What confuses people is how evangelical some atheists can be. Worse than door knocking Jehovahs in comes cases - just watch Michael Shermer for example.
But, if you go watch Micheal Shermer, he's not evangelizing. He's explaining what he thinks to people who are actively seeking what he says.
Pretty big difference.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
The Following User Says Thank You to photon For This Useful Post:
What confuses people is how evangelical some atheists can be. Worse than door knocking Jehovahs in comes cases - just watch Michael Shermer for example.
I just keep to myself and appreciate everyone who does same.
Probably near 100% of atheists, agnostics and non religious world wide would take that offer in a heartbeat.
The fact is religion is thrown in our faces daily, and the little noise coming from non believers is puny in comparison.
There are places where just saying your atheist will get you imprisoned, killed, shunned by your community, etc..
So yeah we're sorry now we're not sitting back quietly like before, but a marginalized segment of this world has for a long time had to hide their non belief, go along with whatever religious dogma rules their nation and now that we can finally speak freely (in some parts of the world) we get called evangelical? lol. right.
I dont see it as any different as political discussions, liberals, conservatives, etc.. They are loud, argumentative and don't keep their opinions to themselves about how I should live, how I should pay taxes, etc..
So what your basically saying is that only in regards to religion should people who don't believe keep quiet, or at least be less noisy?
__________________ Allskonar fyrir Aumingja!!
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Thor For This Useful Post:
I consider (and refer to) myself as a spiritual atheist. I am also a gnostic atheist: I am certain there is no such thing as a conscious entity worthy of worship who exists in, or interacts with the universe.
However, I do believe in the existence of what can be called 'the soul' in that it is an aspect of individual consciousness which is capable of continued existence in some form or other past organic death. I also believe in the possibility of such souls experiencing multiple organic lives. I understand this may not be a completely rational worldview, however I have had subjective experiences for which I need to come to some kind of objective conclusion.
I do not accept the notion that a conscious creator entity is necessary for the existence of a thing like a soul. I see no reason why it cannot be a fundamental part of the universe just like Gravity or Entropy or Quantum Mechanics, merely one which we do not have technology to measure at present. I find this to be particularly plausible in a universe which remains almost entirely invisible to us. It stands to reason that, whatever Dark Matter and Energy are, we are interacting with them on some level. It seems plausible to me that one of the ways in which we may be interacting with them would include a phenomenon such as a soul.
I believe until such time as hard, empirical, observational science can be brought to bear on this, the arts are the best way to study this aspect of existence and either eventually confirm or disprove its existence.
My thoughts exactly.There are mysteries beyond the mortal world we understand today, but they are independent of some over-arching moral framework or a supreme being. It's just science that we don't understand yet.
I have no idea, and am not sure how this video gives the context to know that. That said, I had to look up exactly who he was to be sure, because I am terrible with names most of the time.
I am just saying, it was almost offensive to me the way he was approaching it, and I am a complete supporter of the It Gets Better project, and most certainly not a devout Christian.
I didn't find it that offensive. He spoke plainly and directly but unfortunately when talking about religion the religious don't really like it when you call things like you see them. The only way they like things addressed is in the same manner that their religion addresses them unless it is inconvenient for their personal moral construct. In that case they pick and choose what they like.
The fact is religion is thrown in our faces daily, and the little noise coming from non believers is puny in comparison.
...
So what your basically saying is that only in regards to religion should people who don't believe keep quiet, or at least be less noisy?
And there are more Religious people in the world who feel that they need to constantly bite their tongue in case their personal beliefs even get implied. It is no longer polite to discuss religion, which is made painfully clear, yet you feel that religion is thrown in your face daily? You live in the least religious nation in the world, and it is thrown in your face daily? I think you don't know what thrown in your face means. Mentioning religion (like mentioning atheism) is not the same thing as "throwing it in your face". I think you are hypersensitive to the issue, which may explain why you are so angry about it.
And there are more Religious people in the world who feel that they need to constantly bite their tongue in case their personal beliefs even get implied.
There are also plenty that don't bite their tongues, not sure what your point is here. Like anyone with any ideology, some keep quiet, some don't..
Quote:
It is no longer polite to discuss religion, which is made painfully clear, yet you feel that religion is thrown in your face daily?
Its been and still remains in most places in the world considered impolite, risky, sometimes dangerous to criticize religion, how do you find the opposite that its impolite to discuss religion?
Quote:
You live in the least religious nation in the world, and it is thrown in your face daily? I think you don't know what thrown in your face means.
Iceland is not the least religious, but certainly its no Saudi Arabia. I am not speaking out on behalf of my local issues here, I do that locally since I am a member of our humanist group and we have been fighting tooth and nail to stop christian pastors coming to our elementary public schools talking about Jesus and even giving out biblical children's books.
Since you seem to think locally, lets put this in perspective. With social media and the internet, for those of us who are active in this debate, I see daily via Facebook and news the onslaught of bad ideas coming under the guise of religious beliefs. Rewriting history books in Texas, changing laws to infuse Intelligent design into biology classes, 100's of state and local amendments to limit and make abortions harder... This is a tiny part of what I see and read weekly, then theres the stuff that really makes me sad, people in 3rd world nations being jailed, imprisoned and killed just for not being religious..
Quote:
Mentioning religion (like mentioning atheism) is not the same thing as "throwing it in your face". I think you are hypersensitive to the issue, which may explain why you are so angry about it.
Oh great that old standby by religious apologists, "atheists are so angry."
I have stated countless times throughout the years my issue is not with religious belief itself, although I love to debate it with those who want to; but with ideas, policies and attitudes propagated BY religious ideology. Gay marriage, anti abortion, anti-science, etc.. The list is long.
__________________ Allskonar fyrir Aumingja!!
Last edited by Thor; 05-01-2012 at 02:10 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to Thor For This Useful Post:
There are also plenty that don't bite their tongues, not sure what your point is here. Like anyone with any ideology, some keep quiet, some don't..
Its been and still remains in most places in the world considered impolite, risky, sometimes dangerous to criticize religion, how do you find the opposite that its impolite to discuss religion?
Iceland is not the least religious, but certainly its no Saudi Arabia. I am not speaking out on behalf of my local issues here, I do that locally since I am a member of our humanist group and we have been fighting tooth and nail to stop christian pastors coming to our elementary public schools talking about Jesus and even giving out biblical children's books.
Since you seem to think locally, lets put this in perspective. With social media and the internet, for those of us who are active in this debate, I see daily via Facebook and news the onslaught of bad ideas coming under the guise of religious beliefs. Rewriting history books in Texas, changing laws to infuse Intelligent design into biology classes, 100's of state and local amendments to limit and make abortions harder... This is a tiny part of what I see and read weekly, then theres the stuff that really makes me sad, people in 3rd world nations being jailed, imprisoned and killed just for not being religious..
Oh great that old standby by religious apologists, "atheists are so angry."
I have stated countless times throughout the years my issue is not with religious belief itself, although I love to debate it with those who want to; but with ideas, policies and attitudes propagated BY religious ideology. Gay marriage, anti abortion, anti-science, etc.. The list is long.
OK, so the term "world" was a misspeak. I should have been clearer. I meant the western world. Specifically locally. In the American South, I could see your statement about religion being "thrown in your face" being far more real, however when you compare that with the rest of the western world, it is a minority. Not a majority. Most of the rest of the western world is religious, but not vocally so. Especially where you are from.
In the Canadian and European experience of people of faith, it is not common any longer for people to have a faith of any kind thrown in their face. Not even close. In fact my experience living in both places was that if my faith was mentioned, then I was looked at differently. With some distaste. It is not a pleasant thing.
My point was, you claim you are doing the things you do with your "humanist" group because you are sick of having religion "thrown in your face". That may be the case in some parts of the world, but it isn't happening here. Or where you are. Your efforts would likely be better served if they were focused on those places.
So while I applaud any attempts to get poorly written laws thrown out, to get evolution taught in schools (which I steadfastly agree with), I disagree with your claim that it is due to the fact that religion, and religious people are very aggressive. That was all I was questioning.
It seems to me that your anger is misplaced. I am angry about a number of the very same things you are. That list of the things you wrote that are wrong with the world, I also sincerely dislike. But I dislike it for a very different reason from why you do. Those policies are not specifically religious ones, they are political. I am disgusted with how, especially in America, politics has usurped Christianity and claimed it for it's own. The policies you describe are intended to divide people who believe in God from the political left. They are called "hot button issues" because they are the buttons that the political right pushes to keep people who believe in God from following a policy other than the ones used by the republican right, because to do so would be considered "unchristian". In essence, what we have currently is the situation that the Founding Fathers were most worried about when they put in place the doctrine of the separation of Church and State: a State that uses the Church to control it's people for political gain, and not because it is what is right. I disagree with you not because I disagree with your problem points per se, but because I don't agree with you about where those issues come from.
As for the Third World, you'll find that it tends to be a place filled with intolerance, regardless of if you are atheist or not. I doubt you can make a claim that atheists are singled out more than any other group.
What I meant when I said that religion is not thrown in your face was meant in a personal sense. When was the last time you heard what kind of religion your fellow co-workers believe? Or schoolmates? It's not common any longer for someone's beliefs to be front and center. It's taboo, in the same sense that politics is. I understand now better where you are coming from, but most places in the western world the situations you are describing are not common. At least they do not appear so to me.
As for the comment about "angry atheists", I was specifically referring to you, not to atheists as a whole .
This post kind of wandered a bit, but I hope it is clear enough.
Last edited by Knalus; 05-01-2012 at 02:53 PM.
Reason: grammar
I'm a theist (not religious; there is a big difference). I laugh at those on both sides who claim to be 100% sure that there either is or is not a God. You can't be sure, and you both certainly can't be right. It's funny that there can be two people sitting beside each other at a hockey game, and one is 100% sure there is a God and the other is 100% sure there is not.
I consider myself an agnostic theist. My wife is, I think, 100% sure there is a God. I think she's wrong, not wrong that there is no God but wrong in the sense that this is unknowable. I know people who are 100% sure there is no God; they're also wrong.
For those who answered the poll 100% either way, how in the world can you possibly know that? You can't.
I'm a theist (not religious; there is a big difference). I laugh at those on both sides who claim to be 100% sure that there either is or is not a God. You can't be sure, and you both certainly can't be right. It's funny that there can be two people sitting beside each other at a hockey game, and one is 100% sure there is a God and the other is 100% sure there is not.
I consider myself an agnostic theist. My wife is, I think, 100% sure there is a God. I think she's wrong, not wrong that there is no God but wrong in the sense that this is unknowable. I know people who are 100% sure there is no God; they're also wrong.
For those who answered the poll 100% either way, how in the world can you possibly know that? You can't.
I think, given the poll question, it was referring more to belief than actual provable fact. ie I think that there is definitely (not) a God. Doesn't mean you can prove it or not, it is just what you think.
Getting to the point of what you are saying, you can never be 100% sure of anything if you put things into a certain perspective, but that is not what the poll was intending to ask (at least IMHO).
Maybe we all live in the Matrix.
__________________
"Wake up, Luigi! The only time plumbers sleep on the job is when we're working by the hour."
I consider myself an agnostic theist. My wife is, I think, 100% sure there is a God. I think she's wrong, not wrong that there is no God but wrong in the sense that this is unknowable. I know people who are 100% sure there is no God; they're also wrong.
Depends on what you've defined as 'God' for the purpose of whether or not the answer is knowable or not.
The Judeo-Christian God Yahweh? Demonstrably 100% false.
My point was, you claim you are doing the things you do with your "humanist" group because you are sick of having religion "thrown in your face". That may be the case in some parts of the world, but it isn't happening here. Or where you are. Your efforts would likely be better served if they were focused on those places.
The hell it isn't. Why are we talking about abortion in Canada again? I'll give you a hint. It isn't a bunch of atheists trying to reopen debate.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to longsuffering For This Useful Post:
Zero evidence does not equate to demonstrably false though.
I saw a one mile wide flying saucer with bright lights over my house last night, I pointed it out to 6 of my neighbours but unfortunately they missed it, they now think I'm crazy but they still can't prove my sighting was "demonstrably false though"!!
I saw a one mile wide flying saucer with bright lights over my house last night, I pointed it out to 6 of my neighbours but unfortunately they missed it, they now think I'm crazy but they still can't prove my sighting was "demonstrably false though"!!
I understand what you are saying, but within the scope of this conversation, I believe the distinction is an important one.
__________________
"Wake up, Luigi! The only time plumbers sleep on the job is when we're working by the hour."
Zero evidence does not equate to demonstrably false though.
Not that it changes your point.
Correct, it does not change my point. Much like the engineering world I live in, if something has zero evidence of working in a design/function/program, I can absolutely guarantee that it is false and likely to cost me my livelihood if I choose to continue to think in that direction. I'm sure there are parallels in the IT world. Both of us took years to come to that conclusion via education and then experience. Why should it be any different in this case?
This is all like the Dragon in the Garage. "Carl Sagan"
I don't understand where you're going with this analogy. Are you saying God wouldn't work because of how the universe is designed?
And you do realize Sagan's not saying the existence of God (even the Judeo-Christian one) is 100%, demonstrably false, right? Rejecting an hypothesis because of a lack of evidence does not make an hypothesis false, just as being unable to invalidate an hypothesis doesn't make it true or provide good enough reason to believe it's true.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Knalus
And there are more Religious people in the world who feel that they need to constantly bite their tongue in case their personal beliefs even get implied. It is no longer polite to discuss religion, which is made painfully clear, yet you feel that religion is thrown in your face daily? You live in the least religious nation in the world, and it is thrown in your face daily? I think you don't know what thrown in your face means. Mentioning religion (like mentioning atheism) is not the same thing as "throwing it in your face". I think you are hypersensitive to the issue, which may explain why you are so angry about it.
I don't know, I live next to a church -- it's hard not to here in Toronto, what with a church every few blocks -- and that large, protruding symbol of their religion sticking up above all of the nearby buildings and into the sky makes me feel as if it's being shoved in my face. Well, at least when I look out the window.
__________________
"An adherent of homeopathy has no brain. They have skull water with the memory of a brain."
Last edited by HPLovecraft; 05-02-2012 at 07:26 AM.
. 
