Yvette Cooper Didn't Dawn Butlers Post.
News0 min ago
All the evil in the world is the fault of the atheists
41 Answers
according to the Pope.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith /article2977564.ece
Yet another example of history being rewritten. I guess my question is, will there ever be a time when we are just allowed to believe what we believe and not be told we're murders etc simply because we choose to believe in logic and common sense?
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith /article2977564.ece
Yet another example of history being rewritten. I guess my question is, will there ever be a time when we are just allowed to believe what we believe and not be told we're murders etc simply because we choose to believe in logic and common sense?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by annavc. 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.
Thanks, but in all fairness to Octavius he'll tell you what he thinks of your discussion rather than anything else. I've never seen him insult anyone, but he does'nt need me to speak for him.
They're are zealots of all persuasions, atheists too.
I'm a christian by creed, your colleague sounds like a crashing bore, all zealots are, and are best left to their own devices and to suffer the company of their own (small) band of equally boring friends! ;-)
They're are zealots of all persuasions, atheists too.
I'm a christian by creed, your colleague sounds like a crashing bore, all zealots are, and are best left to their own devices and to suffer the company of their own (small) band of equally boring friends! ;-)
Effectively Brionon what you're saying is true of creationists also. No 2 people on this Earth are alike, several times on here I've had to reply to posts from other people TELLING ME WHAT I BELIEVE IN. It's very kind of them to risk carpal tunnel syndrome on my behalf I just wish they'd save themselves the effort and say what they believe in and how it helps them to relate to the world around them and it's inhabitants without referring back to what Christians believe (or anyone else for that matter) I don't understand why anyone would want to try and make someone believe something (and think they can do so with insults) but you will read on here posts by people claiming to be atheists and free thinkers who will then go on to say that after "15 minutes of explaination it would be impossible" for their children to believe anything else!(?) His free thinking=just so long as you agree with me.
It's exactly this kind of absolutism (on all sides) the questioner is protesting about, and I support him.
It's exactly this kind of absolutism (on all sides) the questioner is protesting about, and I support him.
brionon, my experience of atheists on AB are that most of them seem to have in common a loathing or indifference for anyone remotely religious or belonging to a religious body. To deny the existence of (or actively reject etc) God is fine, if that is your outlook and philosophy in life. I never criticise you for having atheism in your life, but more often than not you always seem to scorn me for being a Christian. I don�t really take it as a personal affront, so neither should you when the mud flies back.
123, far for me to suggest, but I would say from AB experience that atheists don�t believe in anything, except to ritually inveigle the religionists into a bun fight!
123, far for me to suggest, but I would say from AB experience that atheists don�t believe in anything, except to ritually inveigle the religionists into a bun fight!
You are still talking as if we are a Block. That is why I don't like the word Atheist. You take it that we are anti christian but I'm not ,I'm as indifferent to it as to the Pommegranit faith. Why then do I attack religions ? Because it's thrust in my face. In yer face Christians like Blair-start wars and then tell me about their loving God. People knock on my door and try to convert me. pamphlets telling me that the God of the Bible loves me,ignoring the murder of first born and Middianites etc. If I ask how they pick and choose which bits of their bible they believe they get angry and accuse me of blasphemy. Genoeg Gezegd. Basta, Ciao.
Octavius, I had noticed that. What they seem to demand is that I should justify my faith to them. When it's got fcuk all to do with them, it's no skin off anyones nose what you, I or anyone else believes in. Provided it's not used as an excuse to abuse people.
Brionon, what would you like to be described as?
It would be as churlish to describe atheists as being an amorphous group in exactly the same way as it is to say all Christians or Muslims are of the same like mind. The word atheist sums up your viewpoint for the sake of identification, Stalin was an atheist, Lenin was an atheist, Hitler was an atheist, Mao was an atheist, Pol Pot was an atheist. Their atheism might'nt be your atheism but they were very in yer face atheists, how you express your atheism is up to you.
If someone knocks on your door to talk about God just say "not today, thankyou" and close the door, easy. I do it to salesmen and political canvassers etc. all the time.
Brionon, what would you like to be described as?
It would be as churlish to describe atheists as being an amorphous group in exactly the same way as it is to say all Christians or Muslims are of the same like mind. The word atheist sums up your viewpoint for the sake of identification, Stalin was an atheist, Lenin was an atheist, Hitler was an atheist, Mao was an atheist, Pol Pot was an atheist. Their atheism might'nt be your atheism but they were very in yer face atheists, how you express your atheism is up to you.
If someone knocks on your door to talk about God just say "not today, thankyou" and close the door, easy. I do it to salesmen and political canvassers etc. all the time.
How many times does it have to be said that Hitler was not an atheist? Not only has this previously been pointed out to you, but it takes about three seconds to verify. It's not like you have to take my, or anyone else's word for it. Look it up. It's very easy to find out.
Regardless, the atheism of Pol Pot, Mao, Stalin etc was exactly the same atheism as any other atheist's atheism - they didn't believe in god(s).
Their autrocities were not committed as a function of atheism because the sum total of what atheism means is 'they don't believe in gods'. You might equally as well try and explain the actions of despots as a function of their non-belief in unicorns or the tooth fairy. Correlation does not necessarily prove causality.
Instead, why not look at the fact that these people were all the heads of totalitarian states, and see whether there might possibly be a slightly more satisfying explanation there? Hint; check the idiology of afore-mentioned states - there may be a clue or two.
This is very different from a religion, because religions *are* idiological and *do* mandate codes of behaviour. Certainly not everyone within the religion will behave exactly identically, but it's clearly not unreasonable to ascribe the actions of a group of people who all share a common belief that mandates that action as a function of said belief.
Regardless, the atheism of Pol Pot, Mao, Stalin etc was exactly the same atheism as any other atheist's atheism - they didn't believe in god(s).
Their autrocities were not committed as a function of atheism because the sum total of what atheism means is 'they don't believe in gods'. You might equally as well try and explain the actions of despots as a function of their non-belief in unicorns or the tooth fairy. Correlation does not necessarily prove causality.
Instead, why not look at the fact that these people were all the heads of totalitarian states, and see whether there might possibly be a slightly more satisfying explanation there? Hint; check the idiology of afore-mentioned states - there may be a clue or two.
This is very different from a religion, because religions *are* idiological and *do* mandate codes of behaviour. Certainly not everyone within the religion will behave exactly identically, but it's clearly not unreasonable to ascribe the actions of a group of people who all share a common belief that mandates that action as a function of said belief.
Well as I said, Nazism and Marxism were atheistic ideologies, since if we use brionon�s �Greek� reference, rather than the French, then this means they were �ungodly� or �without God�. If religionists are to be harangued with the clich�d �all wars are religious wars carried out in the name of God or a god� then I suppose by your argument you can absolve the atheists of all blame for the rest and just put it down to a malicious despot with a political agenda following an ideology that had nothing to do with religious tendencies and didn�t believe in the existence or authority of God.
It�s a tidy loophole, but it just goes to show how we can all be selective with our interpretation of history dunnit.
It�s a tidy loophole, but it just goes to show how we can all be selective with our interpretation of history dunnit.
Hitler was born a Catholic, but later turned his back on it. Who was his priest to whom he gave confession? That'd be a long mass! Who was the the priest who took his final confession? Gave him the last rites?
It's not a difficult thing to look up the anti-church policies of the N.S.D.A.P throughout it's whole history it was anti-church (Catholicism in particular) to be a Catholic preiest in Poland was not a good place to be in 1939 to 1944 as they were systematically killed. To be a patriarch or a Jew in Soviet Russia was similarly dangerous, and later on Estonian and Lithuanian Catholics bore the brunt.
If you're honest then you'll admit that most people who say they're atheists were actually born into a faith which they later rejected. It is in the act the act of rejection that they become atheists, otherwise by your contention you're condemning 1000s of atheists to a life of creationism due to an accident of birth.
It's not a difficult thing to look up the anti-church policies of the N.S.D.A.P throughout it's whole history it was anti-church (Catholicism in particular) to be a Catholic preiest in Poland was not a good place to be in 1939 to 1944 as they were systematically killed. To be a patriarch or a Jew in Soviet Russia was similarly dangerous, and later on Estonian and Lithuanian Catholics bore the brunt.
If you're honest then you'll admit that most people who say they're atheists were actually born into a faith which they later rejected. It is in the act the act of rejection that they become atheists, otherwise by your contention you're condemning 1000s of atheists to a life of creationism due to an accident of birth.
As always in this argument it's essential to make the difference between evil which has been caused by someone with a certain viewpoint (and who , as Dawkins says, might also have a moustache) and evil which has been committed in the cause of that viewpoint.
That is where the comparsion between theism and atheism collapses.
Evils like the tortures of the Inquisition, the Crusades, the burning of heretics, the witch-hunts, the sectarian murders in Northern Ireland and the Middle East, the 'honour killings', the suicide bombings and the dreadful things that the Old Testament God orders his worshippers to do are all done in the cause and name of religious belief. Without religion they would not have happened.
On the other hand, the atrocities committed by Hitler and by Stalin were not done in the furthering of atheism but in the promotion respectively of fascism and communism.
I know of no war that has taken place between one lot of atheists and another about their atheism. Why should there be? I know of no violent dispute between atheists, any more than there is one between the various people who don't believe in fairies. What is there to dispute about?
That is where the comparsion between theism and atheism collapses.
Evils like the tortures of the Inquisition, the Crusades, the burning of heretics, the witch-hunts, the sectarian murders in Northern Ireland and the Middle East, the 'honour killings', the suicide bombings and the dreadful things that the Old Testament God orders his worshippers to do are all done in the cause and name of religious belief. Without religion they would not have happened.
On the other hand, the atrocities committed by Hitler and by Stalin were not done in the furthering of atheism but in the promotion respectively of fascism and communism.
I know of no war that has taken place between one lot of atheists and another about their atheism. Why should there be? I know of no violent dispute between atheists, any more than there is one between the various people who don't believe in fairies. What is there to dispute about?
Hitler continued to make statements in public and private that clearly indicate theistic beliefs, not atheist. Asking who his priest ignores Hitler's widely known preference for Protestantism in his later years. Being anti-Catholic does not equal atheist.
That whole last section makes no sense.
"If you're honest then you'll admit that most people who say they're atheists were actually born into a faith which they later rejected."
And if that were true, so what? It's irrelevant to anything as far as I can see.
Besides, saying people were 'born into a faith' is silly. They were born to parents who had a faith, they weren't born with faith anymore than they were born with a liking for Brechtian theatre or electro-pop because they neither knew of, nor had capacity to understand the concepts.
It's much more realistic to say we're *all* born atheists and many of us go on to discover that our parent's faith was - happy co-incidence - the correct one.
"It is in the act the act of rejection that they become atheists, otherwise by your contention you're condemning 1000s of atheists to a life of creationism due to an accident of birth."
I can't understand what this is possibly supposed to mean or what contention of mine you're referring to.
That whole last section makes no sense.
"If you're honest then you'll admit that most people who say they're atheists were actually born into a faith which they later rejected."
And if that were true, so what? It's irrelevant to anything as far as I can see.
Besides, saying people were 'born into a faith' is silly. They were born to parents who had a faith, they weren't born with faith anymore than they were born with a liking for Brechtian theatre or electro-pop because they neither knew of, nor had capacity to understand the concepts.
It's much more realistic to say we're *all* born atheists and many of us go on to discover that our parent's faith was - happy co-incidence - the correct one.
"It is in the act the act of rejection that they become atheists, otherwise by your contention you're condemning 1000s of atheists to a life of creationism due to an accident of birth."
I can't understand what this is possibly supposed to mean or what contention of mine you're referring to.
Hitler reinforced ancient pagan rituals to add gravitas to Nazi pageants, it helped make the correlation of Nazism to ancient Germanism.
Ii imbued the reigime with an older ideology when it was in fact ultra modern, and also claimed to be very scientific. Any references to religion were done for purely political reasons, Hitler needed the masses onside in order to prosecute the war. "We'll deal with the churches later" he once remarked to Goebells, and yes I know "being anti-catholic does not equal being atheist" he was'nt fussed on Jews either, but in the time before mass migration Western Europe was a majority Christian society.
All children are born into a faith (or indeed none as the case may be) this is because all parents raise their children in the manner that they see fit, they'll also try to teach them the attitudes and values that they hold dear. If the values they try to fill their children with are tolerant (regardless of creed) then that is good parenting. If you choose to teach your child to believe in nothing then it will believe in nothing in as much the same way as if you choose to teach it about Christ. Same meat different gravy.
Chakka because someone acts in Gods' name does'nt mean they represent Gods' will. The examples you stipulate could just as easily be ascribed to social, political, economic and mysoginistic beliefs. All sin is founded in reason, in any offence don't ask where's God? Ask where's man?
Ii imbued the reigime with an older ideology when it was in fact ultra modern, and also claimed to be very scientific. Any references to religion were done for purely political reasons, Hitler needed the masses onside in order to prosecute the war. "We'll deal with the churches later" he once remarked to Goebells, and yes I know "being anti-catholic does not equal being atheist" he was'nt fussed on Jews either, but in the time before mass migration Western Europe was a majority Christian society.
All children are born into a faith (or indeed none as the case may be) this is because all parents raise their children in the manner that they see fit, they'll also try to teach them the attitudes and values that they hold dear. If the values they try to fill their children with are tolerant (regardless of creed) then that is good parenting. If you choose to teach your child to believe in nothing then it will believe in nothing in as much the same way as if you choose to teach it about Christ. Same meat different gravy.
Chakka because someone acts in Gods' name does'nt mean they represent Gods' will. The examples you stipulate could just as easily be ascribed to social, political, economic and mysoginistic beliefs. All sin is founded in reason, in any offence don't ask where's God? Ask where's man?
Actually, Hitler was disparaging about the attempts to reintroduce paganism, didn't like it at all.
I've been trying to eek out some meaning from what you're saying about atheists, and about the only thing that I can figure out requires you to be perpetrating such a clumsy misrepresentation of atheism and what's been said about it in this thread, that I have difficulty crediting it.
So please, put my mind at rest and tell me that you aren't intending that anyone thinks
a) that on the basis that 'athiests don't believe in god(s)' it's reasonable to say 'atheists believe in nothing', or
b) that on an atheist saying 'of course atheists don't believe in nothing' that it therefore follows that it was untrue when it was previously argued 'all atheists believe only that there is no god'?
That would be a straw man big enough to burn Edward Woodward in.
I've been trying to eek out some meaning from what you're saying about atheists, and about the only thing that I can figure out requires you to be perpetrating such a clumsy misrepresentation of atheism and what's been said about it in this thread, that I have difficulty crediting it.
So please, put my mind at rest and tell me that you aren't intending that anyone thinks
a) that on the basis that 'athiests don't believe in god(s)' it's reasonable to say 'atheists believe in nothing', or
b) that on an atheist saying 'of course atheists don't believe in nothing' that it therefore follows that it was untrue when it was previously argued 'all atheists believe only that there is no god'?
That would be a straw man big enough to burn Edward Woodward in.
Allow me to try and put your fevered mind at rest.
My beliefs are that there is a God, i believe in a Christian God. Others believe in other Gods, good for them.
Some don't believe in any God good for them too.
It's no different to raise a child to believe in God than to raise one not too, a parent has to teach a child something it's better to teach it what they know or believe.
The above mentioned tyrants were all atheists (P.S. Hitler was not enamoured with protestantism, nor was he a homosexual, a sexual sadist or a Jew all thngs said about him) if only you could admit to that. Nazism is widely described as "Neo-Darwinism" I don't hold Darwin responsible for Nazism, or Apartheid, or Segregation all based on evolutionary theory. People took his work, expanded upon and then twisted to their own political ends (same meat, different gravy).
I don't hold atheism responsible for their acts no more than hold Christ responsible for the crusades or Mohammed for the Ottoman empire.
When I look back over the last 200 years or so I can think of the Napoleonic Wars, The Imperialist wars, The American Civil War, The Crimean War, The Franco Prussian War, The Spanish American War, The Russo Japanese War, The Great War, The Chinese Civil War, The Sino Japanese War, WW2 none of these wars (and more) had anything to do with religion, which gives lie to the argument that religion causes wars. Governments cause wars and they get people to fight them, for whatever reason they can think of.
To respect someones right too believe in any God in a free country is as important to respect the rights of someone to believe in no God.
If you dislike the phrase "believe in nothing" I apologise it was merely shorthand to to refer to atheism.
My beliefs are that there is a God, i believe in a Christian God. Others believe in other Gods, good for them.
Some don't believe in any God good for them too.
It's no different to raise a child to believe in God than to raise one not too, a parent has to teach a child something it's better to teach it what they know or believe.
The above mentioned tyrants were all atheists (P.S. Hitler was not enamoured with protestantism, nor was he a homosexual, a sexual sadist or a Jew all thngs said about him) if only you could admit to that. Nazism is widely described as "Neo-Darwinism" I don't hold Darwin responsible for Nazism, or Apartheid, or Segregation all based on evolutionary theory. People took his work, expanded upon and then twisted to their own political ends (same meat, different gravy).
I don't hold atheism responsible for their acts no more than hold Christ responsible for the crusades or Mohammed for the Ottoman empire.
When I look back over the last 200 years or so I can think of the Napoleonic Wars, The Imperialist wars, The American Civil War, The Crimean War, The Franco Prussian War, The Spanish American War, The Russo Japanese War, The Great War, The Chinese Civil War, The Sino Japanese War, WW2 none of these wars (and more) had anything to do with religion, which gives lie to the argument that religion causes wars. Governments cause wars and they get people to fight them, for whatever reason they can think of.
To respect someones right too believe in any God in a free country is as important to respect the rights of someone to believe in no God.
If you dislike the phrase "believe in nothing" I apologise it was merely shorthand to to refer to atheism.
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.