Religion or Atheism? An open forum.

[denuseri]

So you do not agree even with your own past statements conserning the english language then?

Are we back to beating a dead horse?

Do you agree that atheism is an idea?

That the idea is...there are no god/s? (which is exactly the same as having the idea of "your idea that there is a god/s is a false one". Basic english 101 here remember.

See when you say your trying to say that aethism is nothing more than a statement of dis-belief just becuase you dont like the word belief...I see that what your actually doing is trying to avoid the use of logic...just like a sophist to be occlusive when logic gets in the way of your argument or anyone wants to peg you down with it.

...when to be able to make said statement you have to have a working thought proccess and functioning nervous system at work.

You have to have formed an opinion on what your speaking about when you make a statement conserning something like that about believing in something or not...you dont just up and blather the sounds that corolate to I dont believe such and such...without holding a belief (an idea) one way or the other on the topic in your head!

Thats what language is all about...the exchange of ideas.

In other words...a statement of dis-belief is in effect: a belief in and of itself; in that: its a belief in "not believing" what ever it was that it was made against. Again this is basic english word usage.


If you wont agree to at least abide by the rules of the english language than there really isnt much point in continueing you know.

Aethism is just as much an idea (belief) ~ whatever other applicable word in the thesarus you wish to use~ as any other idea or belief etc.

In that regard...your idea that there are no gods (athiesm) and my idea that there perhaps are (theism) are both ideas, they are both beliefs that we hold, they are both concepts that we hold in our minds etc!

You have zero direct credible evidence to support your idea.

The people who have the idea that your idea is in opposition too, in your opinion also have zero direct and or credible evidence.

So there is nothing to support eaither side in the matter that can be consider scientifically credible (something in and of itself that requires faith in ones peers findings unless everyone everywhere is going to be running around trying to disprove /prove eveything all the time for confirmation) other than how they each feel about the topic.

How much faith one side or other has (ie how much merit eaither side holds in it) in their idea is really a moot point as well.

So ...nieather idea has anything to back it up and both ideas are in direct opposition...which one is right?

Which one is right should only matter to the theist yes?

Since it is the theists that say there may be something after death or that our actions on this world may have consequences in the next?

And that idea only matters if the idea of paticular theists is the correct one (since the athiest idea concludes that one is just as dead after death and doesnt transend into anthing or get punnished/rewareded etc)...and even then only if certian sub-sections of some theists ideas prove to be correct in so far as whats waiting one after death. (cuase not every theist believes in the same afterlife if at all).

But outside of that consideration whats the point to blathering on and on about it?

Unless an athiest is on some kind of psudeo religious crusade or trying to make his or her idea somehow mean more? I mean are you trying to be just as zealous as the people whose ideas your trying to replace once were?Whats the point when it doesnt matter after your dead anyways as an athiest? Shouldnt the athiest if they are sooooo enlightened be content to just be silent and not care one way or the other since in their mind it must not really matter?

And since it doesnt matter to them...whats wrong with allowing people who have ideas that are equally credible by any test of science or logic of being the right ones to continue to have those ideas etc so long as they are not harming each other?

Whats wrong with being tolerant and respectful of each others ideas when it comes to this topic?

[Thorne]

Do you agree that atheism is an idea?

<sigh> Okay, yes, atheism is an idea.

That the idea is...there are no god/s? (which is exactly the same as having the idea of "your idea that there is a god/s is a false one". Basic english 101 here remember.

But I've never claimed that your idea is a false one, only that you have no evidence to support your idea, either positive OR negative.

See when you say your trying to say that aethism is nothing more than a statement of dis-belief just becuase you dont like the word belief...I see that what your actually doing is trying to avoid the use of logic

<deeper sigh> Okay, okay, you want to call a non-belief a belief, fine, go right ahead. If you want to be pedantic about word usage, after I have already admitted the lack of flexibility in English, be my guest. I don't see how it helps your argument anyway.

you dont just up and blather the sounds that corolate to I dont believe such and such...without holding a belief (an idea) one way or the other on the topic in your head!

Wait, now. Are you saying that an idea is equivalent to a belief? So if I have an idea to, say, separate people from their money by scaring them about, oh, say life after death, then it's the same as my believing in life after death?

Thats what language is all about...the exchange of ideas.

Not quite, but I'll accept it for the sake of discussion. Still doesn't equate to belief, though. A person can argue about any topic, from either side, without necessarily believing in it.

In other words...a statement of dis-belief is in effect: a belief in and of itself; in that: its a belief in "not believing" what ever it was that it was made against. Again this is basic english word usage.

I think you're taking a torturous route to try to establish your "idea", but for the sake of discussion, sure, go ahead. I believe in atheism. Whatever that means.

Aethism is just as much an idea (belief) ~ whatever other applicable word in the thesarus you wish to use~ as any other idea or belief etc.

You're again equating an idea to a belief. I don't see the correlation.

In that regard...your idea that there are no gods (athiesm) and my idea that there perhaps are (theism) are both ideas, they are both beliefs that we hold, they are both concepts that we hold in our minds etc!

And again you misrepresent my position. I don't claim that there are no gods, only that there is no credible evidence FOR the existence of gods. So using your torturous rules of language you can say that I believe there is no evidence of gods, therefor no reason to believe in them.

You have zero direct credible evidence to support your idea.

I've already admitted that. All the evidence is indirect. Just like all the evidence against the existence of pink unicorns is indirect. Just as all the evidence against an invisible planet orbiting on the other side of the sun from Earth is indirect. There is no evidence for ANY of these things, and all evidence we collect says that these things cannot exist. Of course, evidence could turn up tomorrow FOR any or all of them. I won't hold my breath.

So there is nothing to support eaither side in the matter that can be consider scientifically credible (something in and of itself that requires faith in ones peers findings unless everyone everywhere is going to be running around trying to disprove /prove eveything all the time for confirmation) other than how they each feel about the topic.

Again, I disagree. The evidence which denies the existence of gods IS scientifically credible:

"Lightning is God's punishment for sin."

Uh, no, sorry. Lightning is a discharge of static electricity. It strikes saints as often as sinners. In fact, more churches than brothels are struck by lightning . No god.

"Well, volcanoes are Gods punishment for sin."

Uh, no, sorry again. Volcanoes are natural emissions of molten rock, steam and gases from deep underground. They harm everyone, indiscriminately, good or bad. No god.

"Well, at least praying to God can help us get better."

Actually, in the largest study ever done on prayer, people recovering from heart surgery who knew they were being prayed for did markedly worse than those who weren't prayed for. No god.

"You damned atheists just hate God!"

Which one is right should only matter to the theist yes?
. . .
But outside of that consideration whats the point to blathering on and on about it?
. . .
Shouldnt the athiest if they are sooooo enlightened be content to just be silent and not care one way or the other since in their mind it must not really matter?
. . .
Whats wrong with being tolerant and respectful of each others ideas when it comes to this topic?

That depends on what the theist is trying to do with his beliefs. If he is trying to force his beliefs on others then it matters to me, too. If it harms others, then it matters to me. If it could affect the lives of my grandchildren, it matters to me!

In this country today, we have people denying the validity of global warming not based on science but on the premise that, "God will protect us."

In this country today, there are children dying of curable illnesses because their parents think praying for them will work better than medicine.

In this country today, there are loving couples who are being persecuted just because they happen to be the same sex, and "the Bible says that's wrong."

In this country today, a gay man lies dead, beaten to death by a young man who claims, "The Bible says we should stone homosexuals to death."

In this country today, there are people who want to strip away all of science and return us to the Dark Ages, because "God loves us."

In this country today, I would be considered a pariah, a demon, unable to be elected (if I wanted to be), and in some places targeted for death, just because I don't believe in their gods.

Those reasons, and so many more, is why it matters to me.