews like Matthew Inman seems to suggest. I simply do not care. I do not care about your religion, your petty squabbles with other religions, to me it is silly and stupid. Like how people say aliens will view us as ants compared to them and therefore hardly consider us more than we consider an ant that I how i view your religion. It means nothing to me at all and offers no harm to me at all. To me islamists is just a dangerous political view. I sometimes even have to remind myself they are religious.... I simply am that devoid from theism. One thing I DO care about is other people telling you what to do and how to raise you children as if they are Stalin or Torquemada. As a free man not chained to any dogmatic views that infuriates me.

    I notice on this forum there are many "atheists" like Matthew Inman. I respect your right to call yourself an atheist. However as one may suggest that communists are not true communists, despite calling yourself a communist yet being a Stalinist doesn't make you a communist. Especially if you want to put people into camps or tell them how to live their lives, theists.
    Swear filters are for sites run by immature children.

  2. #2
    Denny Crane!'s Avatar Comes Rei Militaris
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Newcastle, England
    Posts
    24,462

    Default Re: When atheism is no longer atheism.

    You are absenting yourself from a position that is in itself a strawman that only exists in the mind of theists. Congratulations that was quite a waste of time.

  3. #3

    Default Re: When atheism is no longer atheism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Denny Crane! View Post
    You are absenting yourself from a position that is in itself a strawman that only exists in the mind of theists. Congratulations that was quite a waste of time.
    It isn't a strawman at all, however. Then again i'm sure you are one who takes the position similar to a communist and wants to enforce your beliefs, be it political or theocratic, on others. Thanks for providing evidence to my position. <- what an actual logical fallacy looks like.

    THERE IS NO DISCUSSION HERE FOLKS HE IS CONTRARY TO MY VIEWS SO MUST BE ATTACKED. NO RATIONAL DISCUSSION! ONLY BUTTHURT!

    See this is what i'm talking about right here. If you can't see that you are doing what I am saying then you can't fix your behavior. Do you even act like what I am posting or did you see "oh hes calling 'atheists' theists, i must be irrationally mad"? The same irrational anger is what created that idiotic anti-atheistic blog post.

    Lets start from here... .would you call Stalin an atheist? His way of ruling is called political religion for a reason.


    I like it when people get mad at an idea then attack the thread with a false application of logical fallacies on this site, typical TWC behavior. Now on reading this post the wiki article definitions of strawmen and logic fallacies and forget the legitimate topic on hand in additional TWC fashion.

    Just because someone calls themselves one thing but then behaves in a way contrary to how they label themselves doesn't mean it still makes them what they claim to be. If you can't get beyond this base point then get out of this subforum, you don't belong here. Either that or i'm under a false assumption of this subforum and it's another political mudpit filled with posts from the equivalent of the rantings of peoples from the Balkans.


    So do you deny that trying to force your beliefs on others, that telilng people how they should raise their kids, claiming that you are the true moral authority is theistic?

    Your post is not reasonable at all. Far from it indeed. Is it not far more reasonable to claim that people like I describe above are following a religion of their own creation? Explain to me how i'm wrong so I can correct my behavior. I'm sure there are rules here on off topic posts is there not?

    From your post however I gather you didn't read anymore more than a sentence and didn't even go to the link I posted. Complete intellectual dishonesty achieved.
    Last edited by Kanaric; February 10, 2013 at 08:09 AM.
    Swear filters are for sites run by immature children.

  4. #4
    Senator
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    1,343

    Default Re: When atheism is no longer atheism.

    These people are obviously still atheists if they don't believe in god. What exactly makes you a REAL atheist compared to those you are criticising?

    You could always provide a poll and see which atheists on these boards actually want to separate children from their parents based on whether they have faith in god or not. I suspect almost no one will agree with this.

    Stalin was an atheist.

    Atheists are quite capable of forcing their beliefs on others and telling people how to raise their kids.
    [M2TW AAR] The Spirit of the Blitz (16 turn long campaign victory with Sicily)
    [RETROFIT AAR] World War 0 (All factions hotseat)


  5. #5
    Denny Crane!'s Avatar Comes Rei Militaris
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Newcastle, England
    Posts
    24,462

    Default Re: When atheism is no longer atheism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kanaric View Post
    It isn't a strawman at all, however. Then again i'm sure you are one who takes the position similar to a communist and wants to enforce your beliefs, be it political or theocratic, on others. Thanks for providing evidence to my position. <- what an actual logical fallacy looks like.
    Considering if I had to self identify any position it would be one of atheistic buddhist I think I'd find it really hard to force my position on others living in a western country.

    But you just did a wonderful all out attack just because you don't really have a position. Your position is based on a fantasy of others. That isn't me forcing my opinion on others just stating facts.

    THERE IS NO DISCUSSION HERE FOLKS HE IS CONTRARY TO MY VIEWS SO MUST BE ATTACKED. NO RATIONAL DISCUSSION! ONLY BUTTHURT!
    Oh dear.

    See this is what i'm talking about right here. If you can't see that you are doing what I am saying then you can't fix your behavior. Do you even act like what I am posting or did you see "oh hes calling 'atheists' theists, i must be irrationally mad"? The same irrational anger is what created that idiotic anti-atheistic blog post.
    No. I looked at your post and thought, "oh god here is another person ranting about militant hardcore atheists who want to FORCE their beliefs on someone else" even though other than rigorous debate which is what the forum is here for those people do not exist. I've never met a single atheist who wants to force any other person to conform, I've met many who want religion out of politics but thats a totally different thing and also not a bad idea.

    Lets start from here... .would you call Stalin an atheist? His way of ruling is called political religion for a reason.


    I like it when people get mad at an idea then attack the thread with a false application of logical fallacies on this site, typical TWC behavior. Now on reading this post the wiki article definitions of strawmen and logic fallacies and forget the legitimate topic on hand in additional TWC fashion.

    Just because someone calls themselves one thing but then behaves in a way contrary to how they label themselves doesn't mean it still makes them what they claim to be. If you can't get beyond this base point then get out of this subforum, you don't belong here. Either that or i'm under a false assumption of this subforum and it's another political mudpit filled with posts from the equivalent of the rantings of peoples from the Balkans.


    So do you deny that trying to force your beliefs on others, that telilng people how they should raise their kids, claiming that you are the true moral authority is theistic?
    I admit to you going on some kind of lunatic rant that has no bearing to anything I've ever seen, how about you stop frothing at the mouth and come up with some coherent examples.

    Your post is not reasonable at all. Far from it indeed. Is it not far more reasonable to claim that people like I describe above are following a religion of their own creation? Explain to me how i'm wrong so I can correct my behavior. I'm sure there are rules here on off topic posts is there not?

    From your post however I gather you didn't read anymore more than a sentence and didn't even go to the link I posted. Complete intellectual dishonesty achieved.
    Which people? The fantasy in your head people? I don't know these people and I can't understand their behaviours since all I've got are these posts. How about I agree, the people in your head are pretty nasty. Good show Kanaric.

    Are there authoritarians who are atheists? Yes. Are there atheists out there so militant that they are looking to abuse religious people, deny them their rights and take stuff like their children away from them? Jeez I guess there probably is somewhere but I don't see them in government, I don't see them in political parties and I don't see them in the media. I certainly don't see them enough that I feel the need to self identify apart from them.
    Last edited by Denny Crane!; February 10, 2013 at 09:03 AM.

  6. #6
    Rijul.J.Ballal's Avatar Domesticus
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Argon
    Posts
    2,415

    Default Re: When atheism is no longer atheism.

    [QUOTE.]Stalin was an atheist.[/QUOTE]
    and Hitler was christian a lot of people do bad things. it does not mean that their beliefs are the main cause or are to be blamed...

  7. #7

    Default Re: When atheism is no longer atheism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kanaric View Post
    ...

    When you are a "atheist" but you have a dogmatic system of beliefs, want to enforce those beliefs on others, want to enact laws to enforce the propagation of your beliefs, and want to make your beliefs a state "religion" it most certainly ceases to be atheism. ...
    It most certainly is. The definition of atheism has no bearing on how dogmatic you are about your beliefs or this position in particular.

    About the child raising issue. We most certainly do not allow children to be raised however the parents see fit which is why we have child protection laws and there is a case to be had if a parent wants to subvert a child's worldview to such a narrow minded niche that it is incompatible with the wider society and the basic necessities of education. That's obviously taken to the extreme but again we have standards here to prevent children to be totally ed up by their parents, even if it is usually a last ditch effort once it got that far and we have very high bars before doing so which is probably correct for the state but implies society seeks more moderate goals overall.
    "Sebaceans once had a god called Djancaz-Bru. Six worlds prayed to her. They built her temples, conquered planets. And yet one day she rose up and destroyed all six worlds. And when the last warrior was dying, he said, 'We gave you everything, why did you destroy us?' And she looked down upon him and she whispered, 'Because I can.' "
    Mangalore Design

  8. #8

    Default Re: When atheism is no longer atheism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kanaric View Post
    It isn't a strawman at all, however. Then again i'm sure you are one who takes the position similar to a communist and wants to enforce your beliefs, be it political or theocratic, on others. Thanks for providing evidence to my position. <- what an actual logical fallacy looks like.
    It is a straw man because you gave two extreme examples and assumed that many on here have these views. Then, you presented yourself as if you are the enlightened moderate

    What exactly do you want to discuss? Yes, these extremist are big meanies. Yeah, live and let live I'll say. So what?

    Where's that master provocateur, Papay when you need him!?!

    ---

  9. #9

    Default Re: When atheism is no longer atheism.

    Childhood indoctrination should be considered child abuse, because it is. Ruining your child's life by filling their head with beliefs they don't have the ability to question and which may cripple them later in life is a great way to intrude on an individual's right to self-determination. Just because you created them doesn't mean you get to ruin them, that's God's logic, not our society's.

  10. #10
    The Dude's Avatar Praeses
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    I hate it when forums display your location. Now I have to be original.
    Posts
    8,032

    Default Re: When atheism is no longer atheism.

    You could only have an absence of belief in something if you had no notion of that thing in the first place. You're trying to prove your 'absence' of belief by citing all these cases that have no bearing on it. If theists posit 'God yes' then atheism necessarily means 'God no'. Not 'God what?'

    Whether or not you ever think about something is irrelevant. I never think about unicorns but I don't profess unicorn disbelief. I quite actively believe that they don't exist. The fact that there are people who actively believe they do, and that I let them, also has no bearing on what I do and not believe regarding the claim that unicorns exist.
    Last edited by The Dude; February 10, 2013 at 12:25 PM.
    I have approximate answers and possible beliefs, and different degrees of certainty about different things, but I’m not absolutely sure of anything, and many things I don’t know anything about. But I don’t have to know an answer. I don’t feel frightened by not knowing.
    - Richard Feynman's words. My atheism.

  11. #11
    Blaze86420's Avatar Praepositus
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    5,091

    Default Re: When atheism is no longer atheism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Matthias View Post
    Childhood indoctrination should be considered child abuse, because it is. Ruining your child's life by filling their head with beliefs they don't have the ability to question and which may cripple them later in life is a great way to intrude on an individual's right to self-determination. Just because you created them doesn't mean you get to ruin them, that's God's logic, not our society's.
    Oh wow, militant atheism truly is a sight to behold.

  12. #12
    Gatsby's Avatar Punctual Romantic
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    København, DK
    Posts
    2,906

    Default Re: When atheism is no longer atheism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Blaze86420 View Post
    Oh wow, militant atheism truly is a sight to behold.
    Ah yes, "militant" atheism. A truly fearsome force, with their writing down of opinions and harsh words. We need the CIA and Interpol on the case, our right to force our beliefs on impressionable children is under dire threat.

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    Last edited by Gatsby; February 10, 2013 at 01:00 PM.
    You'll have more fun at a Glasgow stabbing than an Edinburgh wedding.

    Under the patronage of the mighty Dante von Hespburg

  13. #13
    Senator
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    1,343

    Default Re: When atheism is no longer atheism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Blaze86420 View Post
    Oh wow, militant atheism truly is a sight to behold.
    1/10
    [M2TW AAR] The Spirit of the Blitz (16 turn long campaign victory with Sicily)
    [RETROFIT AAR] World War 0 (All factions hotseat)


  14. #14
    James the Red's Avatar Campidoctor
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    1,631

    Default Re: When atheism is no longer atheism.

    There have definitely been militant atheists in History, I can think of one such group in traditionally catholic Mexico off the top of my head in fact.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Shirts_%28Mexico%29

    "The Red Shirts (Spanish: Camisas Rojas) were a paramilitary organization, existing in the 1930s, founded by the virulently anti-Catholic, atheist and anticlerical Governor of Tabasco, Mexico, Tomás Garrido Canabal during his second term.[1] As part of their attempt to destroy the Church, they systematically destroyed church buildings.[2] The group, created to carry out the governor's orders, takes its name from its uniform of red shirts, blacks pants, and black and red military caps and it consisted of men aged 15 to 30.[1]

    On December 30, 1934, the Red Shirts opened fired on Catholic exiles who were seeking to return to Tabasco as they were leaving Mass at the Immaculate Conception Church in Coyoacán, killing five and wounding many others.[18] Garrido sent the assassins a case of Champagne in jail and declared that they were under his protection.[18] In 1935, after he ordered his Red Shirts to kill Catholic activists in Mexico City who were seeking to return to Tabasco"

  15. #15

    Default Re: When atheism is no longer atheism.

    Militant atheism would be a poor choice of words. More like the anti-religious crowd that desire to abolish religion from society entirely. Those are a vocal minority however. As an atheist myself, I look down on those who would make it a goal to adopt intolerance, something the religious themselves practice far too often.
    Heir to Noble Savage in the Imperial House of Wilpuri

  16. #16
    Blaze86420's Avatar Praepositus
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    5,091

    Default Re: When atheism is no longer atheism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gatsby View Post
    Ah yes, "militant" atheism. A truly fearsome force, with their writing down of opinions and harsh words. We need the CIA and Interpol on the case, our right to force our beliefs on impressionable children is under dire threat.

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    Right, because the intention of having the state infringe on the rights of others regarding a child's upbringing is not militant at all.

    I feel like this will quickly turn into one of those retarded semantic arguments, similar to ones that arise whenever a discussion about racial bigotry is had. So I'll revise my wording to avoid one: radical atheism, state atheism, douchebag atheism, asswipe atheism. Any of those will do.
    Last edited by Blaze86420; February 10, 2013 at 02:05 PM.

  17. #17
    Denny Crane!'s Avatar Comes Rei Militaris
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Newcastle, England
    Posts
    24,462

    Default Re: When atheism is no longer atheism.

    Quote Originally Posted by James the Red View Post
    There have definitely been militant atheists in History, I can think of one such group in traditionally catholic Mexico off the top of my head in fact.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Shirts_%28Mexico%29

    "The Red Shirts (Spanish: Camisas Rojas) were a paramilitary organization, existing in the 1930s, founded by the virulently anti-Catholic, atheist and anticlerical Governor of Tabasco, Mexico, Tomás Garrido Canabal during his second term.[1] As part of their attempt to destroy the Church, they systematically destroyed church buildings.[2] The group, created to carry out the governor's orders, takes its name from its uniform of red shirts, blacks pants, and black and red military caps and it consisted of men aged 15 to 30.[1]

    On December 30, 1934, the Red Shirts opened fired on Catholic exiles who were seeking to return to Tabasco as they were leaving Mass at the Immaculate Conception Church in Coyoacán, killing five and wounding many others.[18] Garrido sent the assassins a case of Champagne in jail and declared that they were under his protection.[18] In 1935, after he ordered his Red Shirts to kill Catholic activists in Mexico City who were seeking to return to Tabasco"
    Fine condemning crazed semi communist nutjobs, thats an easy sell. Why do I think these are not the focus of the OP though somehow.

  18. #18
    Gatsby's Avatar Punctual Romantic
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    København, DK
    Posts
    2,906

    Default Re: When atheism is no longer atheism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Blaze86420 View Post
    Right, because the intention of having the state infringe on the rights of others regarding a child's upbringing is not militant at all.
    Maybe some do not feel that is ethical for children who have not yet reached puberty to be burdened with membership in a vast and complex belief system and taught that homosexuals are subhuman. Is that radical?

    Maybe some are worried that some belief systems are able to literally breed themselves new followers; you know rather than winning support based on the merit of their teachings. Is that a douchebag's way of looking at morals and spirituality?
    You'll have more fun at a Glasgow stabbing than an Edinburgh wedding.

    Under the patronage of the mighty Dante von Hespburg

  19. #19

    Default Re: When atheism is no longer atheism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Blaze86420 View Post
    Right, because the intention of having the state infringe on the rights of others regarding a child's upbringing is not militant at all.
    Yes, it would be. Thankfully nobody here proposed such a thing, praise be to Amun.

  20. #20
    Denny Crane!'s Avatar Comes Rei Militaris
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Newcastle, England
    Posts
    24,462

    Default Re: When atheism is no longer atheism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mangalore View Post
    It most certainly is. The definition of atheism has no bearing on how dogmatic you are about your beliefs or this position in particular.

    About the child raising issue. We most certainly do not allow children to be raised however the parents see fit which is why we have child protection laws and there is a case to be had if a parent wants to subvert a child's worldview to such a narrow minded niche that it is incompatible with the wider society and the basic necessities of education. That's obviously taken to the extreme but again we have standards here to prevent children to be totally ed up by their parents, even if it is usually a last ditch effort once it got that far and we have very high bars before doing so which is probably correct for the state but implies society seeks more moderate goals overall.
    Quote Originally Posted by Blaze86420 View Post
    Right, because the intention of having the state infringe on the rights of others regarding a child's upbringing is not militant at all.

    I feel like this will quickly turn into one of those retarded semantic arguments, similar to ones that arise whenever a discussion about racial bigotry is had. So I'll revise my wording to avoid one: radical atheism, state atheism, douchebag atheism, asswipe atheism. Any of those will do.
    Thats what you should have been answering.
    Last edited by Denny Crane!; February 10, 2013 at 02:49 PM.

Page 1 of 8 12345678 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •