Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038

Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038

There are 24182 comments on the Psychology Today story from Apr 25, 2012, titled Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038. In it, Psychology Today reports that:

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.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Psychology Today.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#10507 Jan 16, 2013
EdSed wrote:
<quoted text>Atheists aren't less moral than religionists.
Why should an atheist care if they are less or more moral?

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#10508 Jan 16, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Why should an atheist care if they are less or more moral?
Why are you asking a string of tedious questions rather than trying to make an actual point?

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#10509 Jan 16, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Why should an atheist care if they are less or more moral?
Because we are human.

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#10510 Jan 16, 2013
Just Think wrote:
<quoted text>
Why are you asking a string of tedious questions rather than trying to make an actual point?
Make one first.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#10511 Jan 16, 2013
Just Think wrote:
<quoted text>
Why are you asking a string of tedious questions rather than trying to make an actual point?
They are not tedious, but they are challenging.

Can you answer them?

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#10512 Jan 16, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Why is killing witches wrong?
As an atheist you have no reason to hold that moral view...
Wrong, killing of your own species is wrong more often than not, especially if the reason cannot be justified. It opposes the basic instinctual behavior of all animals.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#10513 Jan 16, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Why should an atheist care if they are less or more moral?
Morals are an artificial construct, we choose them as a society, it's one of the benefits of social traits.

Can you ask a question that has not been address a hundred times already?

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

#10514 Jan 16, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Why is killing witches wrong?
As an atheist you have no reason to hold that moral view...
Yes I do. As a member of human society I can and do hold that killing is morally wrong and reprehensible.

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

#10515 Jan 16, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
You can verify abiogenesis?
Empirically?
There's more evidence for that than any magic **poof** from an invisible sky deity.

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

#10516 Jan 16, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
They are not tedious, but they are challenging.
Can you answer them?
No, they are simplistic and show a complete lack of understanding about any aspect of atheism.

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

#10517 Jan 16, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Why should an atheist care if they are less or more moral?
Why does it have to be one way or the other?

But, since you mentioned it, you must think belief in an invisible deity has some moral advantage? Maybe you think that if you didn't believe in a deity you would be some sort of psychotic murderer? If so, please keep your religion. Not all of us need such a crutch.

But, just for fun, please tell us all what moral code you can show originated from your religion? Just 1 moral precept you can actually show humanity would not have without your religion?

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#10519 Jan 16, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Morals are an artificial construct, we choose them as a society, it's one of the benefits of social traits.
Can you ask a question that has not been address a hundred times already?
So if morality is relative and subjective, why is killing witches "wrong"?

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#10520 Jan 16, 2013
QuiteCrazy wrote:
<quoted text>
Make one first.
I've made one irrefutable, on topic point many, many times - there is not now, nor has there ever been, any proof that any god has ever existed.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#10521 Jan 16, 2013
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes I do. As a member of human society I can and do hold that killing is morally wrong and reprehensible.
Is killing absolutely wrong?

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#10522 Jan 16, 2013
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
There's more evidence for that than any magic **poof** from an invisible sky deity.
So you CAN prove abiogenesis through empiricism?

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#10523 Jan 16, 2013
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
No, they are simplistic and show a complete lack of understanding about any aspect of atheism.
Then they should be easy to deal with.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#10524 Jan 16, 2013
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
Why does it have to be one way or the other?
But, since you mentioned it, you must think belief in an invisible deity has some moral advantage? Maybe you think that if you didn't believe in a deity you would be some sort of psychotic murderer? If so, please keep your religion. Not all of us need such a crutch.
But, just for fun, please tell us all what moral code you can show originated from your religion? Just 1 moral precept you can actually show humanity would not have without your religion?
You did not answer the question.

Because you have no basis to account for right and wrong, for an atheist, it just IS...

So with that in mind, why do you even bother to have an opinion on this subject?

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#10525 Jan 16, 2013
Just Think wrote:
<quoted text>
I've made one irrefutable, on topic point many, many times - there is not now, nor has there ever been, any proof that any god has ever existed.
Would you define what you would deem acceptable proof?

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

#10526 Jan 16, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
So if morality is relative and subjective, why is killing witches "wrong"?
It is most definitely relative and based on societal ethics. Even you don't consider everything in your holy scripture to be an acceptable example of modern morals. You pick and choose which "morals" to follow based on your modern interpretation.

So why don't you lose the "high horse" attitude and move on.
Thinking

Leighton Buzzard, UK

#10527 Jan 16, 2013
As you brought up high ground first, why don't you define high ground and then perhaps we can discuss the other strata.
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Can you define the low ground and give a rational explanation as to why it is low ground?

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 Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 31 min Flurtz3940 21,884
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 2 hr Brian_G 23,701
The Dumbest Thing Posted by a Godbot (Jun '10) 5 hr Richardfs 5,730
bigger fish to fry (Jul '11) 5 hr IB DaMann 3
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 6 hr IB DaMann 258,050
Athetists' best bet is that there is a God. 22 hr IB DaMann 94
What are the best arguments against religion? Sat Richardfs 8
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) Fri scientia potentia... 48,864
More from around the web