Why do Atheists care about religion?

Originally posted by AnheroWhy do athiests cling to the theory of evolution, waiting for that missing link to show up? So whats the difference between a christian having faith that the "lord will save him" and and athiest having faith that science will be able to produce a missing link. Or explain how any form of life evolved from a sterile environment after the big bang. what created the big bang and what made it go bang?

Ah, you're a scientific primitive! You should have said so.

You want "missing links", but when they're provided the IDers say, "Now there's two gaps to fill." ad nauseum. Sorry, but the links are sufficiently documented for rational people.

As for the origin of the Universe, the Great Sky Fairy isn't any better an explanation than any other I've heard. And worse than most. Who created God? What was there before him/her/it? In other words, you're version isn't any credible than mine, so we're at an impasse on that.

reply to post by Gawdzilla

You want "missing links", but when they're provided the IDers say, "Now there's two gaps to fill." ad nauseum. Sorry, but the links are sufficiently documented for rational people.

once again an athiest can't make a point with out degrading others "rational people" and "sky fairy". I never told you what religion i am or what i believe. It is my opinion that most athiests are in fact not really athiests they are just anti-christian.
some of those missing links have been found to be around the same times not comming one after the other (evolving) like you would be led to believe. This is in fact a strange time right now that we are in with only one form of man on earth.

Originally posted by Anheroonce again an athiest can't make a point with out degrading others "rational people" and "sky fairy". I never told you what religion i am or what i believe. It is my opinion that most athiests are in fact not really athiests they are just anti-christian.
some of those missing links have been found to be around the same times not comming one after the other (evolving) like you would be led to believe. This is in fact a strange time right now that we are in with only one form of man on earth.

You've been wading through answersingenesis, I take it? The great sky fairy has told them it's okay to lie about that kind of thing because it's God's work and it will be okay to lie for God.

I'm talking science, you're answering with religion. Notice any problem with that?

reply to post by Gawdzilla

I'm talking science, you're answering with religion. Notice any problem with that?

The only problem i notice is that any idea that is not accepted by an athiest is called religion. I have not put my religion out there for you to degrade so how am i answering with religion. My problems with evolution and science do not come for my religious backround.

Originally posted by AnheroThe only problem i notice is that any idea that is not accepted by an athiest is called religion. I have not put my religion out there for you to degrade so how am i answering with religion. My problems with evolution and science do not come for my religious backround.

Please, don't try that old diversion. If you're problems with evolution and science don't come from religion then you are unique amongst the hundreds of other creationists who have repeated the same cant over and over again. The fundies are insulted and confused by science, and they respond garbage science of their own, and that's why I care about religion, it's fundamentally anti-science. If the fundies kept it in church I wouldn't mind, any stupid thing you want to do is fine as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else.

Originally posted by Anhero
The only problem i notice is that any idea that is not accepted by an athiest is called religion. I have not put my religion out there for you to degrade so how am i answering with religion. My problems with evolution and science do not come for my religious backround.

Why do you equate evolution with atheism? The Theory of Evolution is held by scientists because it explains all of biology, which is why it's called the backbone, unifying all of biology. It also has more evidence than likely any other theory in science. "The evidence doesn't lie" to quote CSI, and the evidence says "Evolution".

It's also note worthy than of all the christians around the world, most believe in evolution, even the pope.

Originally posted by WelfhardIt's also note worthy than of all the christians around the world, most believe in evolution, even the pope.

The Vatican recently announced that evolution posed no problems for the Faith. Nice of them, they're slowly creeping into the 17th century.

reply to post by Gawdzilla

Please, don't try that old diversion. If you're problems with evolution and science don't come from religion then you are unique amongst the hundreds of other creationists who have repeated the same cant over and over again. The fundies are insulted and confused by science, and they respond garbage science of their own, and that's why I care about religion, it's fundamentally anti-science.

If the idea of a person thinking for themself and having their own ideas is so abhorrent to you is science really your field? The use of derogatory words like "fundies" only insults your own character. If you believe only what science has told you because it is science and does not come from a religion then you are no better than the people you speak out against.

[edit on 28-4-2009 by Anhero]

Originally posted by AnheroIf the idea of a person thinking for themself and having their own ideas is so abhorrent to you is science really your field? The use of derogatory words like "fundies" only insults your own character. If you believe only what science has told you because it is science and does not come from a religion then you are no better than the people you speak out against.

[edit on 28-4-2009 by Anhero]

You're not thinking for yourself, you're regurgitating the answeringenesis propaganda. You're not fooling anybody when you spout the party line. As for "fundies", that's the nicest thing I call them. Worse would be "fundamentalist", you know like in "Islamic fundamentalist" or "Christian fundamentalist". That "label" would be a certain indicator of a closed mind.

Since when does a belief make a person good or bad?
It's the actions that count.
That's why most religions fail.
They can't even grasp such a basic concept.

If a god exists, he could grasp such a simple concept, and wouldn't be part of a religion that can not.

Use your heads.

Originally posted by TruthParadox
Since when does a belief make a person good or bad?
It's the actions that count.
That's why most religions fail.
They can't even grasp such a basic concept.

If a god exists, he could grasp such a simple concept, and wouldn't be part of a religion that can not.

Use your heads.

So, people who believe that they can go to heaven by blowing up a school bus full of kids is not bad?

Originally posted by Gawdzilla
So, people who believe that they can go to heaven by blowing up a school bus full of kids is not bad?

Not necessarily. As long as they don't do it...
I'm saying the action is bad, not the belief itself...
You can believe that pink fairies will bring destruction upon our world for all I care...

But if your belief doesn't harm anyone... then it doesn't harm anyone.. In which case, it's not bad for society.
We determine 'bad' or 'good' by what is bad or good for society.

A delusion is not necessarily bad unless followed by action.

But in the purest sense, we should be judged by our actions, not our beliefs.

Most gods, real or imagined, would not do this, even though most followers of those gods would admit that we shouldn't judge based on beliefs.
More intellectual dishonesty.
It's ok for god to judge a person by their personal beliefs, but not us.

reply to post by TruthParadox


"Not necessarily. As long as they don't do it... "

Do you EVER watch the news?

Originally posted by Gawdzilla
"Not necessarily. As long as they don't do it... "

Do you EVER watch the news?

I do.
And what was the crime?
A belief or an action?

The belief alone was not the crime.
The action was the crime.

Many Christians believe that a homosexual should be judged or even killed.
But unless I see a Christian actually kill a homosexual, I won't consider him/her "evil", just indoctrinated.

I really don't even see why you are arguing against this..
My point was that the idea of God belongs in the stone age, because we are (or should be) past judging people by their beliefs alone.

reply to post by TruthParadox


You can quibble all you want, but you sound like the kind of person who says, "I didn't kill them, I just put the mortar in the tube and let it drop. After that it was just their bad luck."

Originally posted by Anhero
I do not know, i'm not an atheist. I do not think it is right but it just something that happens when an Atheist takes control of a state.

When you find out what that something is, let me know

More BS?

No, it's a Nazi BS during II World War (and the traitors who worked for them). Tito was the leader of resistance who freed us from Nazi Italian and German occupation...

just go to 5:00

Lol, I know much more about history of my own country than some western capitalistic propaganda reporter; rouge elements from the capitalistic era and Nazi fascist era were dealt with swiftly because they were endangering what we fought for in II World War, which was, of course, socialism

Did you even bother to see the comments below the video made by people from my country ?

We ALL respected him for who he was

Originally posted by Gawdzilla
reply to post by TruthParadox

 

You can quibble all you want, but you sound like the kind of person who says, "I didn't kill them, I just put the mortar in the tube and let it drop. After that it was just their bad luck."

He was talking about beliefs vs actions, and you try and draw a parallel which involves actions.

Are you being deliberately obtuse?

Attempting to represent him thus is extremely dishonest on your part.

Originally posted by RoarkHe was talking about beliefs vs actions, and you try and draw a parallel which involves actions.

Are you being deliberately obtuse?

Attempting to represent him thus is extremely dishonest on your part.

The bomber on the school bus believes he will go to heaven, and his actions blow the poop out of a bunch of school kids. What's so hard about that?

It depends what you're trying to argue, dude. Your statement in itself means next to nothing, but if you're trying to argue that the beliefs are harmful (in and of themselves), because the bomber chose to act upon them, then you should say so.

...but portraying someone you disagree with as a terrorist is no way to argue.

Originally posted by Gawdzilla
You can quibble all you want, but you sound like the kind of person who says, "I didn't kill them, I just put the mortar in the tube and let it drop. After that it was just their bad luck."

A bullet isn't worth a thing without the gun.

Think about it.


But I would like to know your grand solution.
Should we control what people believe? Should it be illegal to believe in something, even without taking action?
Should we lock Muslims up?

Or should we lock terrorists up?

Big difference.

[edit on 28-4-2009 by TruthParadox]