The Growth of Atheism and What it Means for Our Future

Originally posted by daskakik
reply to post by kykweer

 

Because it's an apple, an orange and a watermelon so we call them fruit?

For example people often say our troops overseas. It's understood that this includes marines, infantry, sailors, pilots etc. It's a way to talk about a group and not just one of it's components.

edit on 16-6-2011 by daskakik because: (no reason given)

Then why not just say the military is going to war?

Tptb refers to a nameless, mysterious group that manipulates things from the shadows

reply to post by nicolee123nd


It means you are f*****.
That's why atheists will never be more than that, atheists.
Sorry I say differently.
Why do you prefer atheism when you can perfectly understand that God is part of who you are, and have the two possibilities in your awareness?

That makes you inferior, with no spiritual authority, sub humans. Perfect for control.
You don't 'believe' in God? pfff that's fine. The rest of the species will continue.

A long lived debate regarding ethics, Atheism, and evil has existed for some time.

Atheism guarantees that evil has no greater purpose or meaning; it offers no redemption. This is because in the absolute materialism that atheism implies, evil is very purposeful in that it benefits the perpetrator. The perpetrator commits evil acts, and as long as they get away with it, the victim suffers while the perpetrator enjoys the benefits of their evil deeds.

Atheism makes evil go away by pretending that it does not exist. A natural disaster that kills thousands of people is not evil; it is an act of nature. An animal, whether human or not, that kills another animal is not evil; it is acting according to its own will. We may not like it, we may attempt to stop or prevent it possibly, but in the end Atheism will rationalize it as nature. (the killers daddy yelled at him when he was 16 so its okay that he killed 20 people)

Theism has been blamed of course for plenty of historical evil actions, however i would contend that religion in these cases were used by atheist lead political organizations using the religion in order to manipulate both the masses and compartmentalized inner hierarchy of these so called religious bodies. The inquisition was a perfect example of this. The Roman Catholic church internally rationalized that to retaining power through fear, was more important for the religion rather than actually obeying the core belief of the religion (thou shalt not kill).

Since 1798, the Malthusian argument that man is a virus on the face of the earth and would soon out eat our planets resources, every 20 or 30 years this movement has continued to predict the end of mankind of course in every instance man has overcome obstacles to food and resource shortages, however the movement is just as strong today as it was 200 years ago.

Its current flavor seems to be the green movement, save the planet, global warming, the sky is falling etc. Education and mass media today has been brainwashing many individuals towards this hatred of humanity and the love for polar bears and other vicious predators (which would just as soon eat you alive given the chance) over the love for ones brother human. (Ive recently seen children being taught that they are killing the earth and as a school project they should say sorry to the earth for being born)

Given the direction society seems to be heading, since everywhere we look we are being saturated with this sort of propaganda, i could see continued growth of rationalizing away evil and even calling it green and good to cull populations. Today this is already happening though wars, forced abortion, harvesting of criminal body parts to be sold to the highest bidder etc. (as we are currently seeing in china). However many individuals rejoice in the idea of an abortion (one less contributer to global warming/cooling/climate change, or whatever the current flavor of dehumanization is.) I say that anybody that does, you have been had by TPTB, this is their agenda, and it is against you.

Is forced abortion evil? I'm certain than many reading this post would disagree with me when i say 'yes it is', and you are entitled to your opinion, however my answer and my opinion is directed to OP and people asking the same question rather than those who believe they know the answer.

The fact of evil in the world suggests that atheism does not benefit society as a whole and that grass roots religion which offers absolutes rights and rules that are given by god rather than given by the state or the UN what not, true or untrue, offers much greater benefits for a free society.

reply to post by Gravity215



Again, trying to equate religion with ethics and morality, just plain stupid... Sorry guy, believers of a boogyman and an invisible daddy in the sky does not have a monopoly on morality. Some of us do what is right, because it is the right thing to do, not because we are scared of the boogyman, and that the invisible daddy will punish us....

reply to post by TKDRL


Okay, what makes an action moral, and why should anyone accept that theory of morality? Someone could just say "I disagree" and the only way to make it a moral code is to have power over others.

reply to post by TKDRL

Some of us do what is right, because it is the right thing to do, not because we are scared of the boogyman, and that the invisible daddy will punish us....

Is something good because atheists proclaim it to be good?
Or, do atheists proclaim something to be good, because it is good?

If something is good merely because an atheist proclaims it to be good, then goodness is an arbitrary construct and at the whim of atheists who could change that which is good into that which is bad and vice versa.

Most religions are not subject to the Euthyphro Dilemma, however the religion of Atheism is!

Also TKDRL, please read the entire post you'd responded to that before my screen had updated after posting it, you totally didnt read that.

reply to post by 547000

Okay, what makes an action moral, and why should anyone accept that theory of morality? Someone could just say "I disagree" and the only way to make it a moral code is to have power over others.

Thank-you, the exact point i was trying to make, although i attempted to sight historic and contemporary examples in a somewhat long winded way i suppose.

If you religions folk are having a tough time figuring out how we atheists enjoy life without raping, murdering, and stealing, you should just try atheism. That seems to be the same as your suggestion that we should just believe.

I get being called"subhuman". It's only fair since some atheists think the religions are a little out of sorts in the cranium. However, I don't think of myself being better. I just think of my self being able to see things more clearly. I realize some religious think the same. Do you religious folk also look at us as victims? I see a lot of religious as victims of child abuse by well meaning adults.

Originally posted by TKDRLreply to post by Gravity215

 

Again, trying to equate religion with ethics and morality, just plain stupid... Sorry guy, believers of a boogyman and an invisible daddy in the sky does not have a monopoly on morality. Some of us do what is right, because it is the right thing to do, not because we are scared of the boogyman, and that the invisible daddy will punish us....

God does not punish us. We punish ourselves with anger, jealousy, hatred, ect.That is what Hell is; the torture within... If you are an atheist and live a peaceful life, you will be closer to heaven than any so-called "holy man" that preaches hate and fear, or kills in the name of their God. Most "christians" seem to ignore the words of Christ and look to the old testament....bad move.

Originally posted by gentledissident
If you religions folk are having a tough time figuring out how we atheists enjoy life without raping, murdering, and stealing, you should just try atheism. That seems to be the same as your suggestion that we should just believe.

I get being called"subhuman". It's only fair since some atheists think the religions are a little out of sorts in the cranium. However, I don't think of myself being better. I just think of my self being able to see things more clearly. I realize some religious think the same. Do you religious folk also look at us as victims? I see a lot of religious as victims of child abuse by well meaning adults.

edit on 17-6-2011 by gentledissident because: it's early

You're not getting it. What if someone just decides to say "I disagree it's immoral" and goes ahead and does those things? You have to force it against his own will to accept a moral code, but who's moral code is correct? It's only the man with the most power who dictates what is moral. All you've done is replaced the authority of God with the authority of man. If there's no God it's the powerful men who decide what is immoral. And so there will be a power struggle in the future, so man can impose upon other men his moral code.

reply to post by 547000


I don't need a book or a god to tell me that harming someone or their property is wrong. I wouldn't like it if someone harmed me or stole or damaged my property. It is a no brainer. Morals and ethics existed before religions, they will probably be around after them as well. Barring some event that just wipes out everyone at the same time.

Atheists don't hold a monopoly on sociapaths and psychopaths by a long shot, as religion don't hold a monopoly on morals and ethics.

reply to post by applesthateatpeople



I am certainly no christian, but that more or less sounds inline with how I think about it. We all have the ability to do good, and to do harm. I choose to do good. A lot of religious people view doing harm, as some external force, that is a cop out. The devil made me do it, please forgive me!

I choose to live in peace, until someone makes it impossible for me to do so. Then it is time to crush the obstacle to my peaceful life.

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by 547000

 

I don't need a book or a god to tell me that harming someone or their property is wrong. I wouldn't like it if someone harmed me or stole or damaged my property. It is a no brainer. Morals and ethics existed before religions, they will probably be around after them as well. Barring some event that just wipes out everyone at the same time.

Atheists don't hold a monopoly on sociapaths and psychopaths by a long shot, as religion don't hold a monopoly on morals and ethics.

edit on Fri, 17 Jun 2011 09:31:15 -0500 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)

I dont think anybody here claimed that YOU NEED A BOOK. This thread is about society as a whole.

reply to post by Gravity215


So I am just better than general society then? Am I surrounded by sociopaths and psychopaths?

reply to post by Doublemint


Back in the good old days..when a scientist went against the churches they were killed..when they said the earth wasnt flat, dead; when they said the earth wasnt the center and we were actually the ones going around everthing...dead

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by applesthateatpeople

 

I am certainly no christian, but that more or less sounds inline with how I think about it. We all have the ability to do good, and to do harm. I choose to do good. A lot of religious people view doing harm, as some external force, that is a cop out. The devil made me do it, please forgive me!

I choose to live in peace, until someone makes it impossible for me to do so. Then it is time to crush the obstacle to my peaceful life.

Im not certain as to why you are suggesting that Christians believe all evil is done by the devil. Christianity suggests man has a free will and will be judged for their sins, they also believe that if you truly repent for those sins at the point of understanding and are reborn into a new life following the laws of god you will live forever after judgement day.

Hence a president, for example, claiming to be a Christian but then disobeying gods laws by starting a war to steal resources from another nation and lying about the reasons, my claim to be a Christian however his deeds do not show the same thing. This individual doesn't really believe he will be judged for his sins, and whats more, he is an atheist using religion for the purposes of manipulation, the way leaders of nations have always done. Imagine a world where politicians didn't lie because they personally would suffer the consequences. Like i said earlier in the post you flamed, 'true or untrue, religion as a whole is good for a free society.'

I don't see what's so hard about understanding the ultimate consequence of believing in no higher authority in a society after believing in a higher authority. Nietzsche got it right. The will to power is the logical step for society.

reply to post by TKDRL


When in human history but for the last 50 years have we been moral and ethical?

The Bible states thou shall not kill, that wasn't "mainstream" thought BC.

Sorry to say but you obviously believe in evolution... Survival of the fittest. And that's the only way for us to evolve or progress is to kill the weak ones... Too bad for ethics

Its not human nature but nature to kill. So who defines morality now? Thank God for the bible or you might never have been born.

Oh btw. Almost forgot, and if you are close minded please don't go any further.
A great deal of humans clinging to atheism are demons. Energies who are stopping this planet from ascend.

Originally posted by kykweer
Then why not just say the military is going to war?

Tptb refers to a nameless, mysterious group that manipulates things from the shadows

Troops, military, armed forces are used interchangeably. So is government, TPTB, the man, the institution.

Do you correct people who use the term "our troops overseas" and tell them that they should say "our military overseas" instead?

I was first introduced to the term when it was used by Public Enemy in their song Fight the Power. To me it was a way to describe those who oppress a group of people. The reason it's vague is because it can be used to describe different PTB in different situations. TPTB that existed in South Africa during apartheid are not the same PTB that exist in Chavez's Venezuela.

I agree that often it is used to describe Illuminati, NWO, Bilderberg, Rothschild type groups and while it's use in that way is correct, I'm just pointing out that it can also be used in other ways.