atheism against the law?

Hippyvik

i just don't understand how people the world over, can get so aggresive over something that has no physical proof of existing

PJ_Saluki

Hippyvik wrote:

i just don't understand how people the world over, can get so aggresive over something that has no physical proof of existing

I think it happens for two reasons: Many people need to believe in something and many people need to believe that they're beliefs are correct. It makes them feel good to know that they are betting on the right horse. I honestly think, and I'm glad scientists don't agree with me, that some things are beyond knowledge, at least the knowledge available right now. Also, I don't make a distinction between atheists or theists because I can't wrap my head around a right answer. Maybe I'm just intellectually lazy.

onelongsong

Ahnimus wrote:

Why can we laugh about a belief in Greek Gods, but we can't laugh about a belief in one God?

i believe he meant:

why must you insult the beliefs of those that do not agree with yours?
maybe to him your beliefs are the result of self pity yet he does not insult you. he shows respect for your opinion.

Ahnimus

onelongsong wrote:

i believe he meant:

why must you insult the beliefs of those that do not agree with yours?
maybe to him your beliefs are the result of self pity yet he does not insult you. he shows respect for your opinion.

Uhh, his beliefs are in-fact wrong, they are factually wrong.

Why should I step back and say "Oh, so sorry for infringing on your beliefs!" "Go ahead, continue to influence my politics and my day-to-day life. Don't allow me to criticise and expose your beliefs which are the basis for your influence that affects my life."

You see, I'm through with being nice about bullshit when it directly affects me and the world I live in.

deadnothingbetter

Ahnimus wrote:

Uhh, his beliefs are in-fact wrong, they are factually wrong.

Why should I step back and say "Oh, so sorry for infringing on your beliefs!" "Go ahead, continue to influence my politics and my day-to-day life. Don't allow me to criticise and expose your beliefs which are the basis for your influence that affects my life."

You see, I'm through with being nice about bullshit when it directly affects me and the world I live in.

now, wait a minute ahnimus... have some decency here. when did i infringe on your beliefs and influence your politics and day to day life???

you're preaching to the wrong choir here guy... where is your ethics? i've told you before that you cannot prove that I am wrong. now that is a fact. you have no physical evidence to prove that i am wrong in believing what I believe. this is common sense. and if the fact that i am commenting on these forums makes you feel insecure with you and the world you live in i suggest you treat yourself for that. (i'm aware that you read a whole lotta books about psychology... don't they talk about these insecurities??) there's no need to get personal here. i'm only trying to understand the other side.

Collin

deadnothingbetter wrote:

i've told you before that you cannot prove that I am wrong. now that is a fact. you have no physical evidence to prove that i am wrong in believing what I believe. this is common sense.

When a murderer claims all his victims were evil and possessed by demons and he's doing the work of god, people call him a crazy sick twisted motherfucker. Though, you cannot prove he was wrong.

People who claim they were abducted by aliens and that they've been watching us for year, end up crazy because people mock them, ridicule them. Though, they cannot prove he they were wrong.

i'm only trying to understand the other side.

You're trying to understand the other side? By reading about it on The Anointed One?

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/mathew/intro.html

deadnothingbetter

Collin wrote:

When a murderer claims all his victims were evil and possessed by demons and he's doing the work of god, people call him a crazy sick twisted motherfucker. Though, you cannot prove he was wrong.

People who claim they were abducted by aliens and that they've been watching us for year, end up crazy because people mock them, ridicule them. Though, they cannot prove he they were wrong.



You're trying to understand the other side? By reading about it on The Anointed One?

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/mathew/intro.html

anyways... so i guess just put me in a nuthouse. is that what you want to do?? hey, let me turn the tables a little bit for a change. maybe we should put mulsims, jews, buddhists and all sorts of religious people into the mental institute. that will do it. right? and i wanted to hear your opinion about the link... did you not get that? are you still confused, need for me to explain more? or what's up? be honest with me. do you not like me enough to the point where you don't want me to post these topics anymore?

Scubascott

PJ_Saluki wrote:

I honestly think, and I'm glad scientists don't agree with me, that some things are beyond knowledge, at least the knowledge available right now.

Scientists do agree with you. That is the point of science, to continue to expand our knowledge as far a possible. If we thought we already knew everything there would be no need for science.


As for atheists being naturalists and evolutionists by default. . . these guys need to check their definition of atheism. It may be true that generally speaking, atheists turn to science rather than religion for answers, and science shows us that life on earth evolved by processes of natural selection, but there is no atheist dogma dictating a belief in any scientific principles or theory.

Ahnimus

Scubascott wrote:

Scientists do agree with you. That is the point of science, to continue to expand our knowledge as far a possible. If we thought we already knew everything there would be no need for science.


As for atheists being naturalists and evolutionists by default. . . these guys need to check their definition of atheism. It may be true that generally speaking, atheists turn to science rather than religion for answers, and science shows us that life on earth evolved by processes of natural selection, but there is no atheist dogma dictating a belief in any scientific principles or theory.

I think, if anything, atheists are naturally skeptics. Though they may be atheistic, but still believe in another force. I'd rather consider myself a skeptic atheist though.

Scubascott

Ahnimus wrote:

I think, if anything, atheists are naturally skeptics. Though they may be atheistic, but still believe in another force. I'd rather consider myself a skeptic atheist though.

Another force? Please explain.

Collin

deadnothingbetter wrote:

anyways... so i guess just put me in a nuthouse. is that what you want to do?? hey, let me turn the tables a little bit for a change. maybe we should put mulsims, jews, buddhists and all sorts of religious people into the mental institute. that will do it. right?

No, I don't want to put you in a nuthouse, unless there's something wrong with your brain, which may cause you to harm others or yourself.
I'm not here to prove you or any other religious person wrong (with a few minor exceptions).
I think the whole 'you can't prove me wrong' defence is rather ridiculous, because you can't prove you're right, and throughout history that argument never stopped anyone to condemn those who had different beliefs and now you expect people to walk on egg shells whenever they talk about your religion or god.

and i wanted to hear your opinion about the link... did you not get that? are you still confused, need for me to explain more? or what's up? be honest with me. do you not like me enough to the point where you don't want me to post these topics anymore?

I did reply, I guess you don't bother to read my replies though.
I said I thought it was bullshit, I said I agreed with what catefrances said and gave other input.

Did you check out the link I gave? (Which, by the way, is part of my input in this thread, you're trying to understand the otherside better, I thought I'd help you out).
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/mathew/intro.html

Here's another link you might find interesting:
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-qa.html

deadnothingbetter

Collin wrote:

I think the whole 'you can't prove me wrong' defence is rather ridiculous, because you can't prove you're right

i'm not trying to prove i'm right. i'm not trying to prove anything... what i am saying is that i have faith. please, give me this one. at least, just this once, allow me the privilege as a human being to feel free about believing in whatever i may without facing the hostile attitudes that i get from most people, like being compared to a nuthead or a murderer. will you allow me that privilege? the truth is, i can't prove anything and neither can you. can we agree on this one?

I did reply, I guess you don't bother to read my replies though.
I said I thought it was bullshit, I said I agreed with what catefrances said and gave other input.

Did you check out the link I gave? (Which, by the way, is part of my input in this thread, you're trying to understand the otherside better, I thought I'd help you out).
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/mathew/intro.html

Here's another link you might find interesting:
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-qa.html

yes, i've been reading them. i've been reading every reply.

Ahnimus

Scubascott wrote:

Another force? Please explain.

I dunno, maybe like Vortexes and shit. People are sometimes atheists because of an ill feeling towards religion, but are mystics in some other form. Believing in aliens or something. Still atheistic views, but hardly skeptic.

Specifics

Hippyvik wrote:

i just don't understand how people the world over, can get so aggresive over something that has no physical proof of existing

Its herd behaviourrr!

much like patriotism...

Collin

deadnothingbetter wrote:

i'm not trying to prove i'm right. i'm not trying to prove anything... what i am saying is that i have faith. please, give me this one. at least, just this once, allow me the privilege as a human being to feel free about believing in whatever i may without facing the hostile attitudes that i get from most people, like being compared to a nuthead or a murderer. will you allow me that privilege? the truth is, i can't prove anything and neither can you. can we agree on this one?

Most people compare you to a nuthead or a murdered?

I didn't compare you, I compared beliefs, one that's acceptable world wide and has a powerful organization running it and others that are considered the imaginations of madmen.

I never stated I could prove god doesn't exist, I can't. I'm sorry that you are so easily offended, now that I now this I'll do my best not to offend you.

Songburst

Athiest or this:

http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1703504

Hmm... let me think.

kenny olav

deadnothingbetter wrote:

why do you have to call it a smugly bed-time story?

yeah really, cause the Bible would be a piss-poor bedtime story. most definately not smugly. doesn't hold a candle to Winkin, Blinkin and Nod.

deadnothingbetter

Collin wrote:

Most people compare you to a nuthead or a murdered?

I didn't compare you, I compared beliefs, one that's acceptable world wide and has a powerful organization running it and others that are considered the imaginations of madmen.

I never stated I could prove god doesn't exist, I can't. I'm sorry that you are so easily offended, now that I now this I'll do my best not to offend you.

so do you agree or disagree on my proposition? if not comparing me to a nuthead why did you use the example of the murderer? the thing is with you, you're being a bit of a smart-ass, this is very annoying. you're not offending me, just being annoying.

deadnothingbetter

Kenny Olav wrote:

yeah really, cause the Bible would be a piss-poor bedtime story. most definately not smugly. doesn't hold a candle to Winkin, Blinkin and Nod.

oh, look Collin read this. he just proved my point.

kenny olav

anyway, about this 'is athiesm against the law?' essay...

by its definition of athiest, i would not be one. although i am without theism (i lack a belief in a god or gods), i do not reject the existance of anything supernatural. but how do we define "supernatural"? is it anything that is outside of nature? or is it, as i would prefer to describe it, awesomely natural!!!? but i actually prefer the term metaphysical - something that appears to be real but is yet to be scientifically explained. i would say emotions are real, but you can't quantify them physically.

physical science is but one thing. i positively feel that there is a metaphysicaly reality... and i also feel that the idea of a creator god is hollow .