Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038

Apr 25, 2012 Read more: Psychology Today 23,565

My blog posts on religion have attracted a lot of controversy. Religious people are annoyed by my claim that belief in God will go the way of horse transportation, and for much the same reason, specifically an improved standard of living.

Read more

“Exercise Your Brain”

Since: Jun 07

Planet Earth

#10223 Jan 10, 2013
DJ Hewlet wrote:
<quoted text>
Atheism is a cult. It hasn't attracted enough people to make a minority and that isn't going to change. Atheism has no philosophy, nothing of any particular value to offer. The self centered hedonism of scientifically fueled secular belief is turning our society into a polluted stinking technological ghetto. If you think people haven't noticed, you're fooling yourself.
Max Weber: "Secularization is sometimes credited both to the cultural shifts in society following the emergence of rationality and the development of science as a substitute for superstition "the disenchantment of the world".

13 million people aren't enough to make a 'minority' in this country??? You might wish to double check that one. Check out The Pew forum for the last decade.
Lincoln

United States

#10225 Jan 10, 2013
DJ Hewlet wrote:
<quoted text>
Atheism is a cult. It hasn't attracted enough people to make a minority and that isn't going to change. Atheism has no philosophy, nothing of any particular value to offer. The self centered hedonism of scientifically fueled secular belief is turning our society into a polluted stinking technological ghetto. If you think people haven't noticed, you're fooling yourself.
All of this is your opinion, First Amendment protects this.
Are you trying to convince yourself of this?

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#10227 Jan 10, 2013
That's just stupid and beyond grasping at straws.
DJ Hewlet wrote:
<quoted text>
Disbelief is a belief. The opposite of belief is not a lack of belief but an undecided or unreached conclusion. Proof? Atheists spend an exorbitant amount of time on discussion boards like this defending their belief in disbelief.
The lack of belief in something represents nothing. You wouldn't be aware of it so you would have no claim to knowledge and no opinions. The primitive Yanomami tribe in Brazil lack a belief in the christian God. They never heard of this god and know nothing about it. They have no knowledge of this God. Athiests, on the other hand, are well aware of Christianity and openly reject its theology. They disbelieve.
EdSed

Hamilton, UK

#10228 Jan 11, 2013
From:
http://www.secularism.org.uk/news/2013/01/jur...
Mr Qayyum said: "The Koran is sacred to us and we honour it. We also have a Bible on our stand and we show the Bible the same respect. One of the laws of the Koran is it shouldn't be on the floor, it should be high up and our hands should be clean when it's touched. I was shocked."
And
"Defence advocate Steven Newcombe said: "There are many who oppose Islam. Did you take it he was expressing anti-Islamic views and disrespecting the religion?"
"Yes," said Mr Quyyum, although he agreed that Mr Crawford did not threaten or provoke any violence.
Unquote.
Mr Quyyum and company need to get used to the idea of freedom of speech & expression. People can believe whatever they want. I could believe that the flag is the symbol of my country and should be respected, but flags and books might not be respected - end of story. Respect must be earned, not demanded.

Religion isn't to be respected or disrespected (whatever 'disrespecting something' means. Presumably people mean 'actively showing disrespect to' i.e. being unnecessarily candid when one might be polite or more tactful.) Freedom of speech and expression are important must be upheld.

It isn't at all clear that Mr Crawford was trying to provoke a disturbance and he wasn't being violent, so why was it a police matter at all? A protest is legal whether carried out by a person, group or crowd.

People needn't be offended by people being disgusted by religion. Many of us feel that all the time and never particularly show it.

I think Mr Crawford should have been fined for littering.

Religion = superstition. It's divisive and more trouble than its worth.
Lincoln

United States

#10229 Jan 11, 2013
n 20th century atheist in power murdered millions. As a result turning to atheism is not an easy solution.
Hitler,
Stalin,
Lenin,
Castro,
Trotsky,
Kamenev,
Zinoviev
Mao,
Himler,
Eichmann
all examples of atheists not to be trusted.

Atheists will now claim these were Christians :-)
sickofit

Owatonna, MN

#10230 Jan 11, 2013
When religion is gone is when we will have world peace and total equality and total freedom...
Thinking

Leighton Buzzard, UK

#10233 Jan 11, 2013
You're just another spamtard.
Lincoln wrote:
n 20th century atheist in power murdered millions. As a result turning to atheism is not an easy solution.
Hitler,
Stalin,
Lenin,
Castro,
Trotsky,
Kamenev,
Zinoviev
Mao,
Himler,
Eichmann
all examples of atheists not to be trusted.
Atheists will now claim these were Christians :-)
rio

UK

#10234 Jan 11, 2013
Lincoln wrote:
n 20th century atheist in power murdered millions. As a result turning to atheism is not an easy solution.
Hitler,
Stalin,
Lenin,
Castro,
Trotsky,
Kamenev,
Zinoviev
Mao,
Himler,
Eichmann
all examples of atheists not to be trusted.
Atheists will now claim these were Christians :-)
Absolutely right.

If religionists in power is bad, just look what atheist societies have done.

The greatest genocides in history were exacted under atheit states: USSR, China, Cambodia. The greatest butcher in history did it in an atheist society they had created.
The systematic eradication of religion is the result of atheists reaching power.
They are just as intolerant as religious fanatics.
EdSed

Hamilton, UK

#10236 Jan 11, 2013
rio wrote:
<quoted text>
Absolutely right.
If religionists in power is bad, just look what atheist societies have done.
The greatest genocides in history were exacted under atheit states: USSR, China, Cambodia. The greatest butcher in history did it in an atheist society they had created.
The systematic eradication of religion is the result of atheists reaching power.
They are just as intolerant as religious fanatics.
Not that old lie.

Apart from the fact that some on the list weren't atheist (e.g. Hitler), none of them were motivated by atheism and none of them could have been restrained by (even more) religion.

Beliefs should be challenged, not held sacred.

Perhaps people who are religious and know to keep it to themselves might take it from a prominent religionist?...
"If I were a dictator, religion and state would be separate. I swear by my religion. I will die for it. But it is my personal affair. The state has nothing to do with it. The state would look after your secular welfare, health, communications, foreign relations, currency and so on, but not your or my religion. That is everybody's personal concern!”
&#8213; Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi

If religion is to survive at all, it will need to be defended far better than the patently falacious comments of Lincoln, Rio and Muq. We are all essentially human and equal. We mustn't allow religion to influence politics, science, the law, morality, or education , or freedom of speech or expression,(as in the example in my post at the top of this page). Religion should never divide us,(e.g Sunni & Shia; Zionist & Islamist; religionist & atheist). That would certainly be an atheist view and religionists would do well to live by that too.
tagit

UK

#10237 Jan 11, 2013
EdSed wrote:
<quoted text>Not that old lie.
Apart from the fact that some on the list weren't atheist (e.g. Hitler), none of them were motivated by atheism and none of them could have been restrained by (even more) religion.
Beliefs should be challenged, not held sacred.
Perhaps people who are religious and know to keep it to themselves might take it from a prominent religionist?...
"If I were a dictator, religion and state would be separate. I swear by my religion. I will die for it. But it is my personal affair. The state has nothing to do with it. The state would look after your secular welfare, health, communications, foreign relations, currency and so on, but not your or my religion. That is everybody's personal concern!”
&#8213; Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi
If religion is to survive at all, it will need to be defended far better than the patently falacious comments of Lincoln, Rio and Muq. We are all essentially human and equal. We mustn't allow religion to influence politics, science, the law, morality, or education , or freedom of speech or expression,(as in the example in my post at the top of this page). Religion should never divide us,(e.g Sunni & Shia; Zionist & Islamist; religionist & atheist). That would certainly be an atheist view and religionists would do well to live by that too.
In short - "Give unto Caesar that which is Caesar's, and give unto God that which is God's".

Humans are natural god-makers. Theology of one kind or another will always be a part of mankind's experience. It is a way to expunge moth eaten dogmas and ceremonies, both religious and scientific, to encounter the universe through our eyes and to try again to push against our recognized boundaries.

“Citizen_Patriot_ Voter_Atheist!”

Since: May 09

Earth,TX

#10240 Jan 11, 2013
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Ans.
I think my “little post” on Train hitting some one standing on tracks has fired imaginations on this dormant thread. Within a short time, I received six replies to my single post!!
I would post a common reply to all of them.
1. Albtram
equates it with Pascal’s Wager: If some one says that death is Pascal’ wager, then let him take it. May be they will never die!!
2. RP says:
a. that “everyone sees the trains and tracks…” may be they do, but do we not read “every day” that so many people got killed when train hit them? It happens so often in India!!
b. Some one has to find answer to what happens after death. If you have no definite answer, then rejecting what religions say, is not a reasonable approach. You are taking wager with your life!!
3. Adam
c. says that since so many “religions” exist in the world, so there is no religion!! Can he say the same about so many models of cars existing, so many models of TV sets, Mobiles, Fridge etc.
One should say that since there are so many models available in the world, so all are fake?
d. And then he says that he will “refuse to sit in Paradise with 72 Virgins”… may be he will, but let him first make himself someone who enters paradise!!
e. And he says that I am a Muslim because I was born in a Muslim family. May be he is true, but I have true stories from hundreds of people who were not born in Muslim family, but they accepted Islam after sincere study of Islam and its teachings.
Islam is the fastest growing religion in the West today!!
4. PM 2857
f. He poses a question is that what if “one can see no train despite keeping his own eyes open”?
My reply is that even if you see “no train” coming, but seeing “all arrangements” made to receive a train, should make one “think”.
g. The people who see this universe and things working so perfectly, if after seeing all that , he or she does not “think” that there should a Creator who has created all this, then he is not keeping his eyes open.
h. Some one who sees humans, their power and their authority on the earth and still thinks that his life has no purpose, other that eat, drink, sleep and have sex…. Is not keeping his eyes “Open”.
His claim is Hypocritic. People have seen Creator by pondering on this Universe!!
j. My name in MUQ, which is nothing but the Initials of my name. So I post what I say.
Yes, we understand that you are standing in the path of an invisible train on invisible tracks, and your demented friend is trying to save you from being hit by it.

Let it hit you, you won't feel it, you won't even know, and it will make your friend happy to attend to your invisible wounds. LOL!

And btw, you are as demented as your friend
Lincoln

United States

#10241 Jan 11, 2013
US seems religious so it may to to 2238?
rio

Beckenham, UK

#10242 Jan 12, 2013
EdSed wrote:
<quoted text>
Apart from the fact that some on the list weren't atheist (e.g. Hitler), none of them were motivated by atheism and none of them
I never mentioned Hitler; Germany was never an atheist state.
rio

Beckenham, UK

#10244 Jan 12, 2013
EdSed wrote:
<quoted text>

If religion is to survive at all, it will need to be defended far better than the patently falacious comments of Lincoln, Rio and Muq.
Two wrong assumptions from you in the same post.

First, I never mentioned Hitler.

Second, I do not defend religion. I am against intolerance and that is present among zealous believers just like among atheist militants.

I have no dog in that fight and I think believers and atheists should live together without attacking each other or trying to impose their views on others.

“Right click Left click Yay!”

Since: Dec 10

Nehwon

#10245 Jan 12, 2013
MUQ wrote:
Example of a painting found in the street:
Encouraged by the response that I received from my "train analogy" , I am presenting another analogy.
People of a town while walking down the street, found a very beautiful and strange painting lying in the street. From where it came from, no one knew for sure.
So the town people got divided into two groups:
A. The first "intelligent group" went to analyze and decipher the painting. They found out what all colors were used in the painting and which part was painted first and what was the size of brush used and the type of paper…. They went on analyzing to the minutest detail about that beautiful painting… the more they analyzed, the deeper and more complex nature of the painting was revealed.
They were so busy in analyzing the painting and its component parts and how to make a "copy" of that painting, that they had no time as to "who made that painting and for what purpose" it was left in the street.
If any one posed these questions to these "intelligent people" on these lines, they would "turn back to the questioner"….Why should we be interested in who made that painting and why should we waste our time in finding out for what purpose it was left in the street.
The moment we decipher all the info, we can also make as many "master copies" as we want. So they went on working and even after end of their lives, they could decipher only a small part of it.
B. Then there was another smaller and "Dumb Group" of the town people, who once they saw the "strange painting lying in the street", started looking for "who made it and why did it leave in the town".
And when they went of their quest, they found the "master painter" not far away from the town and He told that he left the painting in the street, so as people should start looking for the painter and come and learn how to paint.
This group was "dumb" but they solved the puzzle faster than the "smarter group".
Which one of this group was smarter? Can you guess?
You neglected to include that there was a group C composed of zealots who, based on their interpretations of books written thousands of years ago, declared the painting obscene.

They burned the painting, tortured and executed the painter then turned their attention to anyone who saw that painting.
EdSed

Hamilton, UK

#10246 Jan 12, 2013
rio wrote:
<quoted text>
Two wrong assumptions from you in the same post.
First, I never mentioned Hitler.
Second, I do not defend religion. I am against intolerance and that is present among zealous believers just like among atheist militants.
I have no dog in that fight and I think believers and atheists should live together without attacking each other or trying to impose their views on others.
Why do you see my comments as intolerant?
(I'll try and read your reply even if I don't get back to you. I'm getting a bit bored of Topix).
EdSed

Hamilton, UK

#10247 Jan 12, 2013
sickofit wrote:
When religion is gone is when we will have world peace and total equality and total freedom...
OFF_TOPIC, but can you or others in the USA tell me if you are able to receive the Al-Jazeera news channel? I have heard the main US network providers won't carry it. Thanks for any assistance.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#10248 Jan 12, 2013
MUQ wrote:
Example of a painting found in the street:
Encouraged by the response that I received from my "train analogy" , I am presenting another analogy.
People of a town while walking down the street, found a very beautiful and strange painting lying in the street. From where it came from, no one knew for sure.
So the town people got divided into two groups:
A. The first "intelligent group" went to analyze and decipher the painting. They found out what all colors were used in the painting and which part was painted first and what was the size of brush used and the type of paper…. They went on analyzing to the minutest detail about that beautiful painting… the more they analyzed, the deeper and more complex nature of the painting was revealed.
They were so busy in analyzing the painting and its component parts and how to make a "copy" of that painting, that they had no time as to "who made that painting and for what purpose" it was left in the street.
If any one posed these questions to these "intelligent people" on these lines, they would "turn back to the questioner"….Why should we be interested in who made that painting and why should we waste our time in finding out for what purpose it was left in the street.
The moment we decipher all the info, we can also make as many "master copies" as we want. So they went on working and even after end of their lives, they could decipher only a small part of it.
B. Then there was another smaller and "Dumb Group" of the town people, who once they saw the "strange painting lying in the street", started looking for "who made it and why did it leave in the town".
And when they went of their quest, they found the "master painter" not far away from the town and He told that he left the painting in the street, so as people should start looking for the painter and come and learn how to paint.
This group was "dumb" but they solved the puzzle faster than the "smarter group".
Which one of this group was smarter? Can you guess?
You really are naive. An intelligent person does not discount the artwork, we just also see the splendor in how it was created, stand in awe at the way the chemical compounds mixed just right by the artist's hand to produce the correct colors. The critical eye of the artist in the details included.

You see a "pretty painting," we see a masterpiece. Guess why most curators are intellects.

“Darwin died for your sins”

Since: Aug 08

Nunya

#10249 Jan 12, 2013
EdSed wrote:
<quoted text>OFF_TOPIC, but can you or others in the USA tell me if you are able to receive the Al-Jazeera news channel? I have heard the main US network providers won't carry it. Thanks for any assistance.
It's available online only right now but Al Jazeera english just acquired Current network (Al Gore's network). Not sure what they intend to do with it though.
EdSed

Hamilton, UK

#10250 Jan 12, 2013
madscot wrote:
<quoted text>
It's available online only right now but Al Jazeera english just acquired Current network (Al Gore's network). Not sure what they intend to do with it though.
Thanks Madscot. I noticed that.

When AJ showed the Al-Quaeda tape after 9/11 there seems to have been a widespread assumption in the US that there was some kind of linkage, or that AJ sympathised with Al-Q to some extent. AJ seems to still suffer from US bias against them. The US establishment seem to see AJ as biased. The fact they are Qatari owned doesn't help, perhaps.

And AJ may still have problems of availability to USAmericans. This is unfortunate as AJ is very popular in the Middle-East.

From:
http://money.cnn.com/2013/01/03/news/al-jazee...
...But if Current was acquired to provide access to more households, there were signs of trouble on that front Wednesday, as Time Warner Cable (TWC, Fortune 500) immediately moved to drop Current following the takeover announcement.

"Our agreement with Current has been terminated and we will no longer be carrying the service," the cable provider said in a statement
(Unquote)

So from here in the UK it isn't clear if USAmericans in general will be aware of AJ. I find its reporting reasonably reliable. As reliable as Fox News at least.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/americas/2013/0...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Atheists' problem with the Bible (Sep '09) 1 hr Pastorbobby666 7,396
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 1 hr An NFL Fan 18,442
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 2 hr nanoanomaly 237,673
News Atheists open up: What they want you to know 3 hr nanoanomaly 10
News Confessions of a black atheist 3 hr UruEuWauWau 305
News Barney Frank Advises Politicians to Stay in the... 4 hr nanoanomaly 14
Atheist-Scientist talks about incest. 4 hr nanoanomaly 5
More from around the web