Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038

Apr 25, 2012 Full story: Psychology Today 23,072

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.

Full Story
insidesecrets

Albuquerque, NM

#11949 Feb 2, 2013
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
Your point being...?
Stalin was an atheist.
Henry

Bad Langensalza, Germany

#11950 Feb 3, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure, sure-- you keep on lying like this, if it makes your religious life have some pretend meaning.
If you are not religious? Why are you trying to very hard to defend it, hmmmm?
Pardon me--but I've seen all flavors of "strategy" by religious-types, trying to pretend they aren't "religious".
The very tone of your posts makes it pretty clear, you're highly sympathetic to religion, if not an actual participant.
Which makes you an enabler of religion.
Well the nuclear age is the real issue of the present. So religion is never any more the main problem of humanity. Be or not to be is the real thematic for the survival of mankind. Capitalism ( as all exploiting classes before) misuse religions for its bad purposes

“It's just a box of rain...”

Since: May 07

Knoxville, TN

#11952 Feb 3, 2013
rio wrote:
<quoted text>
I think you are barking up the wrong tree here; I am not defending religion, just passing on observations. People like religious ceremonies, and many would not break from these traditions, that it irritates you or not.
I am not talking about myself, but in most families, christening, marrage and burial in church/temple are important events, they will not give up, even if their "faith" faded long time away.
Tax exemption on religious ground (which is what yopu imply) maybe something you have in the States, but for us in Britain, it's a completely alien concept.
What taxes do British churches have to pay?

Since: Apr 08

Nottingham, UK

#11954 Feb 3, 2013
insidesecrets wrote:
<quoted text>
Stalin was an atheist.
So?

He also sported a moustache.
Henry

Bad Langensalza, Germany

#11955 Feb 3, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/middle-ground
You should not utilize fallacies, it destroys your argument without the need to refute it.
Atheism is not an ideology, it's a descriptive about one very specific notion, and nothing more. It cannot "bring" you anything, it cannot "say" anything, it cannot "tell you" anything. It is only the lack of belief in gods, that's it. Of course this escapes some atheists as well, but if you're going to try to make an argument, you shouldn't use something that is demonstrably inaccurate as the basis of it.
In the nuclear age religions are no more the main concerns for capitalism. Of course capitalism is a suicadal society, but the nuclear society is an additional impetus for the danger of extermination of mankind.

“It's just a box of rain...”

Since: May 07

Knoxville, TN

#11956 Feb 3, 2013
insidesecrets wrote:
<quoted text>
Atheism is a cult of reason.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult_of_Reason
What they haven't figured out yet is that their elevation above the ignorant masses is not nearly as great as they imagine, since their theories are slender reeds, not marble columns.
Oh my! Did you really assume that no one read the article or did you not read it yourself? The first sentence reads:

'The Cult of Reason (French: Culte de la Raison)a was an atheistic belief system established in France and intended as a replacement for Christianity during the French Revolution.[1]'

Your reasoning is flawed if you assume that this applies to all atheists--see the fallacy of composition: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_compo...

Since the Cult of Reason was a specific movement tied to an equally specific historical period, making it more general and applying it to all modern atheists reflects an ignorance of basic logic.
Henry

Bad Langensalza, Germany

#11957 Feb 3, 2013
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
Really?
"before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me"
Isaiah 43:10
In other words, there was nothing before your god because that's exactly what the Bible tells us was there before him.
By your own definition, your religion is a philosophy of absurdity.
The bible is absolutely absurd!

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#11958 Feb 3, 2013
insidesecrets wrote:
<quoted text>
Stalin was an atheist.
Explain to us with your mighty intelligence where it says in atheism that we must commit genocide?

Thanks liar. Hitler was a vegetarian too, does that mean he was kind of living things?

Usually people behave the opposite of what they preach - especially the religious.

Remember Ted Haggard anyone?
Henry

Bad Tennstedt, Germany

#11959 Feb 3, 2013
Clint wrote:
<quoted text>
Capitalism is the only hope humanity has to survive and flourish.
That is a joke!
EdSed

Hamilton, UK

#11960 Feb 3, 2013
rio wrote:
<quoted text>
You have a very simplistic view about religions, far too rationalist. You think it's only about belief.
The fact is that religions aren't only about beliefs, but about traditions, cultures, mentalities, philosophy, etc... transmitted from generation to generation.
Not every christian, muslim, jew, indu, buddhist, sikh, are 100% behind the dogma, or even understand it, but most feel part of a community that has deep rooted origins. Many people become lapsed christian, non-practising muslim, etc... but still cling to the identity belonging to a faith gives them.
Atheists may be right or not, I don't care, but atheism doesn't bring the same warmth and cohesion belonging to a religion does.
As for "Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038", who do the "religionists" will have to surrender too? LOL
I see what you mean Rio and you couldn't be more wrong.

"traditions, cultures, mentalities, philosophy, etc... transmitted from generation to generation" are not religion. They are "traditions, cultures, mentalities, philosophy, etc... transmitted from generation to generation".

Religion is divisive and a source of sectarianism and conflict. There are good traditions and bad ones - and religion is a divisive one.

Remember, people do not choose to be atheist. Anyone stupid enough to believe in an Abrahamic god is bound to end up in a minority. That is only a matter of time now.

What do you mean by "too rationalist"? How is it possible to be too rationalist?

And as for simplistic: clever people make complicated things simple. Dim people make simple things complicated.
EdSed

Hamilton, UK

#11961 Feb 3, 2013
rio wrote:
<quoted text>
...I am very sympathetic to people wanting to keep their traditions, and I wouldn't dream of eradicating religions, as you atheist fanatics do. Religions don't bother me, and atheists neither, unless they start preaching to me like you try to do!
And perhaps you feel I am not very sympathetic? Or less than you are? People don't want our sympathy. People need mutual respect, understanding and empathy with each other.

Religion is generally harmful. People don't attack religion per se, it is the inevitable consequences of it: ID/Creationism (attacks on science); Halal meat (extraneous costs at best, abuse of animals at worst); religiuos courts (undermines 'one law for all'); child mutilation; superstitions; prejudice against gays, atheists and other religionists; etc, etc.

If you wish to defend religion, you need to suggest some use for it that makes it better than its abandonment.

You muddle religion with "traditions, cultures, mentalities, philosophy, etc". Religion goes from generation to generation like a cancer - it is parent-given, not god-given. Better to have an all-inclusive secular community where critical thinking is passed from one generation to the next than passing-on dogma, prejudice, religious distinctions and superstitions.

Religion = superstition. It really is that simple.
rio

UK

#11962 Feb 3, 2013
albtraum wrote:
<quoted text>
We should keep religion because people like ceremonies???? You assume there has to be a religious connotation to every celebration?
.
No, there will be religions as long as some people want them.

What's your problem in tolerating them?

After all, they have to tolerate you!
rio

UK

#11963 Feb 3, 2013
albtraum wrote:
<quoted text>
1. Enabler and most likely participant.
2. Falsehoods are NEVER harmless.
It's your intolerance which isn't harmless.

I come to think that religionists are more tolerant than atheists like you.

You are worst than an Ayatollah !!
rio

UK

#11964 Feb 3, 2013
NightSerf wrote:
<quoted text>
What taxes do British churches have to pay?
British churches are non-profit organisations which are exempt of taxes in Britain. Same as charities, etc...
rio

UK

#11965 Feb 3, 2013
insidesecrets wrote:
<quoted text>
Stalin was an atheist.
It always amuses me when atheist deny that Stalin was an atheist. They will tell you he was an Orthodox, bla, bla, bla....

Stalin is the perfect example of what atheists can do when they reach power: they persecute believers and try to crush all religions to create an utopian atheist society.
The perfect atheist state would be George Orwell "1984" !

We have seen what atheists can do when they get in power; just look at the sorry story of the USSR, China under Mao, Cambodia with Pol Pot, North Korea with Kim Il Jung, etc...
rio

UK

#11966 Feb 3, 2013
EdSed wrote:
<quoted text>
Religion is divisive and a source of sectarianism and conflict..
Just like if religion was the cause of all the problems, and atheism the solution to everything. Very simplistic indeed.

Sources of conflicts are mostly social, economic, geographical, politic, etc.... Very rarely religious these days, apart from isolated trouble spots where religion is used as a smokescreen (Northern Ireland, Middle East, Sri Lanka, Kashmir, Tibet) for geo-politic ambitions.

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#11967 Feb 3, 2013
insidesecrets wrote:
<quoted text>
Which is the real delusion? The theist does not say he knows with certainty that God exists, he says he believes it. His belief in God therefore does not demand proof since it is based on faith. The atheist, on the other hand, claims to be quite certain that there is no god. Since he claims to be contemptuous of unsupported belief, he must provide some firm foundation for his “knowledge." This he can never do. If there are no proofs that God or gods exist, there are also no proofs they do not exist. The atheist is just as unscientific as he claims the theist is. His stance is just as mired in belief as the theist. The atheist needs to realize that atheism is a belief just as firmly planted in irrationality, in ego and desire, as it claims theism is. Atheism has no proof and no possible proof. It is unscientific. Like all human beliefs, it is conjecture based on a hunch.
By that twisted logic, everyone should believe literally everything that anyone ever tells them until such time as it is proven false.

For the 1,245,630th time - one does not have to (and, in fact, cannot) prove a negative.

Or, are you in fact saying that you believe that Leprechauns do exist and that they are guarding pots of gold at the end of rainbows? After all, it is has never been proven they don't exist...
Henry

Lichtentanne, Germany

#11968 Feb 3, 2013
ExcommunicateThis wrote:
Well, atheism is already the majority view amongst the population of the world in general, even if people go through the motions of religion just to fit in with others of their tribe.
Religions are antiquated!
Henry

Flöha, Germany

#11969 Feb 3, 2013
rio wrote:
<quoted text>
I am not religious and I don't believe in religion, but I tolerate most as harmless expressions of some people's spirituality.
You are a very jumpy sort of atheist, who seems to see the enemy everywhere. That's bordering on paranoia.
I hope you check under your bed at night! LOL
For you lot, everyone is lying, deluded and pretending.
You, atheist activists, don't seem to be a happy lot: just an observation...
I am very sympathetic to people wanting to keep their traditions, and I wouldn't dream of eradicating religions, as you atheist fanatics do. Religions don't bother me, and atheists neither, unless they start preaching to me like you try to do!
As far as I concerned, religions is not "harmless" at all. Religions are always interfering with the states. The Vatican is not harmless at all. The popes are taking parties all the time, so do other religions.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#11970 Feb 3, 2013
This will never happen. Don't be fooled. Religion is the optimum form of control over sheep minded people, why would the government ever be rid of it?

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
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 9 min Eagle 12 232,006
Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... 1 hr Gillette 1,046
Why Atheism Will Replace Religion (Aug '12) 4 hr Friend of all 14,455
A New Kinder, Gentler Atheism 8 hr thetruth 29
Young atheists: The political leaders of tomorrow 8 hr thetruth 6
Why Christians should stick up for atheists 8 hr thetruth 8
Can Atheists Know God Does Not Exist When They ... 19 hr QUITTNER Nov 27 2014 31

Atheism People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE