Page 22 of 34 FirstFirst ... 12171819202122232425262732 ... LastLast
Results 421 to 440 of 675
  1. #421  
    Its sad there are only 3% (6% in my link) atheists in USA. This means there are more God-fearing (and presumably self-loathing) gays than atheists, which should ring rather funnily in church

    This compared to 39% on Britons and 42% Dutch. Maybe the rest of the world does not really understand America. Wasn't it found on people fleeing religious persecution?
    http://www.pitzer.edu/academics/facu...n/atheism.html

    Surur
    Last edited by surur; 05/14/2007 at 10:32 AM.
  2. #422  
    Quote Originally Posted by cjvitek View Post
    I read a survey where as a whole, the group that "America" trusted the least was...atheists. Beyond terrorists, beyond Muslims, the atheists where the group that were garnered the least trust, they were the group that the most people answered "I would be most upset if my son/daughter married a...", etc.

    It was quite astounding!


    Here is the link link

    Chris
    I agree. Astounding, indeed. And uniquely American. The Europeans laugh at those reports.

    Atheists do bad things. They take responsibility for them. They never say, "I killed those protestants|catholics|jews|homosexuals|communists|abortionists|witches|atheists|secular-humanists for God."

    Be afraid of "true believers." There is no protection from those who do evil in God's name.
  3. #423  
    I am not going to go as far as you in your condemnation of "true believers" because people are capable of evil regardless of their beliefs, and to justify your condemnation by saying that true atheists "take responsibility" is just silly.

    Does it really matter WHY someone does something bad? The fact that they did it is the problem, not what their rationalization for it is.

    Chris
  4. #424  
    On another note, one which hasn't received any attention here, 3 of the 10 republican candidates for president have indicated they do not believe in evolution.

    Chris
  5. #425  
    Quote Originally Posted by cjvitek View Post
    On another note, one which hasn't received any attention here, 3 of the 10 republican candidates for president have indicated they do not believe in evolution.

    Chris
    Wow! Got a link. What does GWB think?

    Edit: I see he's supportive of "intelligent design".

    Surur
    Last edited by surur; 05/14/2007 at 12:37 PM.
  6. #426  
    Quote Originally Posted by whmurray View Post
    Be afraid of "true believers." There is no protection from those who do evil in God's name.
    There is no protection from any doing evil in anyone's (or anything's) name, whether be in God's name, in the name of money, power, greedy, jealousy, envy, power, political gain, land, their favorite football team, creating their own job promotion, or forgot to take their mental health meds for the last 3 weeks.

    In Russia during the cold war years, A lot of evil has been perpetrated by those convinced they had to have the swish on their tongue of their shoes or Levis tag on their **** and have killed for a Nike and Levi pair. That does not make Nike or Levi evil because they used their name to commit evil. In fact I bet the majority of people who believe in and use Nike and wear Levi jeans are peaceful loving people who would do anything to help you out if you were in need.

    People in history and today have used all sorts of claimed reasons to commit murder, rape, plunder, steal, declare war, lie, cheat, or commit terrorist acts. They may claim it in the name of their country, their clan, their religion, or in the brand of their breakfast cerial...whatever it takes to hide the true motives of greed, revenge, bloodthirst, to gain power, or to take land. If somone says they would deny religion because some have abused it's name then they could follow that logic and say that they will not seek money because so many wars have been fought in it's name, they will not own land because so much evil has been done in it's name, they will not claim any citizen ship because of so much corruption with gov that represents them.

    I the last 3 months or so, there has been repeated posts on the evils that religion has done, to make a wide range of various points against religion, the bible, etc.... Anything good can be turned to be used for any alternative motivation thinkable. Often times, when many of these unspeakable acts are done in the name of Religion, it is the excuse...the selling point...the facade to hide behind...an unrelated justification for a cause that the claimed religion did not teach and by methods the claimed religion does not support...so that when it comes down to it the unswerving desire to honor their claimed religion was not the true underlaying motivation for committing these acts but rather we find it usually is the desire for money, power, sex, revenge, political gains, land, etc... Because the name of religion has been used and abused as an excuse in the past and present does not mean that all religions or their members are made of the same fabric.
  7. #427  
    I agree with you, Hobbes, but it seems to me we certainly don't castigate those who participate in these sorts of religion-driven evils than for some of the other motivations you mention.

    Forget atrocities for the moment, let's just consider the more subtle and sinister. For example, why is "godless" a perjorative? Aren't we supposed to respect each other's beliefs? Shouldn't we shoot down (using dialogue) any politician who disparages atheists in this manner? Why don't we?
  8. #428  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal View Post
    ...so that when it comes down to it the unswerving desire to honor their claimed religion was not the true underlaying motivation for committing these acts but rather we find it usually is the desire for money, power, sex, revenge, political gains, land, etc... Because the name of religion has been used and abused as an excuse in the past and present does not mean that all religions or their members are made of the same fabric.
    It doesn't help that Semitic religions themselves seems steeped in "the desire for money, power, sex, revenge, political gains, land, etc" (I dont know about far eastern religions unfortunately). Maybe all organized human activity is about "the desire for money, power, sex, revenge, political gains, land, etc" and will eventually be corrupted to that purpose.

    Maybe thats the saving grace of atheism, not having a church.

    Surur
  9. #429  
    Quote Originally Posted by cjvitek View Post
    I am not going to go as far as you in your condemnation of "true believers" because people are capable of evil regardless of their beliefs, and to justify your condemnation by saying that true atheists "take responsibility" is just silly.

    Does it really matter WHY someone does something bad? The fact that they did it is the problem, not what their rationalization for it is.

    Chris
    Perhaps. However, true believers have a built-in rationalization. It goes beyond simply rationalizing evil, to making them into a positive good for which they will be rewarded in an afterlife.
  10. #430  
    Anyone who wants to, and is willing to do evil, will find some rationalization, regardless of what they believe.

    Chris
  11. #431  
    Quote Originally Posted by cjvitek View Post
    On another note, one which hasn't received any attention here, 3 of the 10 republican candidates for president have indicated they do not believe in evolution.

    Chris
    here is a link.

    http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2007May...8Trail,00.html

    People can have any views they like, but there is no way would I vote for someone who refuses to see the scientific evidence of evolution. Regardless of the soft selling of this by Fox news, I shudder to think how the NIH and federal biomedical research would suffer under such an individual (its suffered enough under our current president).

    As I said before, the theory of evolution has led to the saving of millions of lives, and is the foundation of modern genetics which impacts both biomedicine and agriculture.

    As one example, consider the field of infectious disease, which is based in large part on evolutionary theory. We used to live in an age where millions of people died from bacterial infections. Then we discovered antibiotics. Then we discovered that bacteria evolved to become resistant to the antibiotics, through random mutations and adaptive survival based on those random mutations. So since that time, for the last thirty or forty years, we have been in a race with evolving bacteria to develop new drugs which can kill them before they kill us. If we did not understand or denied that they were evolving, we could not understand how to develop newer drugs to overcome their mutations. This is the application of the theory of evolution in action, my friends.

    Enjoying all of the benefits which our appreciation of the theory of evolution has provided while at the same time denying the theory, is harmless, albeit somewhat hypocritical.

    But on the other hand, those who feel the need to circumvent others from teaching evolution and the science which it is founded on, or circumvent potential life saving research which is derived from this theory, this is inhumane and dangerous, IMHO.
    Last edited by cellmatrix; 05/14/2007 at 01:59 PM.
  12. #432  
    It occurs to me that religious Christians and young earth creationist must see the world (and even the universe) as some kind of bizarre stage, created to play out the story of the bible, fated to only exist for a few 1000 years into the past and only another few 100 into the future (as we are as always close to the end of days).

    I wonder what motivation such believers have in preserving the environment for distant descendants.

    Surur
  13. #433  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    It doesn't help that Semitic religions themselves seems steeped in "the desire for money, power, sex, revenge, political gains, land, etc" (I dont know about far eastern religions unfortunately). Maybe all organized human activity is about "the desire for money, power, sex, revenge, political gains, land, etc" and will eventually be corrupted to that purpose.

    Maybe thats the saving grace of atheism, not having a church.

    Surur
    Perhaps. Perhaps not. In any case, such a position sounds very much like prejudice, not to say, bigotry. It is the kind of language that true believers use to talk about those not members of their sect and to justify violence against us. It sounds very much like the language that people in that part of the world use to justify their violence against us.

    It may be true that the culture is all about those things. That should not be surprising in an environment where it is all one can do to scratch a sparse living from an arid environment. However, the Semitic religions are no more a repository for the Seven Deadly Sins than any other. Of course, they are no better proof against them than any other either.

    My concern arises when a sect says that their position is obviously superior to that of other sects or that they are obviously the favorites of God. When, for example, they assert that their deity not only promised them "a land flowing with milk and honey," or "Leibensraum" but authorized them to take it from those already living there, not by persuasion or commerce, but by the coercive power of a nation state.

    I do agree that it is a mark in favor of atheism that its adherents are not usually organized into groups but there have been notable exceptions. The communists were highly organized and they did use the power of the state against all others. While they did not appeal to God for their rationale, they did appeal to Justice. Like the religious who kill in the name of God, the communists killed in the name of the collective. The victims of either are equally dead.

    Beware the True Believers, whatever their cause.
  14. #434  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    ...I wonder what motivation such believers have in preserving the environment for distant descendants.
    Or, for that matter, in preventing nuclear war?


    In case of the Rapture, may I have your car?
    V > Vx > m505 > m515 > T/T > T3 > TC > 650 > 680
    <script type="text/javascript" src="http://download.skype.com/share/skypebuttons/js/skypeCheck.js"></script>
    <a href="skype:wwgamble?call"><img src="http://mystatus.skype.com/balloon/wwgamble" style="border: none;" width="150" height="60" alt="My Skype status" /></a>
  15. #435  
    Quote Originally Posted by whmurray View Post
    However, the Semitic religions are no more a repository for the Seven Deadly Sins than any other. Of course, they are no better proof against them than any other either.
    What we know of the South American religions prove that the above is certainly true.

    As I said, its more about human organizations that their specific ideology which is dangerous. Power corrupts.

    Surur
  16. #436  
    Quote Originally Posted by cellmatrix View Post
    here is a link.

    http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2007May...8Trail,00.html

    .................As one example, consider the field of infectious disease, which is based in large part on evolutionary theory. We used to live in an age where millions of people died from bacterial infections. Then we discovered antibiotics. Then we discovered that bacteria evolved to become resistant to the antibiotics, through random mutations and adaptive survival based on those random mutations. So since that time, for the last thirty or forty years, we have been in a race with evolving bacteria to develop new drugs which can kill them before they kill us. If we did not understand or denied that they were evolving, we could not understand how to develop newer drugs to overcome their mutations. This is the application of the theory of evolution in action, my friends...........
    It does not say in Genesis that God gave us dominion over bacteria. It is highly unlikely that Noah took marsupials or penguins on the ark.
  17. #437  
    Having dominated the thread, the creationists have gone strangely silent. Do you suppose that we have converted them all? Are we now "preaching to the choir?"
  18.    #438  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    It occurs to me that religious Christians and young earth creationist must see the world (and even the universe) as some kind of bizarre stage, created to play out the story of the bible, fated to only exist for a few 1000 years into the past and only another few 100 into the future (as we are as always close to the end of days).

    I wonder what motivation such believers have in preserving the environment for distant descendants.

    Surur
    Can't speak for anybody else, but since your comment seemed to point in my direction I thought I'd chime in.

    I definitely think we should do what we can to protect the environment. But since 'going green' has become a fashion statement we should be careful on whom we decide to bequeath this responsibility.

    Obviously we should all do our part. I recycle cans and plastic at my local center, I drive a car that gets 30+MPG, I turn off the lights in my house when not in use and use flourescents in most of the rooms. I'm looking into solar and wind power, but it's still a bit pricey.

    Why do I do this if I only think the world will be around a few hundred (or thousand) years? Because God told Adam and Eve to tend the garden that He gave them. That was the first job anyone was ever given, and so it is still important today.
  19.    #439  
    Quote Originally Posted by whmurray View Post
    It does not say in Genesis that God gave us dominion over bacteria. It is highly unlikely that Noah took marsupials or penguins on the ark.
    Since the land mass of the earth was once joined together (even non-theists believe this) called Pangea, all the animals lived on the same continent.

    Yes, the Bible supports Pangea. in Genesis 10:25 there is mentioned a man who was named "Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided" The word divided in that passage is a word that means "to separate by water".
  20.    #440  
    Quote Originally Posted by whmurray View Post
    Having dominated the thread, the creationists have gone strangely silent. Do you suppose that we have converted them all? Are we now "preaching to the choir?"
    Naw, we're still here. It's just fun to watch you guys argue amongst yourselves.

Posting Permissions