There are too few atheists in the US

[4RP08inKCMO]

Alright guys, remember we don't need to divide ourself over petty differences. Remember the message, remember the man.

Agreed. This thread needs to die. All of us should be in the Free at Last forum getting pumped for the moneybomb!

 

[Hangly Man]

Atheists are cool with me so long as they're quiet atheists.

As religions go though they tend to be a pretty loud and obnoxious group.

 

[dblee]

I find the amount of pseudo-intellectual elitism in this thread absolutely disgusting.

Collectivism and elitism are the types of ideology that lead to statism, and are by their very nature antithetical to freedom and liberty.

"There are too few athiests in the US"
translation - "I wish everyone was as smart as me"

Talking about IQ and sterilization? Are you kidding me? I'm sensing the overall theme amongst a few of you is that only the smartest ought to reproduce, and the world would be a better place if only the lofty intellectuals of the world (Atheists) were allowed to make the decisions.

I am a Christian, I have an IQ of 148. I am socially liberal. Fiscally conservative. I was not brainwashed by church, my parents were non-religious. So much for your sweeping generalizations.

Some of your efforts to portray Christians as uneducated inbred morons who blindly follow, are as bigoted and wrong as any Christian who would condemn an Atheist for his belief.

for the record:

- I DON'T know if you're going to hell or not. That's between you and God.
- I DON'T care what you do in your home, on your time, or in your life. That's your business.
- I DON'T think it's my holy mission in life to force you to believe what you don't want to.
- I DON'T believe that the world was created in 6 literal days and that science is sorcery intended to decieve the faithful.

I am not being overly politcally-correct. I am being philosophically consistent.

 

[A. Havnes]

You said it, and I have run across plenty of unintelligent atheists, including one that recently told me: "I believe what the TV tells me." That is not a joke. There are a ton of religious supporters of RP, there are a ton of atheists who voted for other candidates Rep and Dem.

Lower intelligence runs across the spectrum right now of all walks of life, much of it has to do with our decades long (RP will tell you what he had to learn on his own) dumbed down public education system, brainwashing by the media/gov't/entertainment, etc. Also, RP is a Christian, and most of the founders were Orthodox Christians and the remaining few deists. Some of the most brilliant and courageous men to ever live.

Some people really need to puff themselves up and put themselves on a pedestal on here, a need for praise and recognition if you ask me. As for voluntary sterilization, that leads to forced sterilization. Same thing with voluntary euthanasia, leads to involuntary euthanasia. That one poster thinks he's so intelligent but seems to not have studied history very well. His belief could very well come around and bite him in the arse.

Maybe they will force sterilization on and/or euthanize RP supporters, which one might he be subject to? Darwin himself was a racist and eugenicist, the communists and Nazis took his beliefs/ideas and used them.

Exactly. There are dumb people everywhere, both atheist and theists. By choosing to smear religious people, it makes you look intolerant. Besides, there are also very intelligent Christians out there.

Let's not forget that studies are beginning to show that you can raise your IQ or your IQ could drop - it's not a fixed thing as was recently believed.

Besides, Ron Paul is a Christian, and I think he would be horrified to read some of what people on here are saying. You're acting like bigots, which is exactly what you accuse Christians of. Let's stop bashing religion and focus on getting Ron Paul into office, shall we?

+1

 

[G-Wohl]

You actually have no idea what you are talking about. I am an ordained Buddhist and have been practising it for 30 years so I suspect i may know a little more about it than you.

Like i said, Buddhism is to religion what anarchy is to politics.

I'm thinking that maybe your self-proclaimed "practising" of the Buddhist religion is exactly what makes you unable to credibly speak about it. If you have indeed been practicing for 30 years, it makes me think that maybe you're a little biased?

Your religion is no better than anyone else's. My personal view is that they're all equally terrible. But are you to tell me that Buddhism's principles aren't taught in any other religion? I happen to currently live in a town, also, that has a high Buddhist population. One sect of the Buddhist faith here has a temple run by the Dalai Lama's own nephew. Another sect in this town has some disagreements about ethics, and thus live on opposite ends of town and they do not associate with one another. It's just like having a Catholic church and a Protestant church in the same town...

I hate to say it, but anybody from the outside would say that Buddhism is just another way to achieve the same ultimate goals. If you're a guy that needs that kind of thing, then it appears that you've found your vessel. But it's not as if Buddhism is the "anarchist" religion and Christianity is the "fascist" religion! The differences between the morals, values, and practices of any religion compared to Buddhism is very small and nearly insignificant. Buddhism, like any religion, is a collection of values and morals embodied by a single entity/figurehead, with folk tales, scriptures, and traditions to help empower these ideals.

It makes me shudder to think that you took offense to my post. It was grounded completely in experience, opinion, and knowledge of the topic, and was in no way meant to be personal. I surely can't see how my own opinions are supposed to offend? It's not as if I've asked you to personally denounce Buddhism because it's icky and awful...

 

[Mesogen]

That's a stupid analogy. We argue off J. Smith based on the authority of revelation, not on the content of revelation. There are modern day miracles in Lourdes, France; San Giovanni Rotundo; and places all over the world. Scientists couldn't explain the miracle of the sun in Fatima, Portugal in 1917 when they saw it but for some it didn't stop their unbelief, although completely unexplained, nor will what I'm saying stop you as well. Some scientists who did see it converted.

Where is the evidence of this miracle? I never heard of it before, but it sounds ridiculous after googling it.

The difference is God is verifiable and provable objectively and logically in the form of Deism. The question is what faith one adheres to. As a Catholic we believe it's a grace that comes from God, although God wants to give anyone the grace who truly desires it.

In a very minimalist sense of belief there is the famous "Wager". Pascal said in his "Wager" if one believes in God and acts upon it the worst case scenario, i.e. "God does not exist", they should act more virtuously and try to adhere to moral principles and there is no bad influence. BUT... if God exists and you do not act on it there is a far greater chance that death is longer than life and if you want to wager on this you are wagering something far greater than this life. Yet, if God does exist you will be happy for all eternity. Not too crazy is it?

One should believe in every religion simultaneously then, because you can't be sure that all of them are wrong. If you don't pray 5 times toward Mecca every day then you will go to hell.

"Fear the fire, which is prepared for the disbelievers."
[Ali'-Imran, 3: 131]

"Truly Hell is lying in wait- a destination for the transgressors."
[an-Naba, 78: 21-22]
(One’s rejection of faith is transgression against Allah and himself).

Atheists emotionally come to their views. You have to emotionally believe there is no design in the world, no Principle of life, no Creator that gives us rights, and the source and summit of love, happiness, reason, truth, and life.

So you say. Or, one can see that any design in the world came about that way from a previous state, all guided into place by repeatably observed natural forces. Where did those natural forces ultimately originate? Who can say? Maybe mathematicians or string theorists can figure out a good explanation someday, but no one can honestly say that they have evidence that anything was done by some conscious individual being.

I have some respect for agnostics, at least they say they cannot
say what they believe about God, they simply admit they do not know.

An agnostic is an atheist.

No other group in the entire world, except atheists, that make a groups and adherence about a Person they do not believe that exists.

Atheists don't go to atheist church and very few of them congregate in any way. I have seen some groups on the internet, but I've never known anyone to participate in any kind of group activity where the common organizing factor was atheism.

There are no groups or delineations that form adherence about their anti-belief in the Tooth Fairy, Minotaurs, and Unicorns.

Sure there are. There are skeptics groups and groups that pat each other on the back for being "reasonable" and "logical."

There are no other blasphemies as a curse other than Jesus Christ. No one screams Mohammed, Hitler, Buddha, or any other major leader in fits of anger. You can only attack the living, and God and Jesus is real and is alive and the vehemence I've witnessed all my life towards God shows this.

Curses in other languages regularly refer to the devil.

 

[Mesogen]

My Atheist group is comprised of about 50% libertarians, 30% Democrats 20% undeclared. Then again we are in Texas.

Atheism simply means without gods. To presume anything else leaves a person open to error.

What does one do in an "atheist group"?

 

[dblee]

Belief in "nothing" requires as much faith as belief in "something."

Therefore Atheism is a religion as well. Let us all practice religious tolerance shall we?

 

[4RP08inKCMO]

An agnostic is an atheist.

That is absolutely wrong and I have an agnostic friend who has made the difference between the two very clear for me.

Since Wikipedia is what people have been using in this thread, here is what it says about the two:

Agnosticism is the philosophical view that the truth value of certain claims—particularly metaphysical claims regarding theology, afterlife or the existence of god, gods, deities, or even ultimate reality—is unknown or, depending on the form of agnosticism, inherently unknowable due to the nature of subjective experience.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnosticism

Atheism, as a philosophical view, is the position that either affirms the nonexistence of gods or rejects theism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism


Atheists believe there is no God. Agnostics believe it is unknowable one way or another. There is such thing as atheistic agnosticism, but saying "an agnostic is an atheist" is a hasty generalization.

 

[haaaylee]

The difference is God is verifiable and provable objectively and logically in the form of Deism. The question is what faith one adheres to. As a Catholic we believe it's a grace that comes from God, although God wants to give anyone the grace who truly desires it.

What makes your religion right? And how could you possibly know what God wants to give?

In a very minimalist sense of belief there is the famous "Wager". Pascal said in his "Wager" if one believes in God and acts upon it the worst case scenario, i.e. "God does not exist", they should act more virtuously and try to adhere to moral principles and there is no bad influence. BUT... if God exists and you do not act on it there is a far greater chance that death is longer than life and if you want to wager on this you are wagering something far greater than this life. Yet, if God does exist you will be happy for all eternity. Not too crazy is it?

So you're religious out of fear of the afterlife?

Atheists emotionally come to their views. You have to emotionally believe there is no design in the world, no Principle of life, no Creator that gives us rights, and the source and summit of love, happiness, reason, truth, and life.

I have some respect for agnostics, at least they say they cannot say what they believe about God, they simply admit they do not know.

No other group in the entire world, except atheists, that make a groups and adherence about a Person they do not believe that exists. There are no groups or delineations that form adherence about their anti-belief in the Tooth Fairy, Minotaurs, and Unicorns. There are no other blasphemies as a curse other than Jesus Christ. No one screams Mohammed, Hitler, Buddha, or any other major leader in fits of anger. You can only attack the living, and God and Jesus is real and is alive and the vehemence I've witnessed all my life towards God shows this.

Mircles do not equal GOD. they equal unexplained things. Why do people always connect the two? that isn't proof. something that can't be explained does not therefore explain a magical guy in the sky that couldn't otherwise be proved or explained himself.


i'm mostly agnostic but i think it's quite alright to say you don't believe God is real.
the bible is full of forgeries, even your Catholic church says so.


also, it's "and God and Jesus ARE real and ARE alive."


And we're not the smart ones?

 

[Paul10]

...

 

[raiha]

But are you to tell me that Buddhism's principles aren't taught in any other religion?

Huh? Where'd that come from? No but we do not have a creator God. Sorry if you thought i was taking offense. You just seemed to make rather sweeping statements about Buddhism that were kind of erroneous. And i got irritated. I'm a Buddhist not a Buddha as are all those silly people who won't talk with one another. Call it post caucus trauma. And I'm a gal not a bloke! I was just irritated, i certainly never took offense.

There are a number of assumptions you are making in your last post which to be honest i don't feel like unpacking as we probably should all be on another sub-forum trying to figure out how to make money for tomorrow.

Actually the Buddhist traditon is quite akin to libertarianism and/or deism because the main thrust is personal responsibility and realizing that actions have consequences. The Buddha was not a god or a prophet or the son of God or anything rarified...just someone who through his own efforts and insight broke through into another dimension of being. He then was able to help others break through their own conditioning to realize their full potential. One thing he constantly banged on about was the necessity of developing individuality as opposed to individualism and to repudiate conformity. To the extent you conform and don't figure life out for yourself, to that extent you remain mechanical, reactive and habitual...ie not free!


I think in all religious traditions you have the 'ethnic' manifestations which tend to be a structure for living a life reasonably ethically rather than a spiritual path embarked upon with the whole of one's being. So when you are talking about spiritual traditions that have been around for donkeys years, you have to be careful to separate the cultural trappings from the actual teachings.
This means you need to develop your discriminating faculty.

Theistic religions scare the bejayzus out me. This is because all of them sanctify violence because the 'sacred texts' contain so much of it.

Jews, Christians and Moslems do not seem to address this problem of violence in the sacred texts. Nor the problem that it seems that God's overwhelming character is that of a violent, punishing, pathological Deity who uses unfathomable violence to both reward and punish.
I'm sorry if this seems like a superficial analysis of the Bible, the Koran and the Talmud or Torah and i certainly do not want to cause offense. I just feel that the problem of sanctifying violence needs to be addressed if we are to survive as a species.

 

[idiom]

Y'all know RP claims to be Born Again right? Do think if he just read a bit more he might get over it or something?

 

[JohnM]

Atheists are cool with me so long as they're quiet atheists.

As religions go though they tend to be a pretty loud and obnoxious group.

 

[Mesogen]

That is absolutely wrong and I have an agnostic friend who has made the difference between the two very clear for me.

Since Wikipedia is what people have been using in this thread, here is what it says about the two:

Agnosticism is the philosophical view that the truth value of certain claims—particularly metaphysical claims regarding theology, afterlife or the existence of god, gods, deities, or even ultimate reality—is unknown or, depending on the form of agnosticism, inherently unknowable due to the nature of subjective experience.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnosticism

Atheism, as a philosophical view, is the position that either affirms the nonexistence of gods or rejects theism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism


Atheists believe there is no God. Agnostics believe it is unknowable one way or another. There is such thing as atheistic agnosticism, but saying "an agnostic is an atheist" is a hasty generalization.

if you are agnostic, you cannot be a theist simultaneously

if you not a theist, you are an atheist

 

[Kludge]

if you are agnostic, you cannot be a theist simultaneously

if you not a theist, you are an atheist

Atheism rejects theism, agnostics don't embrace either ideas, so can't be collected into either of these groups. They're the independents.

 

[hvac ak47]

Too few atheists in the US?

I think there are more than we know. I think alot of people are walking around lieing to themselves.

Im an atheist but at one time when younger I went to church and did the christian thing. The whole time deep down I knew it was all bullshit. I was allways in kind of a struggle with myself.

I felt like a complete fake in church singing and getting baptised. I went because I kept thinking one day I would just drop all doubt and that I had to go to be a good person.

This all came to an end when in bilbe study I asked a simple question of why God needed to have blood spilt in order to forgive someone. I was looked at like a trouble maker, like I was trying to prove God didnt exist.

I wasnt trying to prove God didnt exist. I was trying to prove to MYSELF that God DID exist. When I finally left church to never go back I felt the burden lifted from my shoulders that I was allways told and heard people say they felt after being baptised.

Im sure there are many who are in church today with the same feelings I had then. Whether these people would be considered Atheist or not I don know.

 

[Kludge]

Too few atheists in the US?

I think there are more than we know. I think alot of people are walking around lieing to themselves.

Im an atheist but at one time when younger I went to church and did the christian thing. The whole time deep down I knew it was all bullshit. I was allways in kind of a struggle with myself.

I felt like a complete fake in church singing and getting baptised. I went because I kept thinking one day I would just drop all doubt and that I had to go to be a good person.

This all came to an end when in bilbe study I asked a simple question of why God needed to have blood spilt in order to forgive someone. I was looked at like a trouble maker, like I was trying to prove God didnt exist.

I wasnt trying to prove God didnt exist. I was trying to prove to MYSELF that God DID exist. When I finally left church to never go back I felt the burden lifted from my shoulders that I was allways told and heard people say they felt after being baptised.

Im sure there are many who are in church today with the same feelings I had then. Whether these people would be considered Atheist or not I don know.

I finally left Church after I went to a Christian camp and they had us speak in "tongues". Everyone around me was babbling on and I realized that I was trying to make my words sound random so when I went up to the pastor, he wouldn't think I was "faking".

 

[Carl Corey]

Atheism rejects theism, agnostics don't embrace either ideas, so can't be collected into either of these groups. They're the independents.

Agnostics tend to reject the scientific method when stating that the existence of God cannot be proven or disproven. I don't see how that would make one independent, it seems like a category by itself.

Not to mention there's a vast difference between calling yourself a Christian and being a Christian, ironically you don't have to believe in God for the latter.

 

[curtis119]

Agnostic and gay. I support Dr Paul 110%.