Religion is any belief system of ultimate values that shapes our pursuit of a particular kind of life in this world. This is the reason that it is quite fair to call atheism a religion, and Christianity as well.
Your post has nothing to do with the original topic, and it is based on the false assumption that Chinese geeks will convert to Christianity...
The religious types will never get it. Because they associate, albeit in disparate groups-see all the sects there are - they assume atheists do likewise. Independence of thought and action are beyond them. That is why pastors refer to their folowers a their flocks. Religion thrives on ignorance. On another thread on this site there is a graph and reference to a number of studies which show an inverse relation between intelligence and religiosity. However often they are told, religious people just cannot understand that atheists are not part of a distinct group
Not according to Philip Jenkins' The Next Christendom (Oxford University Press 2002), and Lamin Sanneh's Who's Religion is Christianity? (Eerdmans, 2003).
No. Unless you're adopting the colloquial definition of "religion" that includes fishing and rock music, religion must have a supernatural component, and in its strictest definition it has to specifically postulate supernatural forces that can change the course of our lives capriciously, especially supernatural creatures that can change it to suit their own purposes. To gainsay the existence and control of the supernatural is irreligious, or in its more militant form antireligious. It is most emphatically not religious. In any case, atheism does not even satisfy your own definition, since it is not a system of ultimate values. Lacking the imposed values of religions, every atheist has to find his own. Our range of choices parallels that of the religionists in breadth if not in proportion, from the occasional genocidal Stalin or Caliph Omar, to the average peaceful hard-working citizen, to the occasional selfless Mother Theresa or war resistor. Gosh, I've been hanging out with atheists for my entire life and I've never met a eugenecist. Life sure must be different in India, but I guess we already knew that. The only eugenecists I've heard of lately are the light-skinned Asian Muslims who raped the dark-skinned women in Darfur in order to "lighten up" their bloodlines.
By looking at any atheist dominated society/organisation. They clearly do not believe in equal opportunity for all. Now that they have gained a foothold in academia for instance, many have decided that theists are not smart enough to hold tenure or important chairs. The reason is that they believe religion makes people unsuitable for science. Sort of like Watsons theories on stupid niggers or hot blooded Latinos and Dawkins game plan for breeding people for better genetics for music, math and science. Previously atheists have shown a tendency to remove "undesirable" elemnets from society, upto and including people who wear glasses. Even good ole Jong-il is following the tried and true path Seems to be a recurrent refrain.
It seems strange to me that you can look at the very people who give atheism a bad name and paint their actions to represent atheists as a whole while simultaneously defending and tearing apart other peoples arguments when they apply the same reasoning to a group that you belong to. :shrug:
Is that the action of people who happen to also be atheists, or behavior that comes directly from not believing in God? What part of not submitting to a fictitious father figure in the sky makes you kill people with glasses?
Perhaps I'm making a point. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! The part where you decide to play God of course. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
You refer to atheism like it's an organization. It isn't. There are no policies. To claim that atheists are eugenicists because Dawkins made some offhanded comment about encouraging people with talent to breed is absurd, and you know it's absurd. This is simply trolling.
That does not surprise me either Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! I said atheist dominated organisation. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Organizations composed primarily of people who think religion is foolish tend to view the religious as a bit absurd. Shocking.
And discriminate against them. I'm sure you're familiar with Watsons views on the Black. I wonder how many athiests (with the HiQ) hold similar views.
