Good to know. According to this survey (included agnostics as well); only 1 out of every 10 americans do not believe in God. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_atheism So "far more" is a overstatement on your part. Still justifies atheist is more loud mouth about forcing their views on others.
Why does it matter to me, well mostly it doesn't, but there have been several very interesting conversations that were derailed by you bringing this into play. So it just ruins topics. Also, I know that many atheists around here have explained to you very similar reasoning, and explained that 95% of us, who call ourselves atheist, and don't have belief in god, don't claim to know there is no god. We simply claim no belief in god. But you would rather label us. That's kind of rude. But mostly, just annoying. OK then. I'm done going in circles.
Stop with your bullshit high horse! You've had your fair share of derailment. I've seen you jump on the anti-christian threads, derail others as well. So if you don't like what you dish, then stop dishing it! And rude? You guys label Christians the same fucking way too! Christ man, WTF is your problem?
You should really just start ignoring him whenever he talks about atheism. It goes absolutely no where.
Nah, I hope to get past these couple subjects that have been hashed out to oblivion cause I really do enjoy discussing other aspects of atheism and theism with Mags. The two of us just need to slap each other on occasion, like you would an old time record player when Miles Davis keeps skipping back to the same B flat.
For about the billionth time, atheists do not "believe there isn't a god with no proof". Atheists say that the burden of proof is on the believers, whether Jesus, astrology, Muhammed, or alien visitation. And as Richard Dawkins pointed out, we are all atheists, about other people's gods. I doubt few if any believe in Odin (as opposed to Oden) or Zeus. You are not in a church of people who don't believe in Zeus without proof. There is not a religion of people who don't believe in Zeus without proof. Rather, you say there is no reason to believe (no evidence) in either the existence or divinity of Zeus. Or Odin. Or any of the other thousands of gods and goddesses whom people have worshipped. Atheists feel the same way about your god. Some atheists have recognized that houses of worship also perform a social and community function; indeed, for many if not most parishioners that's the reason they go. My late stepmother was an atheist but she loved Shabbat services for the music and the connection to the community. And some atheists have suggested that we need our own form of social structure. I don't agree, personally, because we don't have a common belief on which to base it. There are liberal, conservative, communist, socialist, libertarian and apolitical atheists. There are charitable atheists and anti-charity atheists. There are feminist atheists like Greta Christina and anti-women's rights atheists like Nat Hentoff. There are atheists of all ethnicities. There are gay atheists, straight ally atheists, and homophobic atheists. I mean, I read Free Inquiry and Freethought Blogs and the range of views is huge, no flipping way we could come together in a "church". However, I do believe we need secular ways of recognizing major life changes - birth, coming of age, mating/marriage, death. There are atheists to still use religious rituals they don't believe in because of the need for some formal recognition and religious rituals are all they have.
For the billionth time, Christians or any other theist feel the same way. There is no difference between and atheist or theist. They both believe what they believe in and don't feel the need for the non believer to question their faith. Cran, you have a faith that you don't feel the need to have others justify your belief. Just as the theist doesn't require a non believer to tell you "hey your opinion is valid". The only difference is the atheist believes they have science to back them up; but fail to use science to truly back them up. Agnostics are the only "Spock-like" logical thinking. They don't say "there is no God" but instead they say "all of what I've seen has given me no proof God exists".
What up folks? Good Morning everyone! I decided for a couple weeks, I'm not going to get in any debates, I'm not going to defend anything. I may post if I find something interesting, funny or cool, but for a few weeks I won't go beyond that. Especially no politics. Peace be with you brothers and sisters
I do not have a faith. I accept facts for which there is evidence. Faith is by definition belief in something for which there is no evidence. Faith is not repeat not disbelief in something for which there is no evidence. Would you say I am religious because I point out there is no evidence for astrology and therefore don't accept it? I think the trouble is believers in a divine being can't see that non believers place their divine being in the same "bag" as all the rest. There MUST be something special about their god that is so self-evident that disbelieving it is also "faith" without proof. They would not say that about disbelief in Zeus. For me all gods are the same. And there is no evidence for any. Therefore I do not accept their existence and will not without evidence. Which there cannot be because, as numerous Christians have pointed out, the whole point of faith is acceptance without evidence. And I'm getting virtual laryngitis having to explain this over and over!
Hey, cran, here's where I think that you're off the mark in your thinking. I disagree with your statement that faith is belief in something for which there is no evidence. That puts belief in God in the light of believing in Santa Claus or, as message board atheists love to use, the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Rather, I believe that true faith is looking at human existence in this universe with open eyes, assessing the order of the universe, the physical laws, the incredible amount of information that is necessary for the formation of even the simplest of cells, and making an assessment that it is more likely that an intelligent, outside causative force is likely behind our existence than sheer time and random chance. Certainly that assessment involves being willing to accept that there are limits of what can be known and ultimately knowing that there cannot be a proof of God's existence in terms of a logic equation. But is an atheistic view on this any better? The atheist simply states that there is no proof for a god and therefore he or she must not exist. Not exactly a valid argument from a logic standpoint either. I kind of like this quote: I understand where you're coming from on this and I hope that I've never given you the impression that I think there is any need for you to justify your lack of belief in God. We're all faced with the fact that we look at two basic facts that we can never wholly explain: 1. The universe exists through factors that we will never be able to fully understand; and 2. There is life within the universe when there is no logical explanation as to how or why that should be so. I choose to believe that there is a God behind it all. You choose to believe that billions of years and random chance is sufficient explanation. I have found peace and comfort in my faith, in my prayer life, in my church community, and in the Bible. I guess ultimately it comes down to the Blood Sweat and Tears lyric: Although that lyric really never made a whole lot of sense to me from an atheist point of view because if death is simply turning off a light bulb, then I guess dying won't tell us anything at all.
Wow great post! Repp'd! Well at least I tried! "You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to e_blazer again."
