Has Atheism become its own Religion?

the same character flaws found in many Christians are also found in many atheists.
Being judgmental of others, for instance.

Honestly the only reason i think people believe in a higher power is because their scared.

Click to expand...

This is incorrect. Most people are religous because it was shoved down their throats from day 1.
But if you are talking of adults that converted you are probably right.

But whats wrong with being scared of death? The thought of being reunited with loved ones after death is very comforting and makes death easier to handle for some.
Many people, religious and non, hold false beliefs and fevered egos that make their life more comfortable.

a religion? naaaah...... maybe they have these groups because people want to spread the word that you dont have to be "spiritual" or have "faith" to be a functioning member of society. i think people are becoming more informed these days and are beginning to realize that there are other options. you dont have to "choose a side" in fear of going to a hot place called "hell". i personally find the concept of heaven and hell and the "afterlife" frustrating because some people are so worried about getting into some theoretical ( i say theoretical because nothing has been proven) magical kingdom with unicorns and fat babies with wings jamming death metal on electric harps, that in the meantime they treat everyone in THIS life like total crap. not all people mind you but "some"............ yeah i can see why they would have groups like the one you speak of but is it a religion?.......naaaaaah. more like a support group for people looking for truth. i apologize if i sound anti religion.....i tried to keep it out of the post so no offence intended. love, peace, and chicken grease.

morgentaler said:

So you're an agnostic about unicorns, leprechauns, Shrek, Transformers, Thundercats, Power Puff Girls, cereal, etc.

Click to expand...

How do you apply agnosticism to cartoon characters when the discussion is about religion? You're starting to sound like one of those people who is "either crazy or is just mad at god"

morgentaler said:

Your stance is weak.

Click to expand...

Said by a man who knows for sure god DOESNT exist...

morgentaler said:

I can tell you that I have a 747 in my pocket, but that if you look it will become invisible and have no mass. Is the correct and "true" stance for that agnosticism as well?

Click to expand...

Agnosticism goes beyond your 747, thundercats, and spaghetti monster... Agnosticism is reality. Prove to me that god doesn't exist, and someone just as naive as you can supply me with as ridiculous proof that he DOES exist... Fact remains, atheists have no more level ground than Christians, you are JUST as naive.

by the way: Agnosticism: the view that absolute truth or ultimate certainty is unattainable, especially regarding knowledge not based on experience or perceivable phenomena; the view that the existence of God or of all deities is unknown, unknowable, unproven, or unprovable; doubt, uncertainty, or skepticism regarding ...

Hopefully you can manage to make better sense in proving your point to the next person who tries to help you open your eyes to just how ignorant in your faith you are.

That or... go around and tell people you are an atheist when you have no absolute proof that god DOESNT or HASNT existed... which essentially flushes your faith down the toilet (where it belongs)

Look at the pattern: when people didn't know what the sun was, they said it was magic/a god; when people didn't know what caused waves and tides, they said it was magic/god; we're left with more unanswered questions, it must be magic/god. I've never seen anything resembling magic-god-spirits, and have no reason to jump on that bandwagon just because there are things that have not been explained.

And, there are plenty of things that I can't personally prove... the sun is a flaming ball of gas? I've never been up close to it myself, but I'll accept the scientific explanation. I don't need everything proven beyond a shadow of doubt... just within reason. Magic god spirits? No way, that's a HUGE leap of faith, and ridiculous IMO.

GrowTech said:

How do you apply agnosticism to cartoon characters when the discussion is about religion? You're starting to sound like one of those people who is "either crazy or is just mad at god"

Click to expand...

Because beyond being a character in a book, there is no evidence to support the existence of your god.

Said by a man who knows for sure god DOESNT exist...

Click to expand...

Your god(s) don't.
They're mythological fabrications.

Even if there were a creative being who gave birth to the universe, you won't find a religion on this planet that has ever been in contact with it nor can present any evidence that their concept of what such a being is is any more relevant than the other baseless claims of another religion.

Agnosticism goes beyond your 747, thundercats, and spaghetti monster... Agnosticism is reality. Prove to me that god doesn't exist, and someone just as naive as you can supply me with as ridiculous proof that he DOES exist... Fact remains, atheists have no more level ground than Christians, you are JUST as naive.

Click to expand...

So every time someone claims something exists, we must spend our time hunting down evidence for why it doesn't exist, when the claim that it DOES exist has no evidence.

You seem to think that just because the concept of god exists it provides itself with validation.

It doesn't.

by the way: Agnosticism: the view that absolute truth or ultimate certainty is unattainable, especially regarding knowledge not based on experience or perceivable phenomena; the view that the existence of God or of all deities is unknown, unknowable, unproven, or unprovable; doubt, uncertainty, or skepticism regarding ...
Hopefully you can manage to make better sense in proving your point to the next person who tries to help you open your eyes to just how ignorant in your faith you are.

That or... go around and tell people you are an atheist when you have no absolute proof that god DOESNT or HASNT existed... which essentially flushes your faith down the toilet (where it belongs)

Click to expand...

See above.
Every time you make that statement you are completely ignoring the idea that if you must consider "god" as real without supporting evidence then you must consider every other idea as real.


I don't know how the universe got started.
So?

Does that make the thousands of competing religions valid? Not a chance.

In fact, there's a hunchbacked bonobo in the 11th dimension who crafts universes from his shit. I might consider worshiping him. As a bonobo agnostic can you now tell me something about him?

morgentaler said:

Because beyond being a character in a book, there is no evidence to support the existence of your god.




Your god(s) don't.
They're mythological fabrications.

Even if there were a creative being who gave birth to the universe, you won't find a religion on this planet that has ever been in contact with it nor can present any evidence that their concept of what such a being is is any more relevant than the other baseless claims of another religion.



So every time someone claims something exists, we must spend our time hunting down evidence for why it doesn't exist, when the claim that it DOES exist has no evidence.

You seem to think that just because the concept of god exists it provides itself with validation.

It doesn't.




See above.
Every time you make that statement you are completely ignoring the idea that if you must consider "god" as real without supporting evidence then you must consider every other idea as real.


I don't know how the universe got started.
So?

Does that make the thousands of competing religions valid? Not a chance.

In fact, there's a hunchbacked bonobo in the 11th dimension who crafts universes from his shit. I might consider worshiping him. As a bonobo agnostic can you now tell me something about him?

Click to expand...

Why did you spend so much time posting content that is hardly worth a ? You do nothing to support YOUR beliefs... My beliefs aren't in question, my beliefs ARE a question. Atheists however, or my new favorite term "people who are just mad at god" have as much to prove as Catholics, Christians, Jews, etc... with their claims. You claim he DOES NOT or CANNOT exist, I merely claim I don't know and I don't want to be the goofy looking guy who claims to know something he does not.

Good work though... I hope you get over this grudge you have against god.

a higher power cannot be proved or disproved, so we are all on common ground.

How can I have a grudge against something that has never been proven to exist. If you would like to cling to legend that's your business.

I might call you a dumbass, because you don't understand the concept of burden or proof, but there's no part of not believing in a god that has no proof that dictates I should kill you.
The 2 religions you just cited do.

What I have a grudge against is religion. Religion exists. It is the irrational belief that something someone told you about a deity is the absolutely truth and the rejection of any and all fact which run counter to that belief.
All dogmatic faith is poison whether in religion or politics.

You so casually dismiss the idea of being agnostic to cartoon characters, but that shows you don't understand your own platform.

Feel free to examine the list here: http://www.godchecker.com/

Are you agnostic about each and every one of these deities? What about the celestial teapot or the invisible pink unicorn?

If you say no to ANY one of them, your argument has failed. Who looks goofy then?

GrowTech said:

Why did you spend so much time posting content that is hardly worth a ? You do nothing to support YOUR beliefs... My beliefs aren't in question, my beliefs ARE a question. Atheists however, or my new favorite term "people who are just mad at god" have as much to prove as Catholics, Christians, Jews, etc... with their claims. You claim he DOES NOT or CANNOT exist, I merely claim I don't know and I don't want to be the goofy looking guy who claims to know something he does not.

Good work though... I hope you get over this grudge you have against god.

Click to expand...

You fail to understand basic rules of logic.

Your beliefs are a question, that is great, I am all for skepticism and questioning.

No, someone who is atheistic about god(s) does not have as much to prove as a religious person. A religious person must prove the unprovable, that something completely intangible in every way exists.

An rationalist/atheist simply dismisses unprovable things. There is no reason to remain agnostic about something there is no way to feel, hear, touch, taste, or smell.

Should at some time these intangible things become tangible, then they will get their due consideration. If this is agnosticism to you, then I suspect any atheist, including myself, is "agnostic".

Additionally, what if we did find a being that created the universe there is no requirement that it actually be a god, or fall within the varied criteria placed upon it by religions.

The "creator" could simply be a math algorithm, or a similarly abstract concept.

Anthropomorphy creates small gods.

Osoheil said:

You fail to understand basic rules of logic.

Your beliefs are a question, that is great, I am all for skepticism and questioning.

No, someone who is atheistic about god(s) does not have as much to prove as a religious person. A religious person must prove the unprovable, that something completely intangible in every way exists.

An rationalist/atheist simply dismisses unprovable things. There is no reason to remain agnostic about something there is no way to feel, hear, touch, taste, or smell.

Should at some time these intangible things become tangible, then they will get their due consideration. If this is agnosticism to you, then I suspect any atheist, including myself, is "agnostic".

Click to expand...

I agree morgentaler.



To contribute more to the thread; I do not think atheism is becoming a religion at all.

If someone is preachy, I don't really mind. But I hate the confusion that some people have that atheism and intolerance coincide. Not all atheists are intolerant.

Why is it a problem if someone is chanting on a soapbox? If all of what he is saying is morally and/or logically sound, what is the issue? I wish more atheists, including myself, were even more outspoken. Why not challenge their words if they are wrong?

I dare anyone who utilizes the flimsy rhetoric of most religious types to -fully- immerse themselves in a world without the benefits of sound logic and rationale. Modern medicine? Forget it. Your car? Trash it. The architectural plans that built your home? Toss those too. None of it would be possible if not for these rules, that scientists and researchers and doctors the world over use every day to great benefit.

Something flimsy catholic rationale has brought us lately is the pope telling africans not to use condoms, even going so far as to say they increase the prevelence of aids. As many schools and hospitals and as much money the catholic church pumps into africa in aid, it is stunning the amount of pain and suffering the pope has just created for an unknowable amount of people by forbidding a piece of rubber. All because of a religious belief.


Something that everyone on these forums can understand; Think of marijuana laws in the US and abroad. These laws are usually based on the poorest rationale imaginable, and they stay laws because of stupidity, poor rationale, and/or religious beliefs.

Atheists and rationalists SHOULD be outspoken. They should challenge bad beliefs and poor rationale when they come up, even if they will be scorned because of it. This is for all of our benefit, even those who do not utilize such strict logic in their own lives.

There is no proof wat so ever that there is a god. The thing u call proof is a book.... a book. u live ur life by the word of people who thought the sun was only miles away, Or that the earth was flat.

Alot of christians have beef with science but you wud still be a primate without it. But what happeneds when all this technology is taken away??.....thats wat i thought. Within months humans wud go rite back to where they were hundreds of years ago.

But whats wrong with being scared of death? The thought of being reunited with loved ones after death is very comforting and makes death easier to handle for some.
Many people, religious and non, hold false beliefs and fevered egos that make their life more comfortable.

Click to expand...

Thats a good point. But its just as silly and make beleive as fairy tells.

morgentaler, please open your mind and souless bag of worm food to the next sentence.

You appear to be a very smart man and I know you know a theist does not have to believe in the Abrahamic trio, yet you viciously attack anyone with a theist perspective with great animosity (because, as you have said, you want them to vote like you) by instantly and generically ascribing your perception of what a christian is to them and then begin throwing internet stones and ridiculing them for believing ALL of the preachings of the imaginary religion you constructed in your mind and then ascribed to them.

That is just plain mean, and not conducive to the betterment of the human race nor does it add to humansity's knowledge base.

"As it is your posts just seem to be speedbumps in the middle of the threads, with all the clarity of marshmallows."

Mr. Morgen, can we agree not to throw insults?
I will not respond to yours, and that does not make you win an argument with logic.
IT is bullying and We don't care much for bullies, so please be nice

and let's pretend for a few moments and for the purposes of this conversation that we are sitting next to each other in a lecture room at a Mystical symposium just after returning from a smoke break and we are surrounded with brilliant minds with big ears, so please, let's keep the conversation civil, shall we?

If you stand up on your chair again and begin preaching your non-beliefs to all of the scientists in the room, I assure you, you will look very odd indeed and security probably won't be as kind as green buds this time.

So, while we wait for the talk to begin, what do you think about the speaker's paper "The Religion Of Evolution"?

morgentaler said:

Atheism is simply the term for disbelief in a theistic deity.
The approach that people take differs greatly across the spectrum.

There are those who think that any belief system is fine. (I used to)

And there are those who think that any belief system built on irrationality or fiction is a threat to society (and that's where I'm at now).

There's all kinds of people in between, and there are certainly those more extreme in their beliefs than me.

My stand is that if you want to consider the possibility of a deity-creator, go ahead. If you start claiming it's true, and try to use that belief to define laws, shape society, collect money, interfere with education, etc. then you're in for a fight.

Click to expand...

Nailed it.

morgentaler, please open your mind and souless bag of worm food to the next sentence.
You appear to be a very smart man and I know you know a theist does not have to believe in the Abrahamic trio, yet you viciously attack anyone with a theist perspective with great animosity (because, as you have said, you want them to vote like you) by instantly and generically ascribing your perception of what a christian is to them and then begin throwing internet stones and ridiculing them for believing ALL of the preachings of the imaginary religion you constructed in your mind and then ascribed to them.

So?
If someone has a hypothetical barrel full of nonsense and some people believe 100% of the nonsense, and some people believe 1% of the nonsense, and present any of that spectrum as truth, well I have no patience for liars.

You want to say "I believe in the possibility that there is a creative force that made the universe", go right ahead.

It you want to start assigning titles like "god", creating reward and punishment zones, doctrine, etc. and act the role of "Liars for Jesus" or other religious constructs, go right ahead. But since it's not backed up by evidence, and even the "historical" biblical texts weren't even written when the events are purported to have happened, any statement of the truth of such a thing is propaganda.

I don't care in the slightest if you think I am a dick. The religious have already been indoctrinated. I'm not going to pussyfoot around every time someone makes a blatantly false or stupid claim.

If someone else comes along and reads it and says "Wow, he's an asshole, but he's right about faith." then yay.

My rudeness does not limit your ability to marry or have a relationship with the person of your choosing, nor interfere with the education of your children, or your legal system.


That is just plain mean, and not conducive to the betterment of the human race nor does it add to humansity's knowledge base.
"As it is your posts just seem to be speedbumps in the middle of the threads, with all the clarity of marshmallows."

Mr. Morgen, can we agree not to throw insults?
I will not respond to yours, and that does not make you win an argument with logic.
IT is bullying and We don't care much for bullies, so please be nice

I don't much care for spam, which many of your posts are.
You started thread after thread of garbage until people asked you to stop.
Most people were polite about it, the odd one wasn't.
I have no tolerance for it any more myself.


and let's pretend for a few moments and for the purposes of this conversation that we are sitting next to each other in a lecture room at a Mystical symposium just after returning from a smoke break and we are surrounded with brilliant minds with big ears, so please, let's keep the conversation civil, shall we?
If you stand up on your chair again and begin preaching your non-beliefs to all of the scientists in the room, I assure you, you will look very odd indeed and security probably won't be as kind as green buds this time.

Mystical scientists? Here's two more words. Cognitive dissonance.

morgentaler said:

morgentaler, please open your mind and souless bag of worm food to the next sentence.
You appear to be a very smart man and I know you know a theist does not have to believe in the Abrahamic trio, yet you viciously attack anyone with a theist perspective with great animosity (because, as you have said, you want them to vote like you) by instantly and generically ascribing your perception of what a christian is to them and then begin throwing internet stones and ridiculing them for believing ALL of the preachings of the imaginary religion you constructed in your mind and then ascribed to them.

So?
If someone has a hypothetical barrel full of nonsense and some people believe 100% of the nonsense, and some people believe 1% of the nonsense, and present any of that spectrum as truth, well I have no patience for liars.

You want to say "I believe in the possibility that there is a creative force that made the universe", go right ahead.

It you want to start assigning titles like "god", creating reward and punishment zones, doctrine, etc. and act the role of "Liars for Jesus" or other religious constructs, go right ahead. But since it's not backed up by evidence, and even the "historical" biblical texts weren't even written when the events are purported to have happened, any statement of the truth of such a thing is propaganda.

I don't care in the slightest if you think I am a dick. The religious have already been indoctrinated. I'm not going to pussyfoot around every time someone makes a blatantly false or stupid claim.

If someone else comes along and reads it and says "Wow, he's an asshole, but he's right about faith." then yay.

My rudeness does not limit your ability to marry or have a relationship with the person of your choosing, nor interfere with the education of your children, or your legal system.


That is just plain mean, and not conducive to the betterment of the human race nor does it add to humansity's knowledge base.
"As it is your posts just seem to be speedbumps in the middle of the threads, with all the clarity of marshmallows."

Mr. Morgen, can we agree not to throw insults?
I will not respond to yours, and that does not make you win an argument with logic.
IT is bullying and We don't care much for bullies, so please be nice

I don't much care for spam, which many of your posts are.
You started thread after thread of garbage until people asked you to stop.
Most people were polite about it, the odd one wasn't.
I have no tolerance for it any more myself.


and let's pretend for a few moments and for the purposes of this conversation that we are sitting next to each other in a lecture room at a Mystical symposium just after returning from a smoke break and we are surrounded with brilliant minds with big ears, so please, let's keep the conversation civil, shall we?
If you stand up on your chair again and begin preaching your non-beliefs to all of the scientists in the room, I assure you, you will look very odd indeed and security probably won't be as kind as green buds this time.

Mystical scientists? Here's two more words. Cognitive dissonance.

Click to expand...

So far your my favorite person on RIU lol

The reason I would like to converse with you without shouting insults at me is that I believe you have a bit more understanding of science that many of the posters here in this sub-forum on science related topics.

However, whenever you enter a room, you begin shouting and ingore topics by redirecting attention by throwing errant insults.

I would like to stay on topic with you specifically for a bit OK, Mr. Morgentaler?

Please explain your "Here's two more words. Cognitive dissonance" statement, as IT requires context in order to pick a meaning.

You also ignored my query regarding the religion of evolution.

Was that on purpose?

"I don't much care for spam, which many of your posts are."

I believe this to be a subjective, undefined, purely insultious claim.

"You started thread after thread of garbage until people asked you to stop."

False
Someone finally was polite enough to ask me to explain.

If you believe Mystical Scientist to be an oxymoron, please insert your own favorite flavor of scientist from your real world.

Please try to communicate here, rather than just attempting to redirect attention by spamming anyone that attempts to rationally discuss anything with you with flaming internet insults.

I am a Spiritual, not religious person, and I don't give a flying fuck how you classify yourself, because whatever it is, so long as you keep it out of my throat, I don't give a damn.

It is you, Mr. Morgentaler, who has repeatedly stated that your purpose here is to deconvert Christians so they will begin to vote like you do.

That what I feel is spam.

Please don't forget Mr. Morgentaler, I await your three answers to the red questions.

1.)
2.)
3.)

The reason I would like to converse with you without shouting insults at me is that I believe you have a bit more understanding of science that many of the posters here in this sub-forum on science related topics.

I am no smarter than anyone here, and any understanding I have of any topic is simply from the desire to learn more about it.

However, whenever you enter a room, you begin shouting and ingore topics by redirecting attention by throwing errant insults.

I don't "shout". I do not capitalize all texts or embolden everything I say, although I am now emboldening quotes because it's simpler for format smaller chunks that way.
Feel free to point out some posts with redirection. I usually concentrate on specific points. If I refer to something outside the statements as a parallel or common associate to what has been stated, that is not redirection, but if you've got examples then I can look over them and see where I can adjust my clarity.


Please explain your "Here's two more words. Cognitive dissonance" statement, as IT requires context in order to pick a meaning.

Mystic scientists. The concept is an example of cognitive dissonance. Mysticism, religion, faith - none of these are evidence based.

Science is the pursuit of knowledge through the collection and analysis of evidence related to the subject of study.

Cognitive dissonance is the individual's compartmentalizing of two opposing concepts so that they can both be believed at the same time.

Eg. Francis Collins, the leader of the human genome project becoming a born-again Christian. The man's life has been dedicated to scientific evidence, and discarding that for which the evidence did not support. On the other hand he has embraced god, which he has no evidentiary proof, and admits its a strange thing to many people. That is cognitive dissonance.

Mysticism is not science. Hence, cognitive dissonance.


You also ignored my query regarding the religion of evolution.
Was that on purpose?

Yes. Contrary to the old saying, there are indeed stupid questions.
Religion is dogmatic faith.
Evolution is "change over time". It is neither dogmatic nor faith based. It (edit: Evolution) has been (edit: change), can be, and will be as long as there is change.

And why do I ignore some points or (intentionally) badly phrased questions? Because that question, like many of the religious statements that you say I'm rude in answering were already addressed and I'm not a babysitter for the intellectually lazy.


"I don't much care for spam, which many of your posts are."
I believe this to be a subjective, undefined, purely insultious claim.

Okay, let's define it:
spam: Stupid Pointless Annoying Messages.

Yup, it's subjective. Yup, it's "insultious".

But guess what? It got you to stop talking like a badly programmed copy of Eliza for 5 minutes.


"You started thread after thread of garbage until people asked you to stop."

False
Someone finally was polite enough to ask me to explain.

Oddly enough you still don't bother to.

One person even expressed concern that you might have a physical illness because they said another user had talked like you before dying.

If you believe Mystical Scientist to be an oxymoron, please insert your own favorite flavor of scientist from your real world.

Flavor? Are we supposed to be tasting them?
Are you looking for any specific discipline of science here? I don't have a favorite. The fact that the religious have a special fear of biological sciences killing their god, and therefore a phobia of it means having to constantly address biology, but some also spout complete nonsense about thermodynamics.

Please try to communicate here, rather than just attempting to redirect attention by spamming anyone that attempts to rationally discuss anything with you with flaming internet insults.

I am a Spiritual, not religious person, and I don't give a flying fuck how you classify yourself, because whatever it is, so long as you keep it out of my throat, I don't give a damn.

You feel free to swallow whatever you want. And when you start your own mystical forum you can kick my ass off of it.

Someone's getting angry now, and talking in full sentences. I see a trend here.

It is you, Mr. Morgentaler, who has repeatedly stated that your purpose here is to deconvert Christians so they will begin to vote like you do.

Show me saying anything about getting anyone to vote like me? You don't even know my political affiliation or if I have one.

No, I have never stated that my purpose is to deconvert Christians.

My purpose is to get people to provide evidence for the claims they provide, or use critical thinking skills to demand and analyze that evidence. That I have stated.

Whatever happens after they start looking at things with a critical eye is up to them.

Great assesment Grasshopper. Folks are scared of dying. They look to nature and see the Creator's Hand in it's design. They assume such a Creator would try to communicate with us in some way. They decide the aforesaid communication would nearly have to be in writing. They study all the reputed Holy Books of the World's Religions and wind up squarely at the Holy Bible. Simple huh? That's how it happened for Hugh Ross.

bigwheel said:

Great assesment Grasshopper. Folks are scared of dying. They look to nature and see the Creator's Hand in it's design. They assume such a Creator would try to communicate with us in some way. They decide the aforesaid communication would nearly have to be in writing. They study all the reputed Holy Books of the World's Religions and wind up squarely at the Holy Bible. Simple huh? That's how it happened for Hugh Ross.

Click to expand...

If one studies all the holy books of the world's religions I would expect they are more likely to find themselves with no religion, unless the ultimate goal is to settle on a religion.

Why seek a connection to the implied god through a middleman?