Quizzes & Puzzles0 min ago
Scouts to open it's doors to atheists.
151 Answers
http
Along with all other discipline it seems, who told that kid he could bend the peak of his uniform cap in such a way?
Soon they will be allowed to wear the peak either at the side or at the back.
What is the World coming to?
Along with all other discipline it seems, who told that kid he could bend the peak of his uniform cap in such a way?
Soon they will be allowed to wear the peak either at the side or at the back.
What is the World coming to?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Methyl, just for info, how inappropriate was the introduction of docking on here @ 14:40?
http
http
@AoG - You spew associations out like confetti at a wedding.
Once again -new born babes have no belief in god. Atheism is a lack of belief on a god. Therefore new born babes are atheist.
Babies are not even sufficiently developed for self -awareness until around 18 months, let alone the capacity for abstract thought that belief in a god demands.
Being atheist has little to do with your political persuasion.
The Scouting Association, in all its guises, is seeking to become as inclusive as possible in our modern day secular society, and for that they are to be lauded. They are "the club", they can set the rules, and rules can and do change with the times.
To attempt to insist upon the exclusivity of swearing an oath to god is akin to Canute attempting to turn back the tide.
And it is not nasty, or unpatriotic to refuse to swear an oath to the Monarchy - An institution that many question.
And all this has already been done - the Girl Guides of Australia have already omitted the requirement to swear to a god or the queen, and good on em. Once again, Britain is lagging behind our colonial cousins...
Once again -new born babes have no belief in god. Atheism is a lack of belief on a god. Therefore new born babes are atheist.
Babies are not even sufficiently developed for self -awareness until around 18 months, let alone the capacity for abstract thought that belief in a god demands.
Being atheist has little to do with your political persuasion.
The Scouting Association, in all its guises, is seeking to become as inclusive as possible in our modern day secular society, and for that they are to be lauded. They are "the club", they can set the rules, and rules can and do change with the times.
To attempt to insist upon the exclusivity of swearing an oath to god is akin to Canute attempting to turn back the tide.
And it is not nasty, or unpatriotic to refuse to swear an oath to the Monarchy - An institution that many question.
And all this has already been done - the Girl Guides of Australia have already omitted the requirement to swear to a god or the queen, and good on em. Once again, Britain is lagging behind our colonial cousins...
LG; I need no lessons; it is you who are unable to grasp the fact that Atheism is a rejection and a denial of religion - something you do continually - and therefore requires cognisance of religion in order to reject it - (I can't believe I'm having to explain this!)
A savage, or indeed an infant, to whom the precepts of religion has not been explained is not positioned to either reject or deny it, and is simply innocent of such a concept and is neither religious or atheistic.
A savage, or indeed an infant, to whom the precepts of religion has not been explained is not positioned to either reject or deny it, and is simply innocent of such a concept and is neither religious or atheistic.
@Khandro Your contention that atheism is a postive, deliberate decision to reject a supernatural creator is just that - your contention, one shared by those who have a bias against atheism.
You do not get to define what atheism is. Atheism is a lack of belief in a supernatural creator. Some atheists, like me, may also argue against theism, but thats because I am anti-theist, not because I am an atheist.
I wonder if you consider the girl guides of australia lacking in moral fibre compared with counterparts around the globe since they have an oath which requires no fealty to a god, or perhaps you view them as nasty and unprincipled for rejecting an oath of fealty to the Monarchy?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jul/06/australia-guides-queen-god-pledge
You do not get to define what atheism is. Atheism is a lack of belief in a supernatural creator. Some atheists, like me, may also argue against theism, but thats because I am anti-theist, not because I am an atheist.
I wonder if you consider the girl guides of australia lacking in moral fibre compared with counterparts around the globe since they have an oath which requires no fealty to a god, or perhaps you view them as nasty and unprincipled for rejecting an oath of fealty to the Monarchy?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jul/06/australia-guides-queen-god-pledge
Khandro, you seem to be having some considerable difficulty in understanding this, so although you’re consistently ignoring me, I’ll try again. Look at it this way. Fundamentally, since the concept of supernatural gods doesn’t exist within an atheist’s mind, the question of whether or not a God exists doesn’t arise. If people like you didn’t implant the idea into the minds of others, including children, the concept wouldn’t exist at all and, hence, there would be no religion and we would all be atheists. Atheism does not equate to a rejection of belief – it equates to a total absence of belief.
Khandro, Educate yourself. This from here:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/atheist4.htm
“A person who is without a belief in any deity. This definition would mainly include those who are simply unaware of the existence of any deity. It would also include a person who is either too young or who lacks the mental ability to conceive of a deity.”
As in the case of ‘belief’, wanting it to be so doesn’t make it so.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/atheist4.htm
“A person who is without a belief in any deity. This definition would mainly include those who are simply unaware of the existence of any deity. It would also include a person who is either too young or who lacks the mental ability to conceive of a deity.”
As in the case of ‘belief’, wanting it to be so doesn’t make it so.
Khandro, of course it’s crackpot. It disagrees with you. ;o)
‘Atheism from the Greek ‘a’ – without, ‘theos’ – god’. (That is actually what the word means – without god – and that in no way implies rejection – it is simply ‘without god’).
How about the University of Cambridge? Is that any good to you? From here:
http://www.investigatingatheism.info/definition.html
‘Atheism is a complex term to define, and many definitions fail to capture the range of positions an atheist can hold………. More recently, atheists have argued that atheism only denotes a lack of theistic belief, rather than the active denial or claims of certainty it is often associated with.’
I would say that coming from the position of atheism, an atheist is far more likely to have a rather more comprehensive understanding of the term than the narrow one you prefer to promulgate. Argue all you like – you can’t change it.
‘Atheism from the Greek ‘a’ – without, ‘theos’ – god’. (That is actually what the word means – without god – and that in no way implies rejection – it is simply ‘without god’).
How about the University of Cambridge? Is that any good to you? From here:
http://www.investigatingatheism.info/definition.html
‘Atheism is a complex term to define, and many definitions fail to capture the range of positions an atheist can hold………. More recently, atheists have argued that atheism only denotes a lack of theistic belief, rather than the active denial or claims of certainty it is often associated with.’
I would say that coming from the position of atheism, an atheist is far more likely to have a rather more comprehensive understanding of the term than the narrow one you prefer to promulgate. Argue all you like – you can’t change it.
naomi //How about the University of Cambridge? Is that any good to you? From here://
Not really, it's yet another cranky website with tenuous connections, pretending it is possible to 'unknow' the concept religion." More recently, atheists have argued that atheism only denotes a lack of theistic belief, rather than the active denial"
Well that's just what you are doing, and everyone else refutes it. All it denotes is that there are a minority of others who also hate being proved to have a wrong view. You can trawl around on the internet and always find someone who will agree to anything contrary to the accepted usage of a word, to me, until the major dictionaries change their entries, I will abide by those definitions.
Not really, it's yet another cranky website with tenuous connections, pretending it is possible to 'unknow' the concept religion." More recently, atheists have argued that atheism only denotes a lack of theistic belief, rather than the active denial"
Well that's just what you are doing, and everyone else refutes it. All it denotes is that there are a minority of others who also hate being proved to have a wrong view. You can trawl around on the internet and always find someone who will agree to anything contrary to the accepted usage of a word, to me, until the major dictionaries change their entries, I will abide by those definitions.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.