Are Atheist Ungrateful and superficial?
- Thread starter Username
- Start date
How can you call me a liar since I don't know if you are a Buddhist or if your forefathers were religious or not . I am not sure if you were born on a tree.
I can call you a liar because you declared, perhaps not in these words, that the moral and social codes of conduct of the people in this country are based on "Christian values", even though it's obvious that the vast majority of such codes do not stem from the bible at all. In fact the overwhelming majority of our social conduct, as well as our laws, are based on Enlightenment values, not on Christian values.
Are you trying to tell me that Enlightenment just sprung out out of nothing and there was no roots, come on you know better then that .
This ,is laughable! Without the people who had the balls to question the Church, we as a civilization would probably still be trying to make left handed people write with their right hands. The exact opposite is true, enlightenment comes when you can break free from the shackles of religious dogma. Exacty what do you think the religious would be teaching us in regards to the natural sciences? Most atheist's do not demand that you believe as they do, but at the same time they do not want religious fairy tales hindering scientific truths .In fact it is unselfish IMO.
@Arauca --
Are you trying to tell me that the only possible source for the values supported by the Enlightenment is the bible? Because morals and social codes of conduct, even most of those found in the bible, predate your religion by a good thousand years, at least.
I didn't say that they sprang out of nothing, I said that most Enlightenment values are demonstrably not Christian values. Things like freedom of speech or protection from unreasonable search and seizure aren't found anywhere in the bible Arauca. Besides, people are thinking up new values all the time, are you saying that the people of that time weren't smart enough to do that?
Are you trying to tell me that the only possible source for the values supported by the Enlightenment is the bible? Because morals and social codes of conduct, even most of those found in the bible, predate your religion by a good thousand years, at least.
I didn't say that they sprang out of nothing, I said that most Enlightenment values are demonstrably not Christian values. Things like freedom of speech or protection from unreasonable search and seizure aren't found anywhere in the bible Arauca. Besides, people are thinking up new values all the time, are you saying that the people of that time weren't smart enough to do that?
Last edited:
Do you mean "offshoot"? In any case, it's probably true in the US and countries of a similar religious tradition (including the ones invaded and forever altered by missionaries) that people indoctrinated as children will often announce their atheism upon reaching some level of maturity. I would not characterize this as an offshoot of their religion as much as a recognition that the Judeo-Christian-Islamic God is a failed proposition, and that the extant religious believers are lost in a world of fiction, a discovery that children often notice while still too young to express their rejection of it.aruaca said:
The older word was 'heretic' and punishable on the same level as rebellion. There is good cause to rebel against the institutions of religion - if that's what you mean by 'system', but the system that requires a person to renounce common sense and replace it with the primitive reasoning of superstitious civilizations long gone - that would be the kind of system that no atheist subscribes to. The only way it could be called 'rebellion' is if we assume the religion has some legal claim of authority over the person in question. Clearly this is not the case.
Atheists see that the reverse is true, while recognizing that we are all subjugated to the laws of nature, not of any God.
Some education was decent, some of it was polluted by religion. Today we know better, but in spite of this people continue to lie to their children.
You are lucky you are not a Christian Fundamentalist. Otherwise you would feel compelled to tell me how you hope to move the education standards back to the days of tent revivals, chattel wives and illiteracy.
The only atheist activism I am aware of is a strident rebuttal to Christian fundamentalism for the reasons I just mentioned.
That sounds more like the education of Beaver Cleaver than my own. If I had to point a "school-days/golden rules days" reference for honesty, I would probably name Geometry as my best source of developing objective standards for the logic of honesty; then I would turn to some of the school era classics - Plato and Shakespeare come to mind, for developing the humanistic logic that drives honest nature; and then I would refer to the fine arts in general, since art, drama and music serve as such profound sources of expressing the human condition. But then, as to honest facts--as religion would have us alter them--I would turn to science, history and the related fields of factfinding, for the honest truth about the world, what religions are, where they came from, and why they try so hard to alter human perception of the world--and thus, to encroach on the highest of human freedoms--while doing so by perpetuation of some of the most dishonest propositions ever put to paper.
There is nothing categorically selfish in the goals I stated immediately above. In my statement "atheists don't care about this", "this" refers to your remark "An atheist wants that god would appear in the sky perhaps on weakly bases in the sky to say hallo to them". None of that is any concern of an atheist, and it's not even in the category of "selfish".
My moral education came from my parents. Which is probably where most people get their moral education from; be they Christian, Hindu, Muslim, Atheist, Pagan or none of the above.
Yazata
Valued Senior Member
That's nice. My view is that you're behaving like a troll in this thread, just hoping to stir things up.
People usually find that views that conform to reality are more useful than views that don't.
No I really do find atheist to be superficial and lash out at other peoples beliefs that they don't agree with. Promoting their own superficial views of reality and calling people ignorant and uneducated just because someone happens to believe something they don't.
A lot of atheist claim to secularist and humanists, yet don't respect the rights of others so i view them as hypocrites too.
spidergoat
Valued Senior Member
Lashing out verbally? Because that doesn't interfere with anyone's right to believe anything.No I really do find atheist to be superficial and lash out at other peoples beliefs that they don't agree with. Promoting their own superficial views of reality and calling people ignorant and uneducated just because someone happens to believe something they don't.
A lot of atheist claim to secularist and humanists, yet don't respect the rights of others so i view them as hypocrites too.
Honestly? Because atheist (no one in particular – just in general) don’t seem too concerned with debating or discourse, only with bashing other peoples beliefs and things they disagree with. If I were to present an argument that disagrees or shows another side to something, say, pertaining to science, and that science was proven to be wrong they will still agree with it and say science is 100% certain there is no denying science. Yet anyone that knows anything about science knows it is a process of trial and error, and based on quantitative, qualitative data and experiments. Some things can be predicted with or without science. Especially when it comes to philosophy and knowledge based beliefs.
I could back my argument up by any type of science, philosophy or psychology and people would still disagree with it. Yet it seems to defeat the purpose of any type of debate when atheist don't seem to take it seriously to begin with.
What do I mean? I mean a lot of atheist I come across while debating claim to be humanist or secularist, but it just seems like an escape mechanism for avoiding a debate.
Its no different than racism and prejudice if you want to know the truth about it.
In this thread, the superficial and ungrateful one appears to be you.Thanks for proving my point!
@Username --
Yes, there are some atheists out there that are like that, but it's hardly something displayed by all or even majority of atheists. And it's behavior that's demonstrably not exclusive to atheists, I can get links showing a portion of any group you care to name engaging in the same behavior. I'd say it's more a human failing and less an atheist failing.
How is that failing to respect the rights of others?
Yes, there are some atheists out there that are like that, but it's hardly something displayed by all or even majority of atheists. And it's behavior that's demonstrably not exclusive to atheists, I can get links showing a portion of any group you care to name engaging in the same behavior. I'd say it's more a human failing and less an atheist failing.
How is that failing to respect the rights of others?
No need. I am in 100% agreement with you here.
IDK.. maybe I just view secularism and humanitarianism differently. It doesn't so much involve respect, but just acknowledging that people have the right to believe or disbelieve whatever it is they want without infringing on other peoples rights.
People with their beliefs and non-beliefs make me really sick sometimes. :wallbang: Maybe I just needed to vent.. who knows...