• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

The Religion of New Atheism

SmokeAndMirrors said:
Yes, and that rampant improper usage began with Mr. Dawkins. He has quite a number of groupies. He was also the guy who created the "Atheism scale" from 1 to 10, which is inherently flawed. Atheism is a knowledge argument, not a "feels" argument, so rating on you "feel" about the likelihood of a god is a really strange thing to do. To me, it demonstrates a lack of seriousness in understanding the philosophical arguments of atheism.

Dawkings argues it from the point of what we know about science. The problem is, atheism is totally independent of science. Even if we knew nothing about science, one could still argue that there isn't evidence of a god. THAT is the central point, and he misses that a lot.

The man's a really great biologist, but he can't ever seem to figure out how to set apart philosophy and science.
Click to expand...

Yeah, this is definitely not the (brand or flavor or bastardization or whatever of) atheism that a) I keep running into and b) ruffles my feathers to no end. When deployed in discussions of public policy I entirely agree with this viewpoint. The rest of the time I just can't be bothered, so long as nobody gets up on their high horse. :)
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
people disliking atheists and not willing to vote them into office doesn't really raise to the level of discrimination for me (so they find something morally unpleasant about the position, so what?), as we are discussing it here, and the same drawback applies to various minority religious views.

Can you cite some examples of atheists being run out of town?
Click to expand...

I'm not talking about being unwilling to vote for them. I'm talking about contesting their legitimacy AFTER being elected, simply due to being an atheist.

Here's the case I had in mind. Several other states have similar blatantly unconstitutional laws on the books.

Under God: N.C. law rejects atheists; voters don't - David Waters
 
TacticalEvilDan said:
Yeah, this is definitely not the (brand or flavor or bastardization or whatever of) atheism that a) I keep running into and b) ruffles my feathers to no end. When deployed in discussions of public policy I entirely agree with this viewpoint. The rest of the time I just can't be bothered, so long as nobody gets up on their high horse. :)
Click to expand...

Well, some atheists are good at how they argue and some aren't, like any other group. The Dawkin-ites are everywhere online, but in life, you're more likely to meet the Common Atheist, who is only certain they do not have evidence, and is fairly ambivalent about everything else.

Like I said in my OP, each of these "horsemen" are a different breed. Harris has his followers as well, which I find a little scary, honestly.
 
The problem isn't atheism, it's scientism. I have atheist friends and there's no conflict between us, but I just can't stand people like Dawkins.

I just wish all people, scientists and religious people alike, would stop worshipping dogma and just acknowledge that no one knows for sure what is going on here. The mysteries of life will always be significantly more than what we think we know. Isn't the mystery exciting? Invigorating even?

Dogma is a major problem in this world. It breeds fundamentalism, which in turn breeds divisions and hate. Humans from ANY creed are capable of it, and it saddens me. If they could just practice some degree of unattachment, they would see that the **** they're arguing over doesn't matter.
 
If you can't handle ridicule of your beliefs, have less ridiculous beliefs.

The very fact that theists get so worked up over atheists arguing with them is kind of hilarious. There is absolutely no reason for atheists, who have a much better founded and more functional view of reality, to keep silent and allow fairy stories to dictate control of society. The only thing that matters is what is real. Not how you feel about it. Not what experiences you have that make you feel transcendent. What matters is the truth, and the evidence you can offer to prove your view of the truth. That people with emotional dependencies on legends feel bad when someone points out how silly their stories are is absolutely no reason to stop. Pissing and moaning that atheists are mean to theists is... it's pathetic, honestly. For the first time in history, members of various religions no longer have the power to silence us with violence and ostracization from society. And now that our views and voices are audible, there is no choice but to agree that we have an obviously superior position.

Atheism is not a religion. It is the lack of a religion. It has no tenets, nor faith, nor prophets. It is simply not adhering to a faith. No matter how much a believer's feelings are hurt by our refusal to let them dictate how we must all view the world, the truth is not up for a vote, and we will not be silent merely because you don't like what we have to say.
 
Paschendale said:
If you can't handle ridicule of your beliefs, have less ridiculous beliefs.

The very fact that theists get so worked up over atheists arguing with them is kind of hilarious. There is absolutely no reason for atheists, who have a much better founded and more functional view of reality, to keep silent and allow fairy stories to dictate control of society. The only thing that matters is what is real. Not how you feel about it. Not what experiences you have that make you feel transcendent. What matters is the truth, and the evidence you can offer to prove your view of the truth. That people with emotional dependencies on legends feel bad when someone points out how silly their stories are is absolutely no reason to stop. Pissing and moaning that atheists are mean to theists is... it's pathetic, honestly. For the first time in history, members of various religions no longer have the power to silence us with violence and ostracization from society. And now that our views and voices are audible, there is no choice but to agree that we have an obviously superior position.

Atheism is not a religion. It is the lack of a religion. It has no tenets, nor faith, nor prophets. It is simply not adhering to a faith. No matter how much a believer's feelings are hurt by our refusal to let them dictate how we must all view the world, the truth is not up for a vote, and we will not be silent merely because you don't like what we have to say.
Click to expand...

well, speaking as a theist here, I don't want atheist to be silent about their beliefs ...however, I do wish atheists weren't such assholes about it... your post is an xample of being an asshole about it.

believe, don't believe, I don't care what goes on in your brain housing group... but when you reach the point where you find yourself to be morally, ethically, and intellectually superior to believers, you find yourself firmly planted in the middle of asshole-land.
I don't think atheists should be ostracized, shunned, scorned, or made fun of.... I simply think assholes should...same thing goes for believers.
 
Thrilla said:
well, speaking as a theist here, I don't want atheist to be silent about their beliefs ...however, I do wish atheists weren't such assholes about it... your post is an xample of being an asshole about it.

believe, don't believe, I don't care what goes on in your brain housing group... but when you reach the point where you find yourself to be morally, ethically, and intellectually superior to believers, you find yourself firmly planted in the middle of asshole-land.
I don't think atheists should be ostracized, shunned, scorned, or made fun of.... I simply think assholes should...same thing goes for believers.
Click to expand...

If atheists discuss their 'beliefs', they will invariably end up looking like assholes, unless they spend most of their energy tip-toeing and sugar-coating their words.
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
I'm not talking about being unwilling to vote for them. I'm talking about contesting their legitimacy AFTER being elected, simply due to being an atheist.

Here's the case I had in mind. Several other states have similar blatantly unconstitutional laws on the books.

Under God: N.C. law rejects atheists; voters don't - David Waters
Click to expand...

the link wouldn't open for me, so I'll need to try it again later. But if it's talking about the laws that exist on the books, concerning such things as oath of office, and other de facto means of disqualifying atheists, then those are not really applied in the modern day. And current court precedent doesn't weigh in their favor

Torcaso v. Watkins - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

edit: in the specific case you cited:

<<<Also fortunately for Bothwell, state law allows officeholders to "affirm" rather than "swear" the oath of office, which exempted Bothwell from the state law that would have required him to "lay his hand upon the Holy Scriptures" and say, "so help me God.">>>
 
Paschendale said:
Atheism is not a religion. It is the lack of a religion. It has no tenets, nor faith, nor prophets. It is simply not adhering to a faith. No matter how much a believer's feelings are hurt by our refusal to let them dictate how we must all view the world, the truth is not up for a vote, and we will not be silent merely because you don't like what we have to say.
Click to expand...

a bit equivocating here. Being that on it's own atheism isn't an ideology, merely a philosophical position. But atheism can be central to various ideological systems of thought, which can be as dogmatic and closed-minded as any religion.
 
Paschendale said:
If you can't handle ridicule of your beliefs, have less ridiculous beliefs.
Click to expand...

Personally, my issue is never with irreverence, it's with insult -- so many times I've run across the sentiment that being religious either is a sign of stupidity and ignorance or it causes them. Neither is the case, because I've met plenty of intelligent, informed people who were very religious.

Paschendale said:
There is absolutely no reason for atheists, who have a much better founded and more functional view of reality, to keep silent and allow fairy stories to dictate control of society.
Click to expand...

I see absolutely nothing wrong with taking theists to task when they use their beliefs to justify policy choices -- so long as it's done either respectfully or at least with as much respect as the particular theists being addressed show you.

At the same time, if you approach the theists (many flavors of which think that theirs is the one true whatever) with the attitude that yours is the one true reality, your attitude is no better than theirs.

Paschendale said:
Atheism is not a religion. It is the lack of a religion. It has no tenets, nor faith, nor prophets.
Click to expand...

Oh, I think there's plenty of dogma to go around for everyone, even if you don't call it that. If it walks like a duck...
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
the link wouldn't open for me, so I'll need to try it again later. But if it's talking about the laws that exist on the books, concerning such things as oath of office, and other de facto means of disqualifying atheists, then those are not really applied in the modern day. And current court precedent doesn't weigh in their favor

Torcaso v. Watkins - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

edit: in the specific case you cited:

<<<Also fortunately for Bothwell, state law allows officeholders to "affirm" rather than "swear" the oath of office, which exempted Bothwell from the state law that would have required him to "lay his hand upon the Holy Scriptures" and say, "so help me God.">>>
Click to expand...

The problem is that they invoked one of those so-called antiquated laws just a couple years ago. Some religious people think they do apply.
 
Amadeus said:
Well, you can only say that religion is malarkey in so many ways before you start offending people.
Click to expand...

a good start would be something like saying " I believe religion is malarkey" or "in my opinion, religion is malarkey" as opposed to " religion is malarkey"...a subtle, but important difference.
one is professing a personal opinion, one is stating it as universal fact.

another good one would be choosing less offensive terms...
altogether too many folks come in with the full intention of offending, though... so that advise would fall on deaf ears in their cases.

this also something for the believers to consider as well....as there's no shortage of assholes on that side of the "debate"
 
If I dressed up in a suit and tie, and went round to peoples houses, telling them to convert to atheism, and that their belief in a deity was wrong, would I be one of those asshole atheists?

What if I stood on a street corner with a megaphone and harangued non-believers, would I be an asshole atheist?

What if I tried to introduce legislation banning theists from holding office, would I be an asshole atheist?

What if I did a whole range of things that Christians get a free pass for, obnoxious behaviours that are condescending and arrogant, would I be an asshole atheist? Are all the Christians on here really that incapable of seeing the double standard? That atheists are now a problem, because they're acting just like Christians?
 
spud_meister said:
If I dressed up in a suit and tie, and went round to peoples houses, telling them to convert to atheism, and that their belief in a deity was wrong, would I be one of those asshole atheists?

What if I stood on a street corner with a megaphone and harangued non-believers, would I be an asshole atheist?

What if I tried to introduce legislation banning theists from holding office, would I be an asshole atheist?

What if I did a whole range of things that Christians get a free pass for, obnoxious behaviours that are condescending and arrogant, would I be an asshole atheist? Are all the Christians on here really that incapable of seeing the double standard? That atheists are now a problem, because they're acting just like Christians?
Click to expand...

Depends on your method of presentation. I've been peddled to by people who were assholes and by people who weren't. Sometimes they get all funny on you, and sometimes they at least try to have a straight-talk conversation about it.
 
TacticalEvilDan said:
Depends on your method of presentation. I've been peddled to by people who were assholes and by people who weren't. Sometimes they get all funny on you, and sometimes they at least try to have a straight-talk conversation about it.
Click to expand...

What if you simply want to be left in peace, and don't want the conversation at all? Religionists presume they have a right to have that conversation over your right not to do so.
 
spud_meister said:
If I dressed up in a suit and tie, and went round to peoples houses, telling them to convert to atheism, and that their belief in a deity was wrong, would I be one of those asshole atheists?

What if I stood on a street corner with a megaphone and harangued non-believers, would I be an asshole atheist?

What if I tried to introduce legislation banning theists from holding office, would I be an asshole atheist?

What if I did a whole range of things that Christians get a free pass for, obnoxious behaviours that are condescending and arrogant, would I be an asshole atheist? Are all the Christians on here really that incapable of seeing the double standard? That atheists are now a problem, because they're acting just like Christians?
Click to expand...

Actually there's a guy here who wants to do just that.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Threads solely focused on atheism do not belong here. Moved to the Philosophy Forum.
 
Last edited:
SmokeAndMirrors said:
The problem is that they invoked one of those so-called antiquated laws just a couple years ago. Some religious people think they do apply.
Click to expand...

People thinking such laws apply, or trying to invoke them, doesn't change the fact they wont stand up to constitutional review and that they simply exist "on the books" in most cases
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
People thinking such laws apply, or trying to invoke them, doesn't change the fact they wont stand up to constitutional review and that they simply exist "on the books" in most cases
Click to expand...

That doesn't matter. It demonstrates social intolerance towards atheists in very concrete terms.
 
spud_meister said:
What if I did a whole range of things that Christians get a free pass for, obnoxious behaviours that are condescending and arrogant, would I be an asshole atheist?
Click to expand...

who gives people a free pass for doing those things, and why would you use the poor behavior of others to justify your own?

The key is looking at such people as examples on how *not to act*, not as a means to justify your own annoying, preachy mentality
 
Thrilla said:
a good start would be something like saying " I believe religion is malarkey" or "in my opinion, religion is malarkey" as opposed to " religion is malarkey"...a subtle, but important difference.
one is professing a personal opinion, one is stating it as universal fact.

another good one would be choosing less offensive terms...
altogether too many folks come in with the full intention of offending, though... so that advise would fall on deaf ears in their cases.

this also something for the believers to consider as well....as there's no shortage of assholes on that side of the "debate"
Click to expand...

I understand what you're saying, and I have softened my approach since joining DP. At the same time, I can respect someone who tells me that I am morally inferior/bankrupt without having to dance around the issue for 3-4 pages. It saves both of us time. :)
 
spud_meister said:
If I dressed up in a suit and tie, and went round to peoples houses, telling them to convert to atheism, and that their belief in a deity was wrong, would I be one of those asshole atheists?
Click to expand...
it all depends on the delivery
What if I stood on a street corner with a megaphone and harangued non-believers, would I be an asshole atheist?
Click to expand...
" harangue" kinda points to be an asshole, so i'd say yes
What if I tried to introduce legislation banning theists from holding office, would I be an asshole atheist?
Click to expand...
most likely
What if I did a whole range of things that Christians get a free pass for, obnoxious behaviours that are condescending and arrogant, would I be an asshole atheist? Are all the Christians on here really that incapable of seeing the double standard? That atheists are now a problem, because they're acting just like Christians?
Click to expand...
I think the point would be to get people to stop being assholes, not to try to out-asshole the other side.

I don't hold a double standard... I find folks who toss, unsolicited, their personal beliefs in my face to be bothersome at best... complete asshole at worst ( depending on delivery, aggression, etc).
the bothersome i can deal with.... the assholes, not so much....in my younger years, I didn't care about believers or non believers doing their thing,but being an asshole usually bought them knuckles to the maw( probably not the best response, but it worked for me)
I'm a bit old for donnybrooks, so I outright dismiss them nowadays ( no response, to some, is worse than any response)
 
Manc Skipper said:
What if you simply want to be left in peace, and don't want the conversation at all? Religionists presume they have a right to have that conversation over your right not to do so.
Click to expand...

Well, I don't know about you, but I'd tell them I'm not interested and shut the door / walk away / return to my book, and so on. They do, after all, have the right to speak just as much as I have the right to say I don't want to talk to them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom