Students to be taught there isn't a God

Originally posted by cruzion
Atheists are atheists because of lack of proof.
The religious are usually religious because that is what they are taught.
They aren't similar at all.

As would a dyed in the wool atheist say. My advice to you is simple really, take objective look from the outside.

Originally posted by cruzion
Almost all atheists BECOME atheists, through their own reasoning. There will be some that are indoctrinated, because of peers and parents, but on the whole, it is individualistic. The odd thing is, most atheists I know became atheists after they were religious, so that would uphold the theory most atheists aren't indoctrinated.

The standard approach I have seen is one that is generally called "victim's mentality". I would like to note this does not include every member of the group we are speaking of, I am speaking from my frame of reference and those I have known. But I have seen a disproportionately large amount of individuals that have either 1) been given crap by so called "religious" kids so much that they end up lashing out at the concept the "religious" kids ape that they are, 2) had some pretty heinous crap happen to them growing up and blame "God" and then the very idea of a "God", the basic "Why would "God" allow suffering?" argument. But that is neither here nor there. And of course both options have the person only looking at the negative and only allowing the negative effect their opinion, which is of course a psychological thing.

Originally posted by cruzion
Now, the few people that I know that became religious later on in life, did so because of some trauma to them or someone they loved. And in all cases, they were councelled by someone religious. Typically, they were at a low point, and probably vunerable. Yes, they had a need, but they could have been comforted without directing them to a faith.
I can't imagine an atheist comforting someone, and then egging them into atheism.

And I have. We would just have to agree to disagree eh?

And I am just speaking my piece I do not mean this as an attack and nor am I trying to change your views but naturally a member of a group would of course look at it in the best light while looking at that group's "enemies" in the worst.

[edit on 20-12-2008 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]

reply to post by johnsky


*pardon the phraseology*
Amen brutha!
Exactly the tree I have been barking up man and the way I am raising my own offspring.

[edit on 20-12-2008 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]

Students to be taught there isn't a God

Wtf? There is a God. I personaly know God is real, and he is within his Kingdom.

reply to post by papabryant


Dude. Listing your 'credentials' is the last resort of a desperate, er, dude. It's even worse to say you are the only person qualified to talk about a subject - it gives the impression that you are full of ****. If you are as qualified as you say you are (which I suspect is a load of BS) it was a terrible waste of money on somebody who cannot adhere to polite and calm debate - even after all of those multiple choice exams! At the level of education you say you are qualified, one would assume that an 'academic' such as yourself can think of a better way of arguing than saying your opponent "can't read" - or in laymans terms, acting like a 6 year old. Or just go to a better university. Or a university at all...Have a cuppa, relax, take out the 'I can read Theology' book and put your feet up for a while - It may even give people the chance to discuss the topic, which I was enjoyiong until you started on your rampage of dodgy facts and Nelson Muntz tactics.

One more point is that you don't need 15 degrees to spot an a-hole at 40 paces - so try not to be such an educational snob in the future.

reply to post by gordonwest


Well, I personally know the spaghetti monster is real, and his noodly appendages are tender yet firm to the bite.
Ramen to that.

Can you show me how this God is real. Oh, and can you define this God for us, so we're all on the same page?

reply to post by angel of lightangelo


There are plenty of Pagans in the world and some of them still revere Zeus. Also, the cult of Isis is alive and well.

reply to post by cruzion


That works both ways.
Prove there is no chance his god exists under any possible definition of the word. As opposed to making silly Spaghetti Monster comments.

[edit on 29-12-2008 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
That works both ways.
Prove there is no chance his god exists under any possible definition of the word. As opposed to making silly Spaghetti Monster comments.

I think you missed the point of the spaghetti monster argument. You cannot disprove the spaghetti monster so it has equal validity with any other god. Just like you cannot disprove a flying unicorn, traveling around Venus, farting gold dust. You can't see it though because it's invisible, prove that it isn't there please.

You cannot use the idea that because you cannot prove it is not true that that makes it true. If you start using that standard as proof then absolutely anything is possible, including the aforementioned unicorn. Why is it people laugh at the Egyptian or Norse gods and yet are so offended when someone says their god has just as little proof to back it up?

Originally posted by cruzion
reply to post by gordonwest

 

Well, I personally know the spaghetti monster is real, and his noodly appendages are tender yet firm to the bite.
Ramen to that.

Can you show me how this God is real. Oh, and can you define this God for us, so we're all on the same page?

And there is no one that can prove that their isn't such a thing is there?

I personally don't believe in a flying spaghetti monster but saying he isn't real doesn't mean he isn't real to you as you have sarcastically pronounced is rather silly of me to say he must not be real to you too.

You have obviously been "in touch" with said monster where I have not and THAT is the ONLY difference and unfortunately the only thing that separates us from ever being on "the same page" as you put it.

I know for me, the way to meet God was the way he said one can written by the ancients in the texts of the Bible moreover it is the ONLY way, it is said, a portal to whatever place or dimension he exists can be properly accessed via a conduit which requires we come as a child or without pre-conceived notions and prejudices asking to know him and to personally ask he come inside you in a symbiotic method, a relationship of flesh host to a supernatural spiritual being.

Speaking from experience, I can say it is a courageous decision and one I can't fathom anyone ever regretting but can only say to properly articulate it can not be explained in mere words but must be experienced making it ever so difficult for those that have to ever explain in mere words alone but we try anyway in spite of the sarcasm directed at us, in spite of the Science that says WE are wrong.

All I can say is, any other method to explain it leaves those listening without belief having no idea

how wrong THEY are.

GOD IS REAL












[edit on 2-1-2009 by Aermacchi]

Originally posted by Styki
Religion should be taught in schools. It should be an elective but every school should has it as an option. Religion is a major part of history, how every country is today and what is going to become of tomorrow.

I suppose the 'historical' aspect of religion should be taught to students -
I can see it importance of learning about the origins from such opinions of Polynesian,Olmec,Viking,Abrahamic,Korean,Eskimo religion....but other than that I think organised religion should be firmly restricted to its respective temples and have very little (if anything) to do with education,law or government.
Organised religious institutions have 'absolutely no authority whatsoever' in society at large and its worth pointing out that other 'non provable beleif systems' such as voodoo and scientology have
'exactly the same' credibility,plausibility and feasiblity as other more popular faiths.

If they are going to exist at all then a very good reason why religious schools should be closely monitored is this documentary film called Unrepentant:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
Attempting to forcefully impose religious opinions through endemic bigotry and prejudice is perhaps one of organised religions most terrible (and predictable) traits.


[edit on 02/10/08 by karl 12]

Evidence is simply information that can be interpreted any way the observer chooses. There is no scientific "proof" that God either does exist or does not exist. That is why religions are "faith" based. Schools have no right to tell anyone that God does or does not exist. They can teach what the different religions believe without their personal interpretation.

Originally posted by WatchNLearn

I think this is a huge step forward. I for one am not an Atheist, however I do believe we are responsible for our own destiny. Half the problem with people is that they sit back and expect some supernatural force to do everything for them - especially the thinking.

I agree, it's a huge step forward, and in the Geography class the students could be taught that the Earth is Flat, which is another huge step forward in the same direction.

We wouldn't want some supernatural force to do something for us, would we, so which supernatural force created the Cosmos and all that exists within it?

Call it God, or our Creator, but there must be a superior force of unimaginable scope and quality to have created everything, including mankind, and it would be really neat for Victoria's pupils to be taught about that.

They should be taught nothing from The Bible or the Koran and similar religious books, only the truth about God or our Creator, with no frills or dogma.

Now that would be a good idea.

reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984


Too bad I never used that gambit.
My point that you completely missed was that just because you cannot prove it doesn't make it untrue. I was not saying that it makes it true. I am sure all kind of mental gymnastics can be used to say that I was saying just that but I assure you I was not.

After all, look at cosmological theory.

reply to post by tezzajw


Well, if you cannot teach my beliefs(Christian), then why be forced to be taught your beliefs(crock)? Neither can be proven until after death, so what makes your opinion better than mine??

reply to post by karl 12


You said, "Organised religious institutions have 'absolutely no authority whatsoever' in society at large ..."

I'm affraid that I have to call you on that. Just because you don't adhere to a religion does not mean that they have "absolutely no authority whatsoever" in society.

I would like to point out that there are several nations on the planet that are theocracies. The mere existance of these proves that religion as a whole does in fact have real authority in society. After all these theocratic states have voting power in the UN. So, the do in fact affect the world at large and you and me.

Your opinion may be that they should not have actual authority but that doesn't change the facts.