Atheist = Closet theist

Discussion in 'Religion Archives' started by Theoryofrelativity, Aug 12, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. mustafhakofi I sa'id so Registered Senior Member

    see my previous post.
    why is it "better yet" religions that mention " evil, killing, enemy, infidel, war, sacrifice, suffering, fear, death, etc.
    are advocating violence in there very core.
    religions core values are evil.
    LOL, do you, for any of your religious assertions?.
    do come on, in the past people did'nt have the education they do today, and because of this education people are less likely to kill each other over religion, though it still goes on in the weak minded and uneducated.
    yes but not much, if it's core values are violence.
    same books as you but with out the propaganda.
    I dont muse with life, I speak for myself, i'm not religious, I dont have another controling my every thought and deed.

    it's a open forum for debate we educate when we can and learn from our mistakes.
    or do you think we come here, to preach someone elses gospels.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. mustafhakofi I sa'id so Registered Senior Member

    yes to a buddist it is, just as god exist, to the christian.
    but outside, it's a supernatural thing.
    I have nothing against buddism, if I was to be religious, this is the one I'd chose.
    but it's not wrong, reincarnation is a supernatural thing.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Well, it seems you've known all along how religious dogma controls the decision making process. BTW, much of what you said applies to the FSM.

    So, women are considered baby factories?

    Marriage is an institution not entirely based on religion, perhaps its those rights gay couples seek.

    Yet, many Catholics do oppose gay marriage based on their religious beliefs.

    Are they really justified and do they really do their utmost to be selfless and happy people?

    Another problem, they don't 'walk strait.' Most are hypocrites.

    The problem is it's not actually happening, hence it's not ok.

    BTW - it is not MY criteria on rationality, it is simple rationality. The conditions aren't possible because what you've said above about Catholics is bollocks.

    That's the problem with theists, they only see the worst in humanity since those are the only traits their religion can function. Humans are compassionate and caring, traits that have evolved over generations. Religion continually reminds us we are not.

    If you are referring to any kind of beliefs in the supernatural, you're dead wrong.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    "People think humanity is innately compassionate, caring and for some reason rational.
    I’d consider these to be irrational beliefs."

    Especially lacking any evidence to support it.
  8. KennyJC Registered Senior Member

    Compassion is just one evolutionary trait popular amongst many social animals. Society as we know it would not exist if we had not inherited these emotional traits. Our emotions are geared towards our very own survival as we are a very socially complexed species. So how is that irrational?

    You can not however, compare emotions to superstitions. Just because emotions create superstition does not mean the emotions themselves are irrational. Religion and belief that sighting magpies (a variety of bird in the UK) gives you luck, are both emotionally generated, and both very irrational. A person only becomes irrational when they continue to believe something despite lack of and/or contrary evidence.
  9. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    That's funny, geometry and physics being compared with dogma.

    How very unfortunate for Catholic women to be treated that way.

    Is this more comedy? You just stated how badly Catholic women are treated and then go on to say "it doesn't produce any harmful effects."

    Humanity hasn't had the chance to show itself as compassionate and caring ever since they were told they're sinners. Most people have been indoctrinated from childhood and are brainwashed to believe in such.

    Do away with religion, wait a few generations and we'll see. Shouldn't we allow positive atheism a chance on a global scale, just to see if it works?

    What beliefs do you refer, exactly?
  10. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Horsepucky! Are you saying there is no evidence to support compassion and caring in humans?

    Are you so brainwashed from your religion, you spout nonsense like that?
  11. mustafhakofi I sa'id so Registered Senior Member

    I think you misunderstood or your just being facetious. to deny a thing it must have first existed, so there is no denial as it is infantile to deny that which does not exist.
    which was made clear in the next sentence quote"there is no denial of these aledged truths, theres no belief that the asserted thing/truths ever existed in the first place"
    sorry you've completely lost me, what are you talking about here. can you try and clarify.
    now your being stupid, if the holy books were taken as what they are fiction, then they are harmless, but as they are taken as truth then they are the basic foundation for the causes of evil.
    I have not replied to the next few paragraphs as they are to inanely stupid for a response,
    yes I'm sorry there, I was of the understanding you where religious, but I find your a fence sitter, a dont know, a not sure.
    you must live in a completely different world to the rest of us, it seems your still in the dark ages, take of the blinkers.
  12. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Human beings have to be taught to love. Children from dysfunctional families and those who grow up without parents (e.g. in orphanages), those who come from violent homes or war torn areas, grow up stunted in the ability to cherish and love. Not true for all, of course, some people have an endless ability to love, even when not reciprocated, but in general, children who receive no love do not know how to give it. Why do you think a functional family unit is the best atmosphere to bring up a healthy child?

    PS This is from my course in Child Psychology not from Islam. From studies on feral children.
    Loving is hard to learn once the crucial stages have passed. Violence however is instinctive (fight or flight) and can be brought about by any feeling of danger or aggression in ALL individuals. It may even be inherent in some individuals who are violent by nature.

    Religion is just a guide, not the Encyclopedia Britannica.
    You still need an education to arrive at some conclusions about the world and the people in it.

    btw, I LOVE your compassionate and caring!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Last edited: Aug 16, 2006
  13. mustafhakofi I sa'id so Registered Senior Member

    more gobbledegook, does'nt clarify, your last bout of gobbledegook, sorry.
  14. fahrenheit 451 fiction Registered Senior Member

    are you sure(being sarcastic)is not indoctrination, a form of child abuse.
    no it's not harmful(being sarcastic again)are you just spamming or are you really trying to be serious.
    all the above was complete gibberish, infact nothing you've said has any value, you must be spamming, could you stop please. it breaks up the flow in the thread. thank you.
  15. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    So the fact that other animals show compassion?

  16. Theoryofrelativity Banned Banned

    I think compassion is innate but varies in severity from specimen to specimen.

    My kids for example, my little boy always demonstrated natural compassionate qualities, whereas my daughter has to be taught them. Or they are less obvious in her.

    The problem with studies on ferral children being basis for deciding what human qualities are innate is that there are so few cases to gleam knowledge from and more importantly, any innate quality if supressed due to lack of need to use it, may remain so, perhaps indeffinately so the lack of apparrant presence of compasion on discovery or after training does not help us to know what was present at birth.

    I knew many children who were raised in care, they loved and were compassionate. They had love between other children. The problem was they rarely felt love from adults or had a single adult to identify with for a long period. Thus their understanding of what love is was distorted based on what they thought it means. Example, they thought that if you love someone, it means tolerating everything they do. Thus to test if someone loved them, they would push the boundaries of usual behaviour to see if the love remained true. What they did not understand was that first you must love yourself and thus you do not allow love for others to be at your own demise. Although it is often the reverse, we do allow ourselves to suffer for the love of others.

    Anyway, kids in care may lack love for themselves.

    Myself I was raised without physcial affection and never felt 'love' (although I was undoubtably loved) but I learned it in adult hood and I lavish love and physcial affection on my children.

    My mother however also never had physical affection and was unable to develop it in adult hood as a mother. She managed with her dog though, which used to upset me greatly

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Now she's a granny, she's better than she was, so it's never too late.

    So there is no 'rule' here.
  17. perplexity Banned Banned

    So how then do I know if I love myself?

    Do we push the behaviour boundary to see if our love for ourselves remains true?

    Or more to the point, whose behaviour boundary do we push?

    --- Ron.
  18. Theoryofrelativity Banned Banned

    you don't need to test whether you love yourself or not Ron, as we know whether we do or do not, it's other people's feelings we are not privvy to.

    If soemone engages in self destructive practices and disrespects self, that would to me indicate lack of or reduced self love.
  19. perplexity Banned Banned

    But I don't. Really. I don't know what it means. I don't know to say if I do or do not.

    To the contrary I suspect a subconscious urge to attract opposition to test my opinion of myself.

    Love for others is of course at my own demise; that is what marriage and parenting is, isn't it? Sacrifice.

    --- Ron.
  20. Theoryofrelativity Banned Banned

    then maybe you do not.

    Marriage and parenting should not be at your own demise, there should be balance and harmony. And any self sacrfice you make on their behalf should give you some pleasure, thus the benefits are still two way.

    If you feel burdeoned, taken advantage of, over streched, then I reccommend some you time, a holiday full of indulgences all for you.

    Women may stay in violent relationships becuase they love the man, what they must try to establish is a love for themselves that is greater to ensure their own survival and quality of existance. We teach 'selflessness' but we should also teach self love.
  21. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member


    Hi ToR

    Actually the difference I was trying to stress (unsucessfully it seems), is that love and compassion are "learned" abstract concepts while violence is an innate instinct. Its not just feral children (that was an extreme example to show that human qualities are learned and not innate, and are affected by language and communication skills). For example there have been studies in deafblind children.

    Studies on deafblind children have shown that
    Love is necessary for the healthy growth of a child

    But it is not innate. It is learned through interaction and assimilation from the environment.

    Here is a brief primer:"abstract concepts" in children love respect"

    And some theories:
  22. Theoryofrelativity Banned Banned


    I will look at those links sam, but I disagree (in absence of doing so)

    for these reasons:

    Animals which require parental support from birth would not receive it were it not for the 'love'..parental instinct that attracts the adult to care for the new born. All new born pups/kittens/human babies etc etc would die if the parent did not possess the unique abiulty to love them and corresponding desire to care for them.

    Animals that do need parental care after birth (most reptiles) demonstrate no 'loving' 'caring' social tendancies, none. Thus as you confirm love is a survival requirement for some species.

    Also it is the old chicken and egg thing. If love had to be learned, how did the first man (lets go back further) primate ever survive in the absence of any parental care?

    To say love had to be learned is to say at one time it never existed.
    How did any animal requiring parental support/love survive before it existed?
    You state yourself in your post, animals deprived of love, die.
    Thus without innate love we would simply not be here.

    Love did not come into being by itself, it existed. It is a requirement of survival.
  23. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member


    Well let's just say not ALL kinds of love are learned. Some are just chemical reactions!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page